Talk:Tank (vehicle)

Move
Was this really a good idea? I've never heard a vehicle explicitly referred to as a 'tank' by any in-game text, and the only notable ones are in the Ulduar raid instance that will only be encountered by level 80 players that have already cleared a tier of raid content. On the other hand the new LFG interface has a 'Tank' check box that players can encounter as early as level 14 and might like to look up what it means, but now have to follow a redirect at the top of the page. Seems like the wrong way around to me. Binkyuk (talk) 10:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Steam tanks? Siege tanks? etc?Baggins (talk) 10:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

From Steam Tank#In World of Warcraft:

''In World of Warcraft, a few steam tanks are still seen, all of them ruined or damaged, but intact on the dwarf/gnome character screen. These vehicles are never seen firing or in motion''

I've played very few levels as alliance, but I never noticed any of the steam tank scenery objects with in-game text saying 'tank', though I could have just not noticed.

Siege tank redirects to Demolisher. I'm afraid I don't know where that term comes from.

From Spider tank:

Currently, no mobs in World of Warcraft have the exact name "spider tank". The closest there I can see is 'Mechano-tank' in gnomer.

The only significant object in the warcraft universe referred to as a 'tank' is the Warcraft 3 Steam Tank unit.

All of this seems to me fairly uninteresting to WoW players, while I can point to a check box in the LFG that says 'Tank', which IMHO certainly is. So I again ask 'why this way around?'. I'd advocate moving the game term page back to the front and keeping this as a disambiguation page. If it's because of consistency, or of a precedent that game objects take priority over game terms no matter how significant then that's fine, please point me at some other examples. Binkyuk (talk) 12:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you talking about them not looking like tanks from real life? Or just the term tank? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just the term 'tank'. I wasn't thinking of RL tanks at all. I suppose now you mention it someone might search for 'tank' if they were looking for the warcraft equivalent of RL tanks, in which case this is the page they'd want. If you started in the dwarf/gnome area and wanted lore info on the tank like things around you then you might, but that still seems far less likely than wanting an article on the party role. Binkyuk (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well this page for tank the "vehicle" is way shorter than tank the "game term", if that counts as a reason to move tank the "game term" back to this article. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Yikes. I looked at 'what links here' and when I saw how many links had been semi-broken I decided to unilaterally revert it. I think I found all the vehicle links and pointed them at the vehicle specific page. Hopefully this is acceptable. Binkyuk (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * There are mobs in game called siege tanks both share the demolisher model, the Horde Siege Tank and Destroyed Siege Tank. As for other "tank" references; "Tank Commanders (Gorge the Corpsegrinder & Tank Commander's Treads), [[Tank Ain't Gonna Fix Itself, Tanks a lot..., dwarven tank drivers.


 * Of course there is the third use of "tank" as a container to hold materials such as fuel (rpg) or Plague tanks or Vic's Emergency Air Tank, Pneumatic Tank Transjigamarig.


 * So making "tank" a disambig helps.Baggins (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ugh. I started updating internal links to point at the correct page, but then noticed there are 274 of them and my brain will melt long before I'm done unless there's an automated method I don't know about. Instead of updating all of them I'll change it to the disambig style used by Arena because it's a heck of a lot less editing. Binkyuk (talk) 14:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Righto, have fun updating those 290 links. Binkyuk (talk) 00:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)