User talk:CMB0627

Edits on 12/22/09
The Proof Info is directly pulled from the articles that are in question.

I have reasoning for my recent edits of the pages of Blood Elves, Highborne and High Elf

-Blood Elf: I put "Some would consider them Fel Corrupted High Elves", The proof is "Blood elves have learned to slake their thirst through the absorption of fel energies." And they are decedents of High Elves.

-Highborne: I put "Some would consider them Arcane Mutated Kaldorei", The proof is "The access of arcane magic to the ruling caste began to split the Kaldorei nation across racial lines and despite their outwardly similar physical appearance, those Highborne were transformed by the magic flowing through their veins."

-High Elf: I put "Some would consider them decedents of Arcane Mutated Kaldorei", They are Decedents of the Highborne


 * Still there isn't any source that says that nor use those terms, it would be just speculation. And useless speculation should not go in the mainspace. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 00:33, December 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Aside from uncited sources theres 2 other issues against your additions: Non-NPOV language, and unessesesary repitition and summarization. The terms you've chosen to use seem to try and portray these races in a negative light. And what you are restating in oversimplfied and hastily added terms is already present in the articles, thus being completely unessesary and sloppy. 01:19, December 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * First of all.....


 * 1) A wiki is a place for free expression right?
 * 2) If you have read the in game Books they say the same thing.
 * 3) They were just basic summarizing.


 * Free expression, yes, but within the guidleines (It doesn't mean you can add whatever you want and it has to stay). There are guidelines dealing with neatness, repitition, neutral point of view, and most other common sense themes. See Guidelines. If the books indeed do say those things (in those exact words) then citing them should be easy. Use either or . Furthermore in the case of the edits made by yourself that was a little too oversimplified and may paint the wrong impression of all members of that particular race, not to meantion they were happazardly added after summaries that have been worked on over longer periods of time and are more in line with what works best for the wiki. 05:56, December 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Well.....
 * Well yes. What I put is just basic summaries of what the people are. But instead of deleting them you maybe could have just edited them to described them better? What I put is the basic summery of Warcraft Lore of those people.


 * I would have, except you notice the summaries right above those little generalizations you added? That's kinda what they are. 13:27, December 23, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes but all i did was summarize it into Laymen's terms.


 * I would argue 99% of the article is in layman's terms, especialy the intoroduction and any further simplification is unnessesary and more misleading than informative. 14:56, December 23, 2009 (UTC)