Talk:Elemental hierarchy

There is no guessing involved, i just took the lore we have in wow and put it on a list.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * You are trying to fill a void by codifying what is seen in WoW into a pattern inspired by the RPG. It is speculative.-- 23:50, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I only wow based information trough, interpretative yes ,since we're not giving a clear list, but it exists(as shown ingame by the abyssal council)and can be clearly seen by the elemental interactions with each other and "word of god" given by blizzard, speculative no, because i didn't theorized or guessed anything, all this information already exited it just wasn't structured into a list, i might be wrong in some parts(i'm fallible) but that can be fixed.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Why bring up the Abyssal Council if you did not add it? What "word of god" are you citing? If you might be wrong and did not cite anything, then you were probably guessing.-- 00:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The abyssal council is proof that such a hierarchy exists, and i have some doubts where to put Ahune and i have doubts that flamewakers are noble, but i'm going to have exams soon so i'll deal with this in 3 days.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:28, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Elementals have a hierarchy. What you are portraying as certain is that elementals have this hierarchy, based on model. If I added the Abyssal Council to your pattern, all wind serpents would be air elemental nobility.-- 00:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I plan to add icons, the elemental nobility is for generic mobs that have been shown to boss other mobs around (ex: Djinn and Air nobles have been shown to be mostly in the higher tiers of the elemental hierarchy), but if that's a problem with you we can remove "elemental nobel" part and stick with creature, inhabitants, princes, second in command, elemental lord, it still works.--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I dislike the icon craze, but that is irrelevant. You are still largely guessing, and if you take out the guessing, then you are left with something that is empty and unhelpful. Can you cite the relationships between the upper ranks? Why do we have to peg down a hierarchy to replace the one that was rendered non-canon?-- 18:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * We don't "need" to, but it's better if we do, and i'm not guessing, but i'll ask the, you want me to cite the upper ranks? the elemental lord, second in command and princes???--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Cite that they are in that order of power. Remove the unconfirmed.-- 21:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'l try...--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Do i need to cite the elemental lords and princes too? they are practically given, by theit titles alone.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Cite the hierarchy.-- 22:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I built this hierarchy using information from wow, i can cite positions hierarchy mostly based on titles, i was able to cite second in commands, we know that the elemental lords are at the top, the elemental princes, since they can't be right below elemental lords(which is occupied by the second in command(i think the stone lords are earth prices but that's besides the point)), then there's the inhabitants which are sapient denizens of the firelands(like citizens), and there's creatures which are types of elemental animal, there isn't any speculation in such a hierarchy, i'll remove nobles because all the info of djinn and flamewakers being nobles i think was from the RPG --Ashbear160 (talk) 22:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * How do you know the order of everything below the "second in commands" but above the "Inhabitants"? How do you know that Theradras is above or below the Stone Lords?-- 22:31, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Theradras is dead, i think that she was one of stone lords as Ozruk but that's speculation, i just put prince above sapient inhabitants(because it is obvious) and those above non-sapient creatures(because it's also obvious).--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sandwichman's point is that it's almost entirely speculative. We have virtually no information at all about their status, power, and standing relative to each other, save that the Elemental Lords are on top. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:42, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And that the second in command are below them(i sourced it), and since the princes exist they need to be somewhere, since it's obvious that they are above the generic sapient species, and that those are above generic non-sapient species, there is nothing speculative about this, interpretative yes, i'm interpretating the information given in wow, speculative no, speculating requires guessing or making theories.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)