Talk:Archmage Modera

Member of the Six
Why do you think she "was" a member of the Six? Obviously she is member of the Ruling Council so why she shouldn't be one of "the Six"?. I mean, the Six actually are the ruling council, don't they? Further on I don't read anything about her leaving the Six. So I think she still is a member. --Cyrdaz (talk) 20:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * What makes you think that the Six still exist? If they still exist, then she is certainly a member, but for all we know, Dalaran's completely changed their system. -- Ragestorm (talk &middot; contr) 21:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * She signs "Member of the Six" unless they've changed the quest text recently. Gaining an Audience (Alliance). -- k _d3 21:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Just confirming this. 21:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Affiliation
So? Neutral or the Alliance?--Mordecay (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Eh, she doesn't have particularly prevalent ties either way. I'd say she's more like Rhonin and Krasus than Vereesa or Aethas. Grissom (talk) 16:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed, however i have seen somewhere her with alli icon...--Mordecay (talk) 18:14, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I only did that because I assumed a certain someone would make a 20 paragraph thread about how she's his favored faction. Im fine with whatever is right. [[Image:inv_helmet_44.png|22px]]  (talk contribs) 21:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

The Third War
Info from the paragraph is from the period between tbc and wotlk. Only the last sentence speaks about her (non?)involvement. Can it be changed and moved little bit down?--Mordecay (talk) 19:39, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * This page could be the poster girl for the poor formatting choices parodied in Wowpedia:New Enhanced Writing Style. If it needs changing, you can change it. You do not need permission, because you are (and I stress this) trying to work around a technicality that does not exist. Just make it make more sense. It does not need to be divided by source with a bunch of redundant section labels. Both those things are stupid and unnecessary.-- 21:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Just for clarification. Sections are redundant because they contains just 1 / 2 sentences, right? --Mordecay (talk) 21:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Sections are useless as sections when they only contain just one or two sentences. Sections are redundant they are named for the source where they get their information, are labeled with a template that says where they get their information, and are clear in the text make it clear (explicitly or not) where they get their information. Bonus redundancy if it is cited too.-- 21:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)