Talk:Kodo

Old discussion
Lets try to keep that Colbert "lets screw with an online reference source" stuff to a minimum here. Thanks. Ringoffire 10:59, 8 August 2006 (EDT)

Tell that to the bots. And nothing happened to this page, so why say it here? Pzychotix 12:02, 8 August 2006 (EDT)

Kodo population has tripled?
Was this inspired by Stephen Colbert's segment about | "wikiality"? ^_^ --Illidan Rocks 18:01, 10 September 2006 (EDT)

Kodo's eggs?
Through a discussion about kodo's pregnancy, I was wondering if there is sign of kodo eggs around the lands of Azeroth, since there is a model inside the game wich is called "kodo_egg", wich looks like any other big egg found near the windserpent's nest. Or there is any other reference about kodos laying eggs, perhaps inside a quest? Thanks. -- Ravenore, the Necroshadowmancer 22:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've never seen eggs around Azeroth, but they are reptiles... 22:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Kodo vs. Kodo beast
I am not sure who put "Kodo beast" as a type of "kodo", but isn't "kodo" and "kodo beast" the same thing? I don't see any entries in the RPG about kodos, they call them kodo beasts. The same thing with Warcraft III. So I am changing it according to actual sources. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 03:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think I figured it out. I moved the kodo beast info, since they are a subspecies of kodo and already have their own page, to the kodo beast article to lessen the confusion. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Based On
Is the Kodo based on the Brontotheriidae? They look very similar, especially when it comes to the horn.  Xavius, the Satyr Lord  17:25, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

From Talk:Kodo beast
Shouldn't this article have the Warcraft III units template and not the kodo article? Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 02:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually an article called Kodo Beast (Warcraft III) should be made and that is the article which should have the template. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 02:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well that article does not exist so this is the closest one for now. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge
there's no such thing as a kodo beast as a subspecies of Kodo, this is a kodo article--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * "Kodo beast" is their name in Warcraft III. Why are they not different?-- 23:45, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * There already exists a article for the warcraft unit, and this is what a person with the book said to me in scrolls of lore
 * "Just checked the source. HPG’s article does not say Kodo Beasts are a subspecies of Kodo, nor does it mention anything about a “primary type.” The world subspecies is never mentioned. In fact, the actual entry uses kodo and kodo beast interchangeably. There are two sets of stats given, but they seem designed only to differentiate between tame (riding) and wild (beast) kodos. The words you quoted are just what some retarded OCD wiki editor said. In fact, it was probably Rolandius…


 * This is the problem of wikis. Even the editors aren't checking the sources.


 * Edit: Just checked, and yes, it was actually Rolandius who added that they were a "subspecies.""
 * As of that i'm beginning to ate rolandious.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Just to be clear, you are arguing that "Kodo beasts" are exactly the same as "Kodos"? Gurtogg_Bloodboil (I checked your claims) is correct in that "There are two sets of stats given, but they seem designed only to differentiate between tame (riding) and wild (beast) kodos." Under "Kodo" there is "Kodo Beast" and "Kodo, Riding". It is true that "subspecies" is not mentioned at all, though you throw out the terms "race" and "subrace" in a similar manner. I like vaguer terms. The difference seems to be wild and tamed, but that does not necessarily negate a difference between "Kodo beasts" and "Kodos". "Kodo beast" might be their full name, but I think at some point the full/overall name was shortened. What was your point again? A merge of the two? It is not a subspecies, but I am not sure it is the exact same subject.-- 00:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I only threw the term subrace and race because of this article, and it's description is exactly like kodos, the terms are used interchangeably(if gurtogg is correct), ad there's already a article for kodo--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * They might be interchangeable. They likely are. I do not know if there is any technical difference. How do you know which is the proper name?-- 18:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Because in wow they are called Kodos and not Kodo beasts (example: Great Gray Kodo)--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Finally this problem has been dealt with :D--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:28, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Mammals or Reptiles
As the RPG books are considered non canon now, does that mean that kodo can still be classified as a Reptile? They resemble mammals far more; many have hair, they're able to survive in northrend (cold-blooded animals wouldn't). They have behaviour similar to mammals, such as staying in herds, and travelling to graveyards at the end of their life. They resemble rhinos and elephants more than reptiles... The RPG books are the only consistent material I can find that says they are reptile. I know applying real life to Warcraft isn't the most appropriate thing to do; that's why I believe we shouldn't state what it is, unless it gets confirmed directly through Blizzard. 13:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Probably mammals, but they have scales (Dirty Kodo Scale) as well as hair, and the Warcraft III manual (page 143) says they are related to salamanders and thunder lizards. I thought kodo eggs existed...-- 16:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Although as a whole the RPG are "non-canon" many elements of the books are canon. Creature descriptions, for one, found within the RPGs are 95% accurate as represented in-game, novels, and manga. 17:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Timeline
How come the non-canon info is taken as an example? What timeline are you referring to? --Mordecay (talk) 13:59, 10 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The history of a concept flows in and out of canon. An exception can be made in cases like this because it is not like the RPG does not exist, and the RPG note taken alone is completely pointless.-- 18:09, 10 August 2015 (UTC)