Talk:Nezar'Azret

Old discussion
She was there in normal mode but unnamed and alone in a large room of ice.-- 23:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Could you please use the Ref game template, for game citations.Baggins 23:28, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Me?-- 23:32, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, ;). Ya wa are trying to avoid the book citation page for in-game citations.Baggins 23:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * sorry had no idea how to cite a game. Warthok 23:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Is the cite game template not working?Warthok 23:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, not sure you may need to take it up with sky, he's the one who implemented it. But ya we want that system utilized, as soon as possible.Baggins 00:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It apparently works fine you just need to remember to add the reflist and <"ref"> and <"/ref"> (minus the quotations).Baggins 01:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Checked up in the game files but unable to find her name, nor as a unit name nor as a proper name. The only Nerubian Queen present has no proper name and when she quotes she is generally called "Nerubian". I think speedy delete needs --N&#39;Nanz 11:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Checking better, I found her. Sorry --N&#39;Nanz 11:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Scepter of Nezar'Azret lore
The flavor text on the Scepter of Nezar'Azret states:

''Nezar'Azret was a nerubian queen who was killed by Arthas Menethil and the traitor king Anub'arak in the Upper Kingdom of Azjol-Nerub. As a queen, Nezar'Azret was both leader and mother to her subjects. It is rumored that nerubian queens can genetically pass knowledge from mother to daughter.''

The third sentence is probably from page 71 of Manual of Monsters, which is good for anyone who does not have the books. The second second sentence is some new info on here personalty. However, the first sentence has me worried. It says that she was killed in the Upper Kingdom of Azjol-Nerub (like her page on here says). The Upper Kingdom, as far as I can tell, was only the area seen in "Ascent to the Upper Kingdom." It may be that Lands of Mystery moved the Upper Kingdom to the area seen in "Into the Shadow Web Caverns," before the Old Kingdom Gate (and therefore separate from the Old Kingdom), which was the area that she was seen in, but I doubt it and think that it is an error.-- 17:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Wtf, I believed the Inner Kingdom was the "exit" during W3, but I just checked the map and it's the entrance. Nezar'Azret was killed in the entrance, that is the Inner Kingdom.
 * My personal bet? Blizzard guys are lazy, and just take what they have here, without even checking the sources.
 * Someone at the beta please report it >_<.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I think I'm going to replay those maps later. Maybe the texts contradicted the maps or something. Really weird.--Lon-ami (talk) 17:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Moving from Name to Title Name
I think it was fine before. Any particular reason to move it to Queen? :S--Lon-ami (talk) 20:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * That is her name in the mission.-- 20:40, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * But in her scepter she's referred without any title :S.--Lon-ami (talk) 21:11, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * So, you think that should take precedence? Like Remulos versus Keeper Remulos?-- 21:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, Remulos' page is at "Remulos", not at "Keeper Remulos".--Lon-ami (talk) 17:18, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The naming policy is unclear whether entities with just one name and a title should omit the title or not. A'noob thinks one way and I think another.-- 17:22, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Time
I think her Culling of Stratholme appearance is meant to be that she teleported there from the future, aka that it happens "after" The Frozen Throne even though the Culling itself is in the past. I mean, she was a living queen in TFT, got killed, and then somehow got raised back as a Crypt Queen/female crypt lord. Xporc (talk) 17:39, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's possible but nothing says so in the quest, so at best it would go into a speculation section. I don't have WC3 installed on my computer, does she or Anub'Arak actually say she's alive in the TFT mission? ReignTG (talk) 17:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You can watch it on youtube, the site blocks me from actually posting a link. Before Nezar'Azret's death there are no dialogs, and after she dies Arthas asks Anub'arak why the nerubians are hostile to them, considering they are his kin. Anub'arak explains that the nerubians they encountered never died and still fights to liberate Azjol'nerub from the Scourge. Xporc (talk) 18:27, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd rather let the readers decide for themselves whether it was a mistake, the devs just re-using the skin (most likely IMO) or some time travel shenaningan. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 19:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * She was alive in TFT then, but the point stands that the Culling happened before that. The quest doesn't say anything about being brought there by time travel, so even though it's possible we shouldn't just assume it's the case. ReignTG (talk) 19:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Exactly why this should go in the Speculation section. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 19:43, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Guys, are you for real? Are you really believing that she was a normal nerubian, then became undead and traveled to Stratholme on her own to assassinate Chromie before she even became an important character, then traveled back to Northrend to get resurrected into a living nerubian queen? It's a scenario about going back to the past, that's the whole point of the Caverns of Time. Or are you guys now gonna assume that the infinite dragonflight is a thing from the past even though they are led by future Nozdormu? Xporc (talk) 19:47, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That is not what I'm saying, I said I personally believe it was either just a mistake or a model reuse, they may have just taken the model they had in their databse or something, or they forgot that detail, and I'd rather the readers decide that for themselves than stating things as fact when we do not know the reason why she's depicted as undead there. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * All I'm saying is it's not explicilty stated anywhere. I believe it's a likely explanation but it's also not confirmed, and that's what the speculation section is for. For what it's worth I also think they just used the name of a WC3 crypt fiend without bothering to check anything about her. ReignTG (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * She's undead because she can't be alive anymore after getting killed by Arthas-boy. Also she wasn't a crypt lord in Warcraft III, she was a creep. Whoever decided to use the name had to search for her only appearance in order to select it, it's not like Nezar'Azret is a random skirmish name Xporc (talk) 19:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * But that's the thing: nowhere does it say this is after Arthas killed her. It's not like the infinite dragons we fight in CoT dungeons who are explicitly time travelers. No NPC dialogue or quest text at all says that she is from the future. As likely an explanation as it is, it isn't canon. It shouldn't be in the main space, it belongs in speculation. ReignTG (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Chromie mentions aberrations in the timeways in . This means time travelers are trying to mess with the normal timeline. The point of the death of chromies is to make to sure things that never happened, well, stay that way. This is not a normal occurence of her background, otherwise she'd know about it already. Xporc (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * What we're trying to say is that though it may be likely, it is neither stated or canon. There's still a leap between "I was just reviewing some aberrations in the timeways" - which could literally mean and be about anything - and "Past Undead Nezar'Azek was sent back further-into-her-past where she wasn't yet Undead". That leap is what makes it speculation and not fact. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, these eight synchronized attacks are probably a random thing and not the act of a time-traveling group. Fine, I'll drop this out until we know more out of respect for you guys. Xporc (talk) 20:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no doubt for the attacks, what's unsure is why Nezar has an undead model when at the time she hadn't died yet! I really don't want to piss you off. Maybe when the scenario is released we can go over this again! -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:58, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not pissed off, don't worry. I'm Sorry, I didn't wanted to be that antagonistic... Xporc (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I went to investigate the scene and she is labelled as Undead.Shammiesgun (talk) 23:38, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Timeline
Writing "15 years later, Nezar captured then-present Chromie and then future/(our present) Chromie came to rescue herself" is poor wording and does not help the reader. The Legion tag is not an indication as to the timeline of the events. The Legion tag only means that the content was made available during Legion, but that content still could have happened X years before Legion. So I don't get why those tags are an issue. It only makes sense to write the background of a character chronologically. -- MyMindWontQuiet 19:53, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Writing the background of a character chronologically is exactly why WC3 tags should be before the Legion ones IMO :( Xporc (talk) 20:04, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I've adressed this already : "The Legion tag is not an indication as to the timeline of the events. The Legion tag only means that the content was made available during Legion, but that content still could have happened X years before Legion." That's written right in the tag itself : "This section concerns content exclusive to Legion." -- MyMindWontQuiet 20:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * As said some months ago, can't wait for the next expansion pack to finally bring explanations for this bullshit Xporc (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * This is exactly why separating out the history by expansion is often a bad idea. Write it chronologically with references and ditch the headers, because they don't work in a situation like this. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:45, 21 August 2017 (UTC)