User talk:Morderi/Archive01


 * Archived - 18. 6. 2017

Welcome to Wowpedia!

Hello, Mordecay, and welcome to Wowpedia, the Warcraft wiki! Thank you for your contributions, and we heartily encourage you to continue contributing!

Some links you may find useful:
 * The things to do category has lots of things to keep you busy!
 * Check out the Community portal for some useful editors' links.
 * Many Wowpedians frequent our IRC channel, on chat.freenode.net, #wowpedia.
 * Finally, please check out the site guidelines and policies!

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wowpedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes as this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, or need help, just ask on the relevant talk page, or visit the site forums. Again, welcome! -- 20:16, 22 July 2014 (UTC) Really appreciated! :D :D :D --Mordecay (talk) 21:39, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Tirion Fordring
I recently added Vindictive Strike TCG 2.jpg to Tirion Fordring's article. Then you removed it. Why? WrathOfDeathfrost (talk) 10:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have not removed any image in Tirion's or in any other's articles -.-
 * Really? Looks like you did, as seen on . The same is seen when checking your contributions, on . However, I guess your denial means you didn't intend to do so. Sorry for being a tad harsh, but I spend a lot of time on uploading images, meaning I might get a little irritated when it seems like people are removing them from articles. WrathOfDeathfrost (talk) 11:05, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oddly... I really remember anything about the pictures. I know that I just edited "brother-in-arm". So, maybe a clicked somewhere... so sorry and next time I will be more careful. ;Mordecay
 * No worries :-) By the way, comments are signed with  WrathOfDeathfrost (talk) 11:29, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yea, thanks... I am new here and I need to learn something about the wowpedia :) Mordecay (talk) 11:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Horde of Draenor
We never actually concluded what to do. Why did you just change it to what you wanted?  (talk contribs) 19:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If you can cite where it is said what are you telling, then I will be the first who will revert it. I asked about the Horde icon´s what do exactly refer to. It is referring to just Thrall´s Horde or "all" the Hordes ever? Nevertheless, vote is really needed on this topic to finally end it.--Mordecay (talk) 20:22, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Alcaz Island
I am not sure what the source of the info is, but please keep in mined that datamined information - even posted on pages like mmochampion - are not allowed on wowpedia. See Wowpedia:DNP policy... --LemonBaby (talk) 12:39, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The source is, I would say, that the Beta. Then why there are pages as quests, zones, dungs etc... these things are also from beta. Or you have in mind that this Alcaz Scenario was somehow... datamined and is not currently available in the beta? If so, my apologies. --Mordecay (talk) 12:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It's most likely datamined, as the scenarios aren't actually available in current beta build. I have reverted your edit and my cleanup edits concerning the scenario and put up a notice for others. 14:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Levels
Please stop removing levels and hp from every single article. It's going to be a pain to revert all of that. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Pardon? Has something changed? As far as I know, levels and hp should not be in characters's infoboxs. --Mordecay (talk) 19:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, they should. They always have been. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:36, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * They shouldn't appear in the infoboxes, if they have a tactics page, or if they are a major lore character which may appear in several locations with levels/health ranging in those zones. But standard NPCs, named or otherwise, should contain that info. 19:38, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * This is what I meant. Maybe I removed info of some minor charachters but I was proceeding by templates and Major and Lore character page. Because of this, Zeratul revert it back... --Mordecay (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * With very few exceptions, none of the level info you removed fit Coobra's criteria. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:38, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * For example where exactly Theron apears besided Sunfury Spire and so his health is removed? And also Varimathrass info is redundant as he is no longer in game. --Mordecay (talk) 14:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

NPC article titles: RECALL
Hello.

Your opinion is required here, on a policy concerning NPC article titles.

Thanks you.

19:43, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Grammar
I understand if English is not your first language (at least, I really hope it isn't), but please try and make more of an effort to ensure proper grammar. As it is, it's often very difficult to read many of your contributions, to the point that, if I haven't read the source, I don't even feel comfortable editing it because I'm not sure what's accurate. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:35, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Is it so bad? :D Yea, English is not my first language... but I am doing my best... or at least trying :D I noticed that my contributions are (almost always) rewording and I am glad because I can see what is wrong. As of Draka´s article... the first part of the manga was not written by me and it sucks... and it needs to be rewritten. As of the second part, I am still waiting for an answer to one my question and then maybe i will edit it.

So... I hope that there is somebody who will continue correcting my contributions, if needed... --Mordecay (talk) 08:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

"Chen will be visiting cities"
If it is purely a guess, do not put it in as a fact and then link a random reference to 'back it up'. I'm in the beta; this sounded suspect to me. I had to back check for 45 mins in the ref and the Chen page history AND your contributions page to confirm this. Please don't do stuff like that.--Mondoblasto (talk) 13:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, it was said during the Press Tour, which is a valid source, and some days ago there was a question. Here: Q: Theramore scenario completely underwhelming compared to other pre expansion events. It's Meh.

A: Was never meant to be a world event. It's the first Scenario of the game. Tons more content coming next week!

So that's why i put it there. But obviously it is not happening and if Chen would not appeared until 25.9. I would have removed the sentence... i had it in mind so where's the problem? --Mordecay (talk) 13:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Maiev
Hello! :) I'm in office now, so I don't have the books with me. After joining the resistance, I'm sure that her only stated relative was Jarod, that survived the war (but many priestesses were slayed, and is quite possible that she was friend with some of them). I don't remember if her family is even mentioned in the books or if they say something about Maiev's life before joingin the resistance; I'll check it this evening at home. Bye, --  Forco   sussura agli abissi  12:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm reading the books right now. When Maiev is introduced (in The Sundering) her family is not mentioned, and the same for the rest of the novel. Furtehrmore, it's clearly stated that Hajiri, where she went to train as a priestess, was far from home, and Jarod himself had not seen her since then. So, as far as I know, the Shadowsong brothers' family is never mentioned in the whole trilogy (with an exception: Cenarius says that Jarod's grandfather "was a great friend of the forest").
 * Speculation: The Shadowsong could have had relatives and close friends that perished during the war; Jarod stated that he knew many people that lived in Suramar that were likely killed by demons. But we have nothing certain, and the RPG is not canon. Personally, I think that at least their parents died some time before the war; otherwise they would have been mentioned (and the same for Tyrande and the Stormrage twins' parents). Bye bye :) --  Forco   sussura agli abissi  20:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Mordecay (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Baine Bloodhoof
Hello! Could you tell me from where this information is taken (about Baine explling some tauren from Thunder Bluff); just because I'd like to read the story. Bye, --  Forco   sussura agli abissi  17:46, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure that's from The Shattering: Prelude to Cataclysm. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It was mentioned in Tides of War (Second chapter). --Mordecay (talk) 17:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) I've still to buy Tides of War, so I didn't know. --  Forco   sussura agli abissi  19:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Genn's and Velen's involvement in the Attack on Theramore Isle
I'd like to know your opinion on [|this particular subject].

Thank you for checking! --Cemotucu (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Hearthstone wiki
Hey there, and thanks for getting the Hearthstone article off the ground. I'm writing this message to let you know that we've just set up a sister wiki for Hearthstone on Gamepedia (we're on Gamepedia too). If you're interested, feel free to help get that wiki off to a good start. Thanks again for your edits and please keep up the good work! -- k_d3 16:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Lorewalkers
Well, If you go to the Lorewalkers page on battle.net, it does show that Lorewalker Cho is the leader. 21:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that is, I think, a sufficient source. --Mordecay (talk) 21:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

"Learn the alphabet, maybe?"
If you're going to correct people, please try to be polite and constructive. If you are aware that the list is ordered by last name and not first name, it might be helpful to mention that; either system could be used, and are used on various short story pages, such as the article's most recent predecessor, Death From Above. Other recent examples The Trial of the Red Blossoms and The Blank Scroll do not use any kind of alphabetical order. So while I agree that alphabetical order is a perfectly good way to order the pages, you are quite incorrect in stating "Alphabetical order... as everywhere." -- Taohinton (talk) 15:24, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Anduin Wrynn in Stormage
"The Emerald Nightmare was able to caught in whole Azeroth and so was the young Prince. He alongside Tiffin were nightmares of Varian though the King was able to avoid the Nightmare."
 * Relevant as that was the thing that Malfurion used to convince Varian to work with the Horde during the battle :)
 * Not every passing mention of a character in a novel needs to be included on their biography page. The section as written contributes nothing of significance about Anduin, and "some event that happened to this character was used by a different character to convince another character to do something" is not a good justification for keeping it in a character biography. — foxlit (talk) 11:51, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it is worth noting his status - being trapped by the Nightmare - during the war, at least. That's significant. The sentence with visions can be deleted though.--Mordecay (talk) 11:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Did anything interesting happen to him during the events of Stormrage, did he do anything of interest, or were there any interesting consequences for Anduin? Since the nightmare in Stormrage affects basically everyone on Azeroth (and the arc is resolved without further consequences when Malfurion fixes everything), going around adding "He, too, was trapped by the nightmare!" to every individual character's biography seems kind of redundant to me. — foxlit (talk) 12:08, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No need to add that to every character as not everyone was mentioned in the book; Anduin was. I think that mentioned appearances are involved in the character's biographies. For instance, in TotA Nalice was said to be gone from the Wyrmrest Temple during that time and it is included in her article so dunno why Anduin should be an exception. --Mordecay (talk) 12:19, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There's even no need to add it to biographies of characters that were mentioned in the book, unless their appearance in the book was actually interesting in some fashion (see: the three questions above). For Anduin and Stormrage, this does not appear to be the case.
 * In Nalice, the TotA section at least describes something that had actually affected the character, which makes it mildly interesting. However, splitting that tiny biography ("background") into WotLK/TotA/Cataclysm sections is silly: it really should just be two paragraphs of coherent text, with references replacing the subsection headers and template tags.
 * Finally, I'm not proposing that Anduin should somehow be an exception -- rather, the same "being merely mentioned is not enough to be relevant" logic should be applied consistently throughout the wiki. If there are sections on other character pages with similarly tenuous connections to the subject of their articles, those too should be fixed. — foxlit (talk) 18:22, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's news for me to add info based on whether it is interesting or not. One could tell (not me :P ) that Nalice's disappearance is not interesting. You know it is a matter of opinion. I think it is not us to decide whether the info is interesting or not. It's the readers.
 * But back to the topic... I re-read a part of Stormrage and realized that Anduin is not just mentioned but he appears there in the the moment the Nightmare took him. That's more than worth of adding (keeping it in our case). :)
 * So much to this and I think I will not be replying anymore because it would be always the same... and we could go on like this forever... --Mordecay (talk) 19:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

&larr; "Interesting" in this context really means "relevant to the subject of the article." It is very much up to the editors to figure out a good way to present a summary of information available from various sources, and that includes determining whether a particular mention of a character in a lore source is significant to that character or not. Throwing an incoherent barrage of "X appeared in Y where he did... nothing of importance?!" text at the reader does not make for a good article.

The section, in its current form, will not remain in the article. You're welcome to try rewriting it to actually make sense, but I would caution that if Anduin's involvement in the novel adds up to only being affected by the nightmare (like everyone else on Azeroth), and there are no actual consequences for him, it'll still be a bit of random trivia rather than something worth mentioning in Anduin's biography. — foxlit (talk) 20:36, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * This also applies to the War Crimes section of Grommash Hellscream (alternate universe): the section essentially reads "some orcs were cheering for Grom and he responded with an ear-splitting cry, raising Gorehowl to the sky," which basically says nothing interesting about the character. Character biographies should not be a string of sections for each novel appearance, blindly including every minor appearance in the hope that someone might want to know -- rather, they should tell the character's story coherently.
 * We're currently discussing potential changes to policy/guidelines to codify this intention. You may want to weigh in. — foxlit (talk) 11:14, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Cite more things
Please add more sources for your additions.-- 22:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not adding them immediately.--Mordecay (talk) 09:07, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Delete tags
Do not clear the text from pages that are candidates for deletion. Doing so completely defeats the entire point of the Delete tag. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay... uhm I merged the content with Medivh's page so I just thought it could be deleted now. Sorry then. --Mordecay (talk) 21:19, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * In cases like that, just add the tag, then | and explain why it should be deleted (in this case, because the content has already been merged with another article). Otherwise, it looks like the page has just been blanked for no reason. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks for the reminder.--Mordecay (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Life Spans Edit?
I'm curious as to why you added back the ~ next to the ages, since they play no part in the official age. Cannibeans (talk) 05:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's because they were included in Loreology's tweet. I considered reverting it too for this reason. But didn't because much of that chart is approx anyways. It doesn't make much difference either way. The purist in me wants to keep it the way Loreology had it. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 05:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, that why.--Mordecay (talk) 08:22, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Vandals
When you report vandals please use vandal not suspect, using suspect will have admins believe the situation has already been dealt with. =) 20:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I hope that I won't have to though :D --Mordecay (talk) 21:33, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Timeway vs timeline
Devs are using "timeway" and "timeline" interchangeably, but they are technically different things. Timeline is the entire history of the universe past-present-future and is pmuch synonymous with universe (i.e. alternate timeline = alternate universe). Timeways are tunnels that connect different parts of time.[4] --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ahh, okay. Ty!--Mordecay (talk) 22:39, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

deleting The Story so far
I just spotted that you marked the page The Story So Far (Burning Crusade) for deletion, but didn't create the voting page. Maybe you want to add that? --Luke1410 (talk) 20:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmm... probably :D Thanks! --Mordecay (talk) 13:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Mug'thol's clan
In TFT, Mug'thol led a group of Stonemaul ogres (the majority of which were found in Dustwallow Marsh). In WoW, he led the Crushridge ogres. How do you explain that? How is a simple renaming of a warband speculation?-- 14:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I think that the renaming needs a proper reference (if any), because the quests don't mention that. Thus, even if it is most logical explanation, still unsourced and thus a speculation, no?
 * And moreover, there is a slight conflicting (unsourced) info - Crushridge says that this group of ogres joined the Stonemaul and later renamed from Stonemaul to Crushridge. How did they do that if they were always Crushridges? --Mordecay (talk) 15:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I strongly doubt that there is a citation, beyond their existence in the two different states.-- 15:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Orcs and ogres
May I have link to the Tweet that says that they are not related?-- 15:37, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No "not related" but Loreology said that some of Brann's theories are true and some aren't. As per Micky's reply we will learn if Brann's theories are correct. So it is probably right, but at the time being, it is just a theory. The tweets - https://twitter.com/Loreology/status/486552192967798784 and https://twitter.com/MickyNeilson/status/509141857306021890 --Mordecay (talk) 16:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Gilneas
As we spoke earlier, Gilneas was retaken by the alliance and the city is settled as you can see later on wrathion's quest line. Altough it is unknown if they serve the alliance they do considered loyal to Gilneas which is part of the alliance. Varian says after the siege of orgrimmar that he is working on cleansing the plague from gilneas city (which is the reason gilneas is abandoned) alltough most of the gillneans cannot return to their homeland due to the plague, the paninsula is still under alliance Military controll since the 7th legion took over the city and the forsaken forces where wiped out by the GLF. the forsaken beat the alliance back to the greymane wall from silverpine but didnt cross it again. The coast which is the battle ground is raided by forsaken boats from silverpine not ALL of gillneas. i think its enough evidences that show gilneas is under alliance controll even if its unsettled by its citizens.

i will respect your call and wont change it again if you say so but i think the lore supports this fact. -Yairg81544


 * Hmm... it has been a while... So Wrathion´s questline takes place around the fall of Deathwing (Cata) while the UVG info of its abandonment is MoP era. While Varian said "We need to investigate cleansing the plague from Gilneas lands so they can rebuild." It doesn´t mean that he was already working on it, i would say. So this abandonment is still the case, unless we are provided with more lore on it, no?

"the paninsula is still under alliance Military controll since the 7th legion took over the city and the forsaken forces where wiped out by the GLF." Do we know it? Since it is "in ruin and abandoned" it isnt probably true.

Gilneas was and is a problem regarding of its status but the current state of the pages are result of long edits since the UVG came out.--Mordecay (talk) 00:05, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Comparing dif versions of text
IDK if you're manually comparing the different versions. If you are, you can do some tricks to make it faster. I believe Microsoft Word has a function for this. Or you can use a Wowpedia sandbox page, paste 1 version of the text, then paste a different version and check the edit comparisons. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 21:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yep, I'm using Word, but thanks! --Mordecay (talk) 21:22, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I disagree
I think you just want to put in your own viewpoint on the title of Uther, because I don't see Supreme commander for his title in the lore for the Silver hand, Alliance army, sure, but his Order? I do not see it.
 * This is what UVG says, not me. Otherwise, is there a source for Grand Master? --Mordecay (talk) 19:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Images
A lot of your recent uploads need to have their sources and/or license added please. 00:42, 27 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok, it didn't show the option to add that coz I uploaded them through... hmm... option that is available during editing.--Mordecay (talk) 10:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Sneed's Shredder and Hozen
RE Sneed's Shredder: did not think the card flavor text was relevant information, is all.

RE Hozen/Monkey King: There is no "former leaders" section in the racebox template, so I just stuck him on the "racial leader(s)" section. Could just add Monkey King (formerly, presumed). DeludedTroll (talk) 16:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * RE1: Yea, most of (if not all) the HS descriptions are irrelevant but you know, they're nice and funny bits though. And since hsgamepedia has links to wowpedia I thought it would be cool to have links to hs on wowpedia too. I have already added a few of them and since the admins hasn't complained I think I'll continue adding them.
 * RE2: The only source on his leadership is his title, no? There is lack of info whether he was the king of all hozen or just one tribe etc. I think that could go to a speculation section.

--Mordecay (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2015 (UTC)


 * 'Twas mostly the "small army of Royal Jibstabbers" bit on the Monkey King article that made me think that he was the ruler of all hozen. AFAIK, there hasn't been any clarification of what he actually is/was king OF. Someone with Twitter might try poking one of the devs about it. Until we know for sure, a Speculation section might be the best option, yes. DeludedTroll (talk) 17:33, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Revert button
I was a little confused by your "undo" on Djemerez's edit on Aerie Peak today. His original edit had an edit comment that made a lot of sense (how DO you tell the difference between the head of a Gryphon vs an eagle), whereas your reversion had no comment to explain what the problem was. I think it would help editors work together better if reversions to good-faith edits were not done without an explanation, particularly when the original editor DID go to the trouble to explain his thinking.&#32;- jerodast (talk) 03:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Look again, I reverted the change where Djemerez completely deleted the note. I added it back and slightly changed the wording. He then added more clarification. --Mordecay (talk) 07:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Vanesaa VanCleef
Hi Mordecay, I was wondering why Vanessa VanCleef's status in (lore) isn't listed as deceased. I understand that citation for this was a tweet that Loreology posted, but the tweet was very ambiguous and I don't think it can be used as hard evidence that she might be alive. After she is defeated in the Deadmines, you can find her corpse where she blew herself up; it is even listed as a corpse. I think that this is enough evidence to say that she is dead unless someone from Blizzard actually confirms otherwise. There is also, of course, her own dialogue at the end of the encounter. In it she says that she intends to kill herself, adding even more to the likelihood of it being the case. Belanal (talk) 11:33, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, since that time they may have changed their opinion on her death... who knows. But the fact that they haven't completely decided (as per Loreology) is intriguing. :D After second thought, deceased may stay but a note at the bottom could be added referring that tweet.--Mordecay (talk) 18:00, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I think that that arrangement is perfect! Thanks for sorting this out with me :) Belanal (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Teron Gorefiend
Re: status unknown

Two possible reasons:
 * 1) It may be vestigial information from prior to the first WoW expansion.
 * 2) It was marked as unknown lore-wise because of the boss' death emote, which had him implying that he would eventually rise again.

Whichever is the case, it sounds speculative and, in my opinion, should be removed from the infobox and placed as a short note under the section for The Black Temple. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 19:39, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Yep, agreed with the suggestion.--Mordecay (talk) 20:34, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Delete tags, take two
Once again, do not blank pages when adding delete or speedydelete tags. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Will try to remember that! --Mordecay (talk) 18:55, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Also, delete tags require a vote. If it is a basic maintenance issue, use speedy delete and give a reason.-- 19:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Oki!--Mordecay (talk) 19:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Moving articles
When moving an article, please be mindful of other pages that link to it. If there are a lot of pages or you simply do not wish to deal with editing the relevant articles, please leave a redirect. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 20:04, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Aha! I know what you think. It must have slipped my attention. Will try to remember to check it next time! --Mordecay (talk) 21:12, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Seperate page for class lore?
Hi Mordecay, would it be alright to create seperate pages for class lore like mage, warlock, paladin, etc? I don't want to add hella info on the warlock page if it contains in-game related stuff.VisionOfPerfection (talk) 00:25, 1 November 2015 (UTC)VisionOfPerfection


 * If you have to ask, it should be on the pages that you want to alter or the forums.-- 00:52, 1 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Me personally I would like to have separate articles for lore and in-game mechanics :D But it's not possible here, apparently. So if you must, add the info on the current pages with "lore" or "history" section. And yes, hear Sandwich's comment so more people can speak their mind. --Mordecay (talk) 09:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: Earthen
Everything from the tabletop RPG on the "Earthen" page is segregated, as per policy. However, it is segregated in a way that so the RPG maintains its context. It was you who popularized separating all RPG info into one huge section with minimal context. That isn't policy, that is just a style. While you did keep the section headings this time, they were duplicates of previous headings, so an invisible "_2" was added to each section. Not as bad as it could have been, but still sloppy. Also, you say that "almost 10 RPG tags don't look very nice there," while you have a habit of inserting similar tags into sections for your own labeling reasons. Perhaps a new dialogue can be opened.-- 20:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Me, personally? Wow! I don't even know that. And I thought I'm good at categorizing things :-/ Anyho, I try to separate the info so that it has context with headings, but maybe (as you imply) I didn't do it in the past? As far as I'm aware, I use the tags with heroes on top, right under the headings-which-I-apparently-don't-use. If one big category for non-canon info is bad why has nobody warned / stopped me that it's not correct? I remember being told not to do sections for one sentence, and now, even tags are wrong... That's probably why I continued to do that for the whole time. I cannot but notice that you take some personal care of that page as you mentioned on its talk page. But yet you say nothing about the other pages that have "huge sections with minimal context"? You know I just wanted a simple answer and not a reproach of what I do and do not so sorry if this is a bit sarcastic :D --Mordecay (talk) 21:31, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I am sorry if it read like a reproach, but this simple answer is this: I like it how it is and you like it another way. What you did to the segregated RPG info is better than some of your attempts, but still not ideal section-creation. ...and you do usually like tags. We can discuss this (please do), but I really think that it is just a matter of stylistic opinion.-- 03:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Naah, all good. Well yea, that's it, different stylistic options, indeed. I'd like to hear more opinions on this too. --Mordecay (talk) 09:29, 18 November 2015 (UTC)


 * If I'm allowed to come with an opinion on this matter, personally I'd prefer to have all the non-canon info in its own section and dedicate the rest of the article to what is stated in canon sources - even if this causes the RPG info to essentially become a bunch of random lore points listed out of context. Could always reword them or list the RPG lore in the form of a bullet point list (like how it's been handled on the Illidan page), but I really just find it to look messy and disorganized to have RPG tags all over the page mixed in with canon lore. -- 14:38, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * As it is now, everything between a tag and a section heading is invalidated info from the RPG books. Is it really mixed?-- 23:45, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I suggest a forum discussion or a vote to hear more voices. --Mordecay (talk) 21:10, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Merge by Vote Policy
With the the vote on the Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne manual and Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Game Manual articles deciding to merge them together into Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne game manual I became rather curious on the merge by vote policy. However I was unable to find anything on it so I was wondering can any editor carry out the vote after it's been decided or is there another factor at play (example:wait time, a specific editor having to do so, etc)? --X59 (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Not sure about the factors but probably poking the admins would do :D Anyway, the page is finished now. --Mordecay (talk) 11:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I see and thanks for letting me know about the done being finished.--X59 (talk) 18:58, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Lunara
Why did you revert my edit about Lunara's relatives? Egrem (talk) 20:33, 17 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Because it isn't known if she is a part of the Warcraft universe or just the HotS-verse. --Mordecay (talk) 20:41, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Lootbox
The lootbox template appears to be broken since the update, I'm in the process of changing all lootbox links to itembox. 19:03, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Wow. GL! --Mordecay (talk) 19:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Ironmarch
I honestly didn't know that Iron Horde Incursion even existed. Looking at it and the page I edited (Ironmarch), the former appears to be strictly about the event from a lore standpoint while the latter discusses it from an in-game perspective. So it appears to me that "Ironmarch" was the correct article page to place in the pre-launch category. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 21:06, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, right. --Mordecay (talk) 21:25, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Changes
In Varian's gossip text during the attack he calls Arthas a traitor.

The manual makes it pretty clear Daelin supported Terenas and the Alliance even after the internment camps.

Rise of the Lich King puts Saidan at exactly six and a half feet, though it could've just been a generalization.

And is it really necessary to have a source for the first and second of something coming before the third? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 16:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)


 * 1) Yea? Do you happen to have the full transcript of the text?
 * 2) Yeah, he supported Terenas but I want a source for that "he opted to have the orcs put in the camps." I didn't find it in the manual when I briefly checked it.
 * 3) Okay, I checked only Of Blood and Honor.
 * 4) And with the wars I want a source stating the Third being an extension of the First and Second ones because I am not so sure Blizzard has said it in that way.

Keep the good work tho! I like the little details and corrections. --Mordecay (talk) 17:33, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and by the way I'm still looking for the transcript. Also, is a speculation section really necessary for the Stromgarde and Gilneas brigades? That's typically more for fan theories. And for the Bronzebeard brothers do you want the specific ToD page? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 19:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

--Mordecay (talk) 19:34, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) I added the speculation sections for the Brigades because they haven't showed up outside of the Stonetalon mission (not counting Legion appearance as I'm not sure if the Gilean one is the same). So we don't know if there were any survivors but if yes, it would be logical for them to join Theramore, so dunno.
 * 2) The Bronzebeard brothers... Both Muradin and Brann appeared only after the orc attack on the city was broken so we don't know exactly what they were doing during that time (like if Brann personally fought the orcs).
 * But speculation is for theories, like if Calia was in Theramore or a captive of the Forsaken. It's written in several sources that all of Jaina's expedition settled in Theramore, so it's not a theory to speculate on. If there's no mention of the Gilneas ones being similar it'd probably be best to rename it Gilneas Brigade (Warcraft III) and make a Gilneas Brigade (Legion).

And they were among the dwarves fighting:

''...They fell upon the orcs from the rear, and between them and the humans the orcs were quickly cut down.

"Our thanks," one of the dwarves proclaimed, singling Lothar out. "I am Muradin Bronzebeard, brother to King Magni...'' ShadowShade81413 (talk) 04:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

l
 * On the Brigades, "It's written in several sources that all of Jaina's expedition settled in Theramore."

The bold part is crucial. Oke, so I first wanted to ask for the sources, but then I checked the WoW manual and found "Jaina helped defeat the demon Archimonde and banish the Legion forever. She then gathered the human survivors in Kalimdor and founded the port city of Theramore." This supports it so you're right. --Mordecay (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Two Headed Ogre, and Lost one One NoPics
Do you think you could add this to your to to-do list? Several lore characters could benefit from it. Copperblast (talk) 22:11, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * For this kind of pics it would be better to ask one of the admins. And Coobra already responded here . Nice idea, though! --Mordecay (talk) 09:24, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Azeroth/Stormwind and Varian
I was wondering why you switch Azeroth the continent with Stormwind at every mention. Was it not called Azeroth and renamed Stormwind after the Second War? And even so doesn't Azeroth still refer to all the Stormwind lands because it's the name of the continent as well, like Lordaeron?

Also regrettably I haven't been able to find a copy of Varian's gossip text where he calls Arthas a traitor during the Scourge attack. Which is a shame because I've found copies of what Bolvar, Broll, and Valeera had to say. Do you know a way to dig this info up? Or would you be willing to take my word for it, because I remember clearly Varian said "the traitor prince Arthas" and I'm positive whoever wrote that bit in his article was referring to this. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 17:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I have been changing the name because of this note It wasn't changed after the Second war, they work with it as if Stormwind was always its name.


 * Well if it was posted online somewhere, you could try archive.org maybe. Do Broll and Valeera (Bolvar's text is probably transcribed under the Harbor section I presume?) say something interesting? And yes, I will take your word for Varian's text :D --Mordecay (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Ok, gotcha.


 * I'll look into that. Broll says he won't be going to Northrend because of something urgent in Darnassus (Stormrage foreshadowing?) and Valeera is grumpy that people haven't been welcoming to a blood elf. Both are on their articles. And thanks :P ShadowShade81413 (talk) 20:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know I finally found it :) --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 02:34, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


 * By all that is holy! Thanks! Did Horde characters have these too? Do you think u can find them? --Mordecay (talk) 12:22, 19 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Here you go --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Cool, thx! --Mordecay (talk) 22:05, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Ashenvale, Turalyon, Alleria, Khadgar
Hadn't Tyrande and her Sentinels taken Ashenvale on their way to Orgimmar, and the aftermath being an agreement for it to stay that way? Also do you think it's a bit early to give Turalyon and Alleria the neutral bat (although it will probably happen to Turalyon)? Practically all Alliance/Horde figures are friendly to both sides in Legion, so this might not say a whole lot. It's less likely Alleria will still be affiliated with Quel'Thalas and the Farstriders. And do you know why the Alliance insignia was removed from Khadgar? Did Blizzard go back on his WoD description? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 18:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

As far as I know it hasn't been said in that way and I believe it's just a speculation based on the fact that she had to come through Ashenvale to Orgrimmar. The only thing said is that bit from her post-cinematic appearance.

Dunno, it just occurred to me that since they lead the Army of Light they should have the neutral icon. Yes, Alleria likely won't be affiliated with modern Quel'Thalas and Farstriders.

It was likely done to reflect Kirin Tor being neutral again. Though on second thought was it actually stated that they officially left the Alliance? IIRC, it was just "Jaina leaving Kirin Tor and Khadgar taking over the Kirin Tor" but it's likely the case as Dalaran is open to both factions? --Mordecay (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with the Khadgar reasoning then, and yeah it's probably the case for Dalaran for that reason. If you don't mind, I'm going to put the insignia back on Turalyon and Alleria until we get a definite answer. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Raiders/Mounted Warriors
Do you really think it was bothersome to mention them mounted warriors? I mean, even if the Mounted warrior is a class in the WoW rpg, it is also a concept in the real world. Also I think "Raiders are the wolfriders of the orcs, riding dire wolves into battle" is a tad awkward as a sentence now :p Xporc (talk) 19:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm okay with your last edition, but if we compare with the vanilla page it is just removing a link to an existing page of the same name. Are you sure coming back to what it was originally isn't the best? :D Xporc (talk) 20:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I just kinda don't like it mixing and linking with the RPG class. Do you feel the link should be there? --Mordecay (talk) 20:27, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I have no strong opinion about this, I just think it'd be silly to have the text "mounted warrior" in the webpage and not have it linking to the actual and already existing page about mounted warriors Xporc (talk) 00:54, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Tense
" Most articles should be described as facts, so use the present or future tenses. "The trainer is in Stormwind." "This recipe can be learned by rogues." " Source : Wowpedia:Manual of Style Dawn80818 (talk) 17:57, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Zooti Fizzlefury
The faction field is for the purpose of game play, not lore. Marking him as Alliance gives the impression that only Alliance characters can interact with him, which would be very inaccurate and only confuse visitors to his article page.

Copy/pasting this matter to Forum:Neutral Faction Icons since it's related. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 00:25, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Blacklord Hamarahk
Well, as far as I can glean from his article, he has never appeared in any of the games and novels and only exists as a name in the Bestiary book, the WoW Magazine and Wowhead's database; not someone I would consider particularly notable. I don't have the Bestiary or any of the Magazine issues, though, so correct me if he has a more noteworthy role than what is stated in his article. -- 19:17, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmm, okay. His name is only listed in those sources. --Mordecay (talk) 19:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Suggested Warcraft movie actors ideas
So, we have this old page that is outdated, considering that a number of characters have already been cast, but I think the page still has potential for discussions about future installments. What do you say, should I update it further to have a section that includes the already-cast characters that won't be recast, (such as Durotan, Blackhand, Llane, etc.?) MightyBotto (talk) 09:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm, probably yes? Try maybe asking on its discussion page or forum to get more opinions. --Mordecay (talk) 09:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, I did so! MightyBotto (talk) 10:17, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Consistency
If by 'So much for the consistency.' you mean the way some film universe info is placed on its own page, and some in main page subsections, I agree, but there didn't seem to be a consensus when I started adding info, so for the subjects with only a little info I added it to the main page. I'm not against having all separate pages, just not sure which style more people would object to. If you meant the fact that there was already a separate article, I simply didn't notice, and am fine with the content being moved. -- Taohinton (talk) 16:41, 19 June 2016 (UTC)


 * All good. Keep up the good work :D --Mordecay (talk) 13:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Your thoughts
What do you think about this issue? 23:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Pandaren revolution
Hey there! With regard to whether it should be an upper or lower case 'R' in 'Pandaren revolution': I was aware that in that quest it refers to it in lower case, but in World of Warcraft: Chronicle it uses the upper case 'R' when describing it. If it comes down to picking between the two, I'd have to say that Chronicle might be a more reliable source than quest text. I also think that would make more sense looking at other examples. For instance, it's "French Revolution", not "French revolution". -- Belanal (talk) 17:02, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi! If it is in the Chronicle, then it's okay. I read that part but don't remember the name there but it may have slipped me. Or unless you mean the heading? --Mordecay (talk) 17:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I was talking about the heading, yes. I know it appears to be in all uppercase, but uppercase in that font just means the letter is slightly larger. It's a bit hard to see, but the 'R' in the 'Revolution' is actually a capital. It's the same with the 'P' in the 'Pandaren' just before it. Sorry if this is becoming a bit pedantic :P -- Belanal (talk) 19:03, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Oh, yes, you are right with the letters. Honestly I dunno how to deal with headings, if it is possible to use them as sources, tho. --Mordecay (talk) 21:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Cool, I'll change it for now then and make sure to cite that source fully. Hopefully, that will work! Thanks for your patience ^_^ -- Belanal (talk) 23:54, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Bit late to this discussion, but I think counting the capitalization used in section/chapter headings as canon is shaky at best. For example, on page 93 the section is titled "The Well of Eternity and the Rise of the Night Elves", but in the actual text it's always written as "night elf/night elves", never "Night Elf/Night Elves". I think the way they decide to capitalize certain words in chapter headings is just based on what looks good, rather than them going "We should retcon 'pandaren revolution' to 'Pandaren Revolution'". (The reason I used Gnoll War as the name is because the text doesn't give another name for that conflict and it seemed like a simple and accurate name in line with the names of other armed conflicts in Warcraft lore.) I think it's the same thing with "Zandalari Invasion"; the fact that there's not a "The" in front of that name makes me think it's more of a generic description rather than a valid alternate name for the war. Just my two cents. -- 17:18, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Blackhand Comic
Hm, Legion confirmed that the Blackhand comic is canon to Draenor-Prime too. So I just want to say... HAH! TOLD YOU SO! TOLD YOU SO! Who was wrong? You. Who was right? Me! HAH! Meganerd18 (talk) 05:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Come on, man. Xporc (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Confirmed where? -- 07:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If I had to guess: Words of Wind and Earth Xporc (talk) 08:07, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Exactly, it was Legion that confirmed it. During WoD, it was only speculated (but probable) to be canon for MU. Blizzard directly said that it was undetermined at that time. So no, you were not right back then. --Mordecay (talk) 14:32, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Embrace
Hi. I'm interested in knowing what makes you think that the Embrace being the only time a new Aspect could be created was something made up by the Aspects. Because it actually worked with Kalecgos. Thanks. -- ShellShockLive (talk) 20:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello. It just occurred to me that the two books don't mention the Embrace, and in fact, they presented how it happened. --Mordecay (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * What "two books" ? Twilight of the Aspects definitely does. ShellShockLive (talk) 22:13, 2 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I meant Dawn of the Aspects and Chronicle Vol. 1 - these showed us the creation of the Aspects. No Embrace is mentioned there. --Mordecay (talk) 22:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit
What does this mean ? http://i.imgur.com/4FimWTm.png It notifies me that you changed something but when I look at the changes, nothing really moved. Thanks for explaining. --MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 18:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * There was an extra space after last full-stop. --Mordecay (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The Burning Legion destroys life or planets?
Hi, I would like to signalling you this discussion; if you want to give your opinion you are welcomed! cheers, --Xnsyntfxynytnh (talk) 12:13, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

AU Gul'dan
Hi. The Harbinger video is about alternate Gul'dan, not main Gul'dan. In the main timeline Gul'dan was a Shadowmoon, in the alternate universe he was part of an unnamed clan which he decimated himself. -- ShellShockLive (talk) 23:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'm well aware of that. The source I provided speaks about alternate Gul'dan. The Harbringer video later retconned that bit about him. --Mordecay (talk) 23:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, it sounded like you were talking about MU Gul'dan, I'll detail that. ShellShockLive (talk) 23:50, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Elothir
Re this edit

I "messed" with it because the ordering didn't follow the boilerplate. The other time I objected to the ordering of fields being changed (one of those pages for a Memory in Dalaran IIRC) was because they already matched the boilerplate. I'm not trying to be picky here, it's just that I believe the more consistency there is had across articles, the friendlier it will be for editors. (And we could really use an increase in the number of active editors on Wowpedia.)

I don't really care which way things are arranged in the infoboxes, so long as something is settled on. Sorry for the misunderstanding. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 19:37, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Isn't this the boilerplate? --Mordecay (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't know the history behind that template, so I'm not sure what to tell you. All I've ever been going by are the preload links provided above the editing box when on an empty page. So in the case of an NPC, the preload option is calling for Help:NPC articles/Preload. If I'm doing a mob, it's Help:Mob articles/Preload. Same thing goes for quests and items.


 * Guess I'll just leave it alone from hereon out since both get a lot of use. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 20:11, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Captain Ironhill
Where do you see he can use Stoneform? Usually wowhead doesn't show anymore the abilities for removed NPCs, and I'm curious if there's a way to find it back. Xporc (talk) 22:33, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * A wotlk free server database. --Mordecay (talk) 22:39, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Duh, should have thought about it earlier. thx. Xporc (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No problemo :D --Mordecay (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Reversions
You left no comments on your reversions. Explain? Dajax02 (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see any reason why HotS pics should replace warcraft pics in the infoboxes. --Mordecay (talk) 21:19, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Because they are pics by Blizzard for Blizzard, depicting Warcraft characters (thus making them Warcraft pictures)? And because some of these pictures, mainly the Falstand and Muradin ones, are better depictions of the actual characters (in my opinion at least) than the already existing art? I can't see how this should be any different than art from Hearthstone or anywhere else. Dajax02 (talk) 22:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Please, see this discussion. --Mordecay (talk) 22:46, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Gotcha. Dajax02 (talk) 22:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Illidan
Hi. That quote "This time he saw not just one universe but a near infinity of them, a complex fractal structure, where new worlds were born each minute from the decisions made a heartbeat before. Everywhere the Burning Legion marched, destroying world after world" is misleading because taken out of context.

They are not literally, physically, going to each of these worlds and destroying them. Here's the full quote : "This time he saw not just one universe but a near infinity of them, a complex fractal structure, where new worlds were born each minute from the decisions made a heartbeat before. Everywhere the Burning Legion marched, destroying world after world. Every death narrowed the range of possible worlds, till eventually all the multitude of possibilities narrowed to but a few."

So no they don't go to all these alternate universes and destroy their worlds. They are simply preventing any other possibility than destruction. By killing every people and destroying all worlds in the main universe, they prevent any other possibility from existing. So, for example, by killing John, they immediately "destroy" all other possibilities for John's son to exist. So there will be no universe with John's son marrying Juliette (anymore).

They are making it so the only possible future for this universe is destruction. They are not leaving any other possibilities, they are "narrowing it to but a single future". This is why everywhere Vandel looked, he only saw death. "He saw countless Azeroths, countless Vandels, and Khariels, and to every one of them came death" (and so on, there's a lot of enumerations). Because every single possibility was death, it was destruction, there was no other possibility than that. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 10:48, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh yea, I just took the reference from another page and there is a deeper meaning to it. But yet, it is still what they do, destroying worlds in general, so maybe it can be updated to reflect demons's goal? --Mordecay (talk) 17:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll try to phrase it succintly! -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 18:26, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Table
Hey, would you know how I could turn this table into a three-column table like this to put the Neutral between the Alliance and the Horde ? Also takes less vertical space. Thanks. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Done.
 * Awesome thanks, much clearer this way. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 18:00, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Okri'lon and Nethergarde
Did you abandoned doing those articles? :( Xporc (talk) 19:03, 31 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Of course not! I will revert the page back later. --Mordecay (talk) 20:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Xporc (talk) 20:37, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I will definitely do the Okril'lon page, but I'm unsure of the Nethergarde page. Since u mentioned it, I wanna ask, what do u think of it? An editor has been doing such articles about vrykul (groups based on town names, but I may be wrong on this bc I don't really follow vrykul as of late). W/E... what I mean is that I'm unsure whether there is a "Nethergarde group" since all mentions of "Nethergarde" refers to the Keep rather than a "group". Or would it be enough to have a group based on NPCs named Nethergarde soldier instead of Nethergarde Keep soldier? --Mordecay (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * IMO, you should just merge the page you've already done with Nethergarde Keep itself so the page is both about the citadel and the faction. So if you want to have a list of the generic Nethergarde soldiers, it should be put there, under the vendors. Xporc (talk) 21:24, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Still you're still shuffling around a lot of pages: Cosmos#Order_and_Disorder doesn't work, it links to an item ... Xporc (talk) 13:27, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --Mordecay (talk) 13:32, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Thal'kiel
Quit fighting with MyMindWontQuiet. Remember WP:3RR. Edit summaries are not talk pages.-- 03:56, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Ok. Gonna discuss it, tho. --Mordecay (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks
I'm old member of wowpedia, but I just lose my old account so thanks for greetings. SODIX89 (talk) 21:54, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Risen/Scarlet Crusade
Note that Adventurers Wanted: Stratholme Main Gate (Alliance) says "The Dreadlord Balnazzar has slain the Scarlet Crusade and resurrected them as the Risen." Of course, it may still not apply to the ones at Tyr's Hand, but I doubt it's a coincidence ... Xporc (talk) 19:44, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * There is a lack of a direct source stating that they too are members of the Risen (Unlike for the Stratholme Crusaders). Tyr's Hand's Crusaders may or may not be Risen. I detailed the problem and my reasoning here Alternatively, Eligor is a dreadlord and he was just bluffing stating that he doesn't know the source of their undeath!--Mordecay (talk) 19:48, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Isn't it just possible that the Tyr's Hand quests chronologically happen before Stratholme, where they learn about the Risen? Xporc (talk) 19:59, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Everything's possible. The question is whether it really happened that way. --Mordecay (talk) 20:04, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Orcish clans
"|faffiliation" doesn't work for orc clan infoboxes :( Xporc (talk) 10:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Whoops, kinda overlooked it that it is a different infobox. --Mordecay (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Tears of Elune
Talk:Tears of Elune Dajax02 (talk) 15:32, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Ogre girl
I'm not sure what the ruling is on this one, since "ogre girl" is an official descriptor of the character (haven't read Traveler, so I'll take you word for it) but it's but clearly not her actual name (assuming she has one); the first point would make the "This article's name is based on conjecture" part of the bettername template as well as the automatic "Unofficially named articles" category name a bit misleading, since it implies that the article name is made up by fans and not an official name used by Blizzard. I don't see anything about it on the naming policy, so I guess the article can stay as it is without the template. It probably doesn't matter too much either way, though. -- 16:18, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


 * "it implies that the article name is made up by fans and not an official name used by Blizzard". Yea, my thoughts exactly. --Mordecay (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Retcons
Hey, is there a page dedicated to listing known retcons? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 19:35, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Retcon speculation.-- 19:47, 11 March 2017 (UTC)


 * There is this page, but it is possible it is outdated. I mostly added retcons and discrepancies to the respective material's pages like War Crimes and UVGs. --Mordecay (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:10, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

How rood :'(
What was so wrong with my "improvements" suggestions on the Echo Isles page? A quick and plain "No." tells me nothing. Makes me cri. :c WarGodZajru (talk) 22:25, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe that everyone here has ideas for improvements for the world. I don't think these should be here as they are subjective. --Mordecay (talk) 22:27, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * May have to do with the fact that there's nothing remotely official in there and is purely fan-made subjectivity, I'm not sure this would be the best place to put it, nor if there's a place for that on wowpedia -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 22:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Alright, fair enuf. Suppose if I, and/or others, would really like to voice suggestions about improvements on Wowpedia, it would be better for a page made specifically for such, whether that exists already or not, as MyMindWontQuiet said. But yah, gotcha. WarGodZajru (talk) 22:34, 17 March 2017 (UTC)


 * For bits, that doesn't quite fit the speculation bit, creating a personal subpage is probably the best option, if you'd just like to get some creative writing done. PeterWind (talk) 00:51, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

GM
Hey. You can't use this (http://i.imgur.com/UVCLSyB.jpg) as a source and I've already explained why.

- it's a screenshot. That's the less legit type of reference.

- the veracity of the information is unverifiable. Also, GM have no authority on the lore.

- Plus, GM are technically not authorized and usually do not have access to such resources, so that's already shady (and GM are officially supposed to redirect people to the Story forums). The only way that would be possible is if that GM actually had contact with the lore guys or something which adds another layer of non-plausibility.

- the source is not verified. It's a guy on the story forums who claims to be friend with a GM and that posted this screenshot. That screenshot isn't any more legit than this one (http://i.imgur.com/GnSwcWU.png). It cannot be used as a reference. I cannot stress this enough: it's a random guy on the forums that posted a screenshot, this does not in away constitute a valid source.

Note that I personally believe some of the answers given here, but as I said, it's personal, just me, it can't be used as a source. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 16:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * ...if that GM actually had contact with the lore guys... Isn't that what happened? The GM got the answers from lore guys, IIRC, that was said at the beginning of all this. If that wasn't the case, I would be skeptical too. Also, could u direct me to a policy about references? And maybe u could also post it on wowpedia forum. And regarding Rokhan, we have already seen him with the other Horde's leaders so even if this screenshot is nonsense, there's the in-game thing. --Mordecay (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It's the "if" that matters here. Those are claims from a random guy on the forums. If I posted there, said the same things, and posted a screenshot with answers I had chosen, how would you know? Would my screenshot be considered an official source of lore? No it wouldn't, don't you agree? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 16:53, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm also referring to what the GM said: "...talking to more knowledgeable people and compiling what answers I'm allowed to give.". --Mordecay (talk) 17:03, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * But you don't know that the GM said that. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:05, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Does this mean we should remove the references linking to that image? Or.. should we leave them as is? WarGodZajru (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Since it's not a valid source, the reference should be removed, but you could keep what you said as speculations I guess. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:12, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't know? I can clearly see his response so I do know. Looking briefly through the policies, I found "Comments by authors, artists, and Blizzard Entertainment employees may also be of interest, but should always be clearly cited as such." The game master is a Blizzard employee and there is his response. Neither Wowpedia:DNP policy nor Wowpedia:Lore policy have any thoughts about GMs. Also, continue here, pls. --Mordecay (talk) 20:32, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You don't know that this is the GM's answer. It's a screenshot. If I told you that this (http://i.imgur.com/GnSwcWU.png) is what my GM friend answered me, would you believe me? No, but they're still both technically "screenshots of a GM's response". The point is : there is no way to verify that 1) the GM did indeed check with the lore guys 2) this is a GM at all. Nevermind I hadn't seen the forum. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 21:43, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Well, I can recognize the edited part :D --Mordecay (talk) 21:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Valiance Expedition/Alliance Vanguard
The article is about a past organization that might be disbanded. Like how the Alliance of Lordaeron and Old Horde articles have dead people still listed as leaders. The leaders should be left in their last known state unless it appears again. --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell, when a leading character died, his position in organization(s) was always moved. --Mordecay (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Even in cases where the movement/organization died with its leader/became defunct? PeterWind (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Except that, probably? I was looking at troll tribes when writing the answer. --Mordecay (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Empire of Zul redirect
The correct spelling would be "Zandalari Empire" rather than "Zandalar Empire", just pointing that out.

Though, not sure which is best, to add "Zandalari Empire" and keep it the only redirect, or keep both "Zandalar/Zandalari Empire". Reason I ask is, because it has never been referred to as "Zandalar Empire", except for one time in Vanilla (but I get that some might search for that term), only "Zandalari Empire" due to... "Zandalari" being the correct term. Which uh, you might have seen me stress quite a lot the past few days. :'D WarGodZajru (talk) 13:02, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Zandalar Empire is also in use, see its source. As is the term Zandalar troll as of a Cataclysm quest - The Zandalari Menace. But yes, it is true that they seem to use "Zandalari" more now. --Mordecay (talk) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * That's fair, I overlooked that Cataclysm quest chain, though not once in MoP or in Shadows of the Horde/Chronicle Volume 1 were the terms used. I'd say MoP, being a "newer" expansion, carry priority over older expansions where other terms have been used (Cata and Vanilla). At least to my knowledge. Not saying they don't exist anymore, just saying they have been replaced by Blizzard. As shown in the novels, one of which was meant to shed light upon "ancient lore", and since it doesn't use those terms even once... they're most likely out of commission. So.. should shove them to the side (in parenthesis ofc) and replace with the newer, better-sounding term. C: WarGodZajru (talk) 13:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Why do you keeping doing this?
and

The first one is not a huge deal, but it's not even necessary, so why waste your time and effort?

The second is more often (honestly, nearly every single time) not even in the right format. It's a.... *apologetic look* pain in the ass to keep fixing, tbh.--Mondoblasto (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Isn't that because of the plugin that automatically create quests? Xporc (talk) 10:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Yep. Try addressing your concerns here. If these really need correcting, Linneris will need to update the plugin coz that's how I'm doing dem quests. (I see now that the start line creates the end line if the NPC is the same, but I'm not sure if the end line really hurts, tho.) But hey, thanks for finishing the pages! I often leave out the in-game stuff mentioned in the Notes section. --Mordecay (talk) 10:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You got some of the gist of it, yes. You keep adding the |end line manually, when it is not needed.  The only reason we should have the |end line is 1. Different person, and 2. Same person but different location (at which we add coords).  Otherwise it's a waste of your time to insert it, time that could be used elsewhere.  Let the plugin do the work for you, that's why it's there! :D
 * As to the second one, you keep putting it inaccurately, not as in "the info is wrong", but rather that's not how it's put in the game. There are some times where it IS put like that, I found usually because the reward is something unique, like a toy, or item, or a buff. (Come to think of it, maybe that in particular should be added to the quest boilerplate.)  In any case the way it usually is, is already in the boilerplate.  I always check Wowhead to see if it's one way or the other when I'm not sure.  As to little details in itembox|, you keep putting in "q1=|", which is saying 'this item has a stack of one,' which again is unnecessary and a waste of your important time.  The itembox| example above the one you keep using in the boilerplate shows it as it should be: simply omitted.--Mondoblasto (talk) 08:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * U got me confused here, mate, so I created a page right now and it is the plugin - not me, manually - that creates the end line. Same goes to the itembox. --Mordecay (talk) 11:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It says right in the boilerplate: "| end = Caelestrasz  ".  You just... delete it.  It's just like you wouldn't put in |groupsize or |reputation if there isn't any.--Mondoblasto (talk) 15:44, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * I got it. I'll fix both issues in QuestFiller when I have time. (Maybe we should make a page for it, something like Wowpedia:QuestFiller, and move the current forum discussion to its talk page?) - Linneris (talk) 12:13, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * That sounds like a great idea. Xporc (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Fixed the issues in release 1.1.4, created the project page. - Linneris (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Warchief
The reference does say "Former Warchief of the Horde" but I'm honestly not sure if that's truly written as a title or if it's just simply because sentences start with a capital letter, so former is written Former. But I'll accept it. As for the TCG, yes, it's not canon. If it was an original title, perhaps, maybe, but I don't see the point of having both "Chieftain of the Darkspears" and "Darkspear Chieftain", specially since the latter is, well, non-canon.- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:40, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Hmm. But that's not a sentence. If u also look at the other articles, these are titles. --Mordecay (talk) 17:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hard to tell really. All the others have been seen in-game or in other media. But it's okay. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Lorewalkers
Why did you tag all the NPCs with Lorewalker in their name as needing citations that they're members of the Lorewalkers? It's literally part of their names. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Just the ones on the Wandering Isle as I wasn't sure whether these counts too. I literally said "They are not tagged. Or do u assume as they have the title?" But yea, on second thought, the title is enough I guess. --Mordecay (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2017 (UTC)