Forum:Deceased characters

Clarify

 * Moved from Rolandius's talk page

The Undead category is there for gameplay, just like how the Humanoids category is in the Trolls and other races that are classified as humanoids. -- 11:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I know that. I am asking why is Category:Deceased characters in the Category:Ghosts article when Category:Deceased characters says that Undead characters should not include Category:Deceased characters since they are not really "deceased" e.g. they can still give out quests, end quests, etc. You have to understand what I am saying this time. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:06, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

People who're undead aren't dead. They're undead. Simple enough, no? 12:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That is what I am trying to say. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

You have to understand what I am saying this time. A character who has deceased is no longer living, and when they have passed away they can appear at particular locations or to haunt a particular person. See also the definition of ghost on Wikipedia: "A ghost has been defined as the disembodied spirit or soul of a deceased person..." See also ghost: "..."unable to realize that they are no longer alive..." Am I making myself clear?

You're right Toran in that people who are dead aren't dead, but like I said before the Undead category is there for gameplay purposes, just like how Revenants are Elementals, Wyverns are Beasts etc. -- 12:32, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Wow you really do not get what I am saying. I already told you I am not talking about the Undead category. Let me break it down into some simple steps. 1) The Category:Deceased characters article says that "Undead characters, who have not truly passed on, should not be included here" so they should not be connected to that category. 2) Ghosts are Undead characters as some can give out quests, end quests, etc. 3) The Category:Ghosts article has Category:Deceased characters in it. 4) The Category:Ghosts article should not have Category:Deceased characters in it. Am I making myself clear? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:40, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * And you really don't get what I'm saying. 1) It says Undead, not undead, which means that not all creatures in WoW who are classified as Undead are deceased, such as the Jabbering Ghoul; a former human that has turned into a ghoul (Undead). 2) Again, ghosts are classified as Undead in-game. They have passed away since they are already dead. 3) Again, ghosts are remnants of dead people. I can't make myself more clear about this. 4) Isn't this just repeating yourself?
 * If this doesn't make you understand that Undead creatures are for gameplay purposes, undead (note lower case) are not necessarily Undead, and ghosts are deceased characters, then I'm not sure what will. -- 12:55, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You are not even reading what I am talking about. Everything you are saying I have agreed about and you are ignoring the real question. This is like a dog chasing its tail. I will ask a third party. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You're asking why Category:Ghosts is in the Category:Deceased characters, are you not? Or are you asking why Category:Ghosts is in the Category:Undead? Either way, gourra has answer both. 19:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Gourra has changed the text on the Deceased characters category, so that it no longer references undead. I agree with the reasoning on both sides, and that the prohibition on undead was causing confusion, not the classification.  That and discussion about "Undead != undead", which was by and large irrelevant. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Coobra, sorta close. I was asking why was Category:Deceased characters in Category:Ghosts. Category:Deceased characters had said that its category was connected to characters who are "deceased" as in not present anymore in the Warcraft universe anymore. It said do not connect this category to undead characters who we can interact with still or "think" they are dead but are obviously still NPCs. I then removed that part from Category:Deceased characters to follow Gourra's point of view but then he reverted that too. So to me he was saying I should follow two contradictory ideas which were 1) Category:Deceased characters is not for undead characters 2) Category:Deceased characters is okay for ghost characters even though they are undead characters. Now that Gourra has changed the text, which pretty much was a revert of his own revert of my edit, it means Category:Deceased characters is for any character who has "died" like ghost characters, Scourge characters, Forsaken characters, etc. I thought Category:Deceased characters was for characters like Archimonde, not characters like Baker Masterson. I mean, just look at Category:Deceased characters. I am pretty sure all those people are "deceased", not walking around still. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk  -  contr ) 00:23, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Third Party

 * Moved from Ragestorm's talk page

I need a third party to figure this out. Okay, Category:Deceased characters says in it "Undead characters, who have not truly passed on, should not be included here..." which to me seems to say that characters who are undead but not "gone forever" and are still able to give out quests, end quests, etc. should not be connected to Category:Deceased characters. It is only for characters who are truly deceased and not undead. Okay, now if you go to Category:Ghosts, I removed Category:Deceased characters but it was put back. Ghosts are characters who are undead and not deceased and it even says "Since their race can always be clearly identified..." which means you are able to interact with them if you can still tell what race they were before. The category is filled with NPCs who are ghosts and not "gone forever" as some of the ghosts give you quests, end quests, etc. Gourra does not understand what I am talking about and instead keeps saying something about Category:Undead being in Category:Ghosts which I am not even talking about. The best I can figure out, he thinks I want Category:Undead removed from Category:Ghosts when my whole question is why was Category:Deceased characters put back in Category:Ghosts when all the ghosts are not "deceased" but instead are undead characters who can usually interact with you. Category:Deceased characters says do not connect Category:Deceased characters with undead characters "who have not truly passed on" like Category:Ghosts, which is full of NPCs "who have not truly passed on" and are still present. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 13:16, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm going to make it very simple for you so you can understand: one must be dead/deceased to become a ghost. All ghosts are dead/deceased. -- 13:23, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am going to make it even more simple so you can understand since this is WoWWiki, not me saying this. According to Category:Deceased characters, ghost characters are not deceased characters. Deceased characters are characters we will never hear from again. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought you'd understand my point, but it seems you don't. The category description sucked anyway, so I'm changing it so you understand. -- 13:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, you are reverting your own revert of my edit? If you don't understand that Category:Deceased characters is for those characters who are "deceased" and not for characters who died and and now are ghosts, Scourge, and whatever other kind of undead than I cannot help you. Unless you now want to put Category:Deceased characters on every ghost, Scourge, etc. character in the Warcraft universe. I am going to sleep. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:42, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * And you clearly don't understand that someone who is dead is, well, dead. -- 13:51, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ragestorm, any comments? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

You know, generally, when someone says "deceased", they really DO mean never gonna hear from again...

I mean, Sylvanas. She's undead. Do we put "Undead, Deceased" as her status? No. The Lich King's undead. Do we put "Undead, Deceased" as his status? No.

Tbh, you gotta be deceased to be ANY of these things. If you're gonna talk like that about ghosts Gourra, you may as well talk like that for the Scourge, the Forsaken, the Unyielding, and just about anything else that is technically "Deceased". 17:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Gourra has changed the text on the "deceased characters" category to not refer to undead. I am not truly happy yet with the Ghosts category, for much the reason of Toran.  All ghosts are unarguably "undead".  Most undead can be classified as deceased, with exceptions being... exceptional.  But that fact is not always "interesting".


 * To me, something would qualify for both categories only if both were particularly significant. Marlene Redpath would strongly qualify: while undead (a ghost), the fact of her death is of interest.  Sylvanas weakly qualifies for both tags, her death is relevant, but seldom considered.  "Orcish Ancestors" would not:  they are only interesting because they are ghosts.  Their former selves are not of particular interest.  --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I can see both arguments. The deceased category should only apply to characters who are dead and stay dead- this can include undead characters who have died again, this time permanently (though thinking about it, I'm not sure how many of those are knocking around).  On the other hand, ghosts (at least the NPC/quest-giver variety of ghost as opposed to any mobs who might be classified as such) are clearly undead, but rarely seem to actually be related to the Scourge- in fact, most ghosts linger through means totally unrelated to the plague.
 * I suggest we put it to a vote, the options being that
 * A): Ghosts are deceased, because they are dead, even though they have not passed on (another discussion will be needed to determine if they should also be counted as undead)
 * B): Ghosts are undead, because they are dead and not passing on, hence they are not deceased (which implies moving on, the intent to move on, or, as in the case of the Orc Ancestors, contentment with their new form)
 * I'm leaning more towards B, as ghosts are lingering, even if they're lingering for a good purpose. And if I've hopelessly befuddled the issue further or otherwise missed the point, please let me know.-- Ragestorm (talk &middot; contr) 21:35, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

On what page would we hold this vote? If it's this one, I vote B. 21:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps on a forum page? Moving this discussion to a forum page seems like a useful idea in and of itself. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The B option sounds like the one I have been trying to point out. I was trying to relay that ghost characters are indeed "Undead" in both the creature term (humanoid, demon, etc.) and the fact that they are undead. It is a "given" that characters who are now ghosts, Scourge, Forsaken, etc. had to have died at some point. What I was trying to point out is that the "Deceased characters" category said that it was for characters like Archimonde who are deceased and, unless some future lore says, are not walking around still giving out quests, ending quests, etc. Someone like Baker Masterson would not fit in the "Deceased characters" category because he has not stayed "deceased" and in fact can sell you items. Like Toran said, if we put the "Deceased characters" category on every character who has "died" then we would have to include characters who are now Forsaken, Ghosts, or whatever other undead term. Just look at Category:Deceased characters. So far it looks like we have only been putting this category for characters who no longer can interact with us. This includes people like Archimonde and Deathstalker Fry because Archimonde is dead and is not around anymore, to our knowledge at least, and although Deathstalker Fry "died" once before, he was a Forsaken who was killed and is "dead" again and not still walking around. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Voice your Opinion
✅

Votes

 * A : Ghosts are deceased, because they are dead, even though they have not passed on. (Leave in Deceased characters and in Undead categories.)


 * B : Ghosts are undead, because they are dead and not passing on, hence they are not deceased. (Leave in undead, but remove from Deceased characters.)


 * C : Ghosts, like shades, are undead. Ghost characters should be differentiated from "just ghosts", because we care about who they were when they were alive.  (Create a new category, subordinate to both Undead and Deceased.  Remove ghosts from deceased.)


 * D : Ghosts, like shades, are undead. Undead must be deceased (living separate from unliving) Ghost characters should be differentiated from "just ghosts", because we care about who they were when they were alive.  (Create a new "ghosts" category, subordinate to Undead.  Undead is subordinate to Deceased.  Remove ghosts from deceased per WW:CAT.)

Comments
 I'm going to try and make myself clear once again: deceased characters are those who are dead and stay dead. This does not include characters who died and are now "alive" in some form, including banshees, forsaken, zombies etc, and also characters such as Sylvanas. Ghosts are not alive (explanation not needed) and are such deceased and will stay deceased until they assume a non-apparition form, examples given just earlier. Even though someone could interact with a ghost doesn't mean that it's "alive" in some form.

I expect to get shot down, though, since people still seem to think that they are undead... -- 09:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * So, let's see. We have 3 states for the characters:
 * Alive
 * Undead
 * Deceased/Dead
 * And we're discussing if spiritual beings, like non-scourge-ghosts, are deceased or not?
 * Well, gameplay wise, they're undead, but status-wise they're deceased, nope? For a ghost, would it be something like this?
 * race = Human
 * creature = Undead (this one is only for those appearing in-game and labeled that way)
 * status = Deceased
 * I think that those that can't interact, those ghosts that are ghosts, and not banshees and shadows, that do interact, serving the Scourge or other factions. So, those that are DEAD, those that are just apparition of souls, and not undead spiritual creatures formed by those souls, are deceased.
 * So, Postmaster Malown is deceased, and Kaelystia Hatebringer is undead.
 * But, well, my problem comes here: What's the difference between them two? I don't find any. Of course, we'd need to differentiate between ghosts that rest in peace and ghosts that don't. Those who rest in peace are deceased, but those who don't are undead.
 * I think I just made it worse than before xDDD.--Lon-ami (talk) 10:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * PS: The voting is unclear, please, explain in a short paragraph what are we voting and what is each option.
 * Well from their description, banshees kinda sounds like they are disembodied spirits, i.e. ghosts. Don't take my word on that one, though.
 * I'd say that ghosts are deceased characters who are undead. I hope there's no doubt about that. But everyone who are ghosts did at one time decease and didn't come back to a corporeal form, while deceased characters are the ones who are dead and stay dead. In my opinion the Ghost category is in the Deceased characters category because of the reason I mentioned earlier. -- 11:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not sure really what you are talking about Gouura. On the one hand, you said "deceased characters are those who are dead and stay dead.", which I agree with, but then you turn around and say "Ghosts are not alive (explanation not needed) and are such deceased and will stay deceased until they assume a non-apparition form". Why are ghosts different than other undead like banshees, Forsaken, zombies, etc.? Just because they have not appeared as "a non-apparition form"? Ghosts in the Warcraft universe are still able to talk to you, attack you, be attacked by you, etc. If a ghost is attacking you in WoW, are you going to tell it "Hey wait, you are not a non-apparition form yet"? Ghosts are not "deceased characters". It is a bit like the quote in Frankenstein "It's alive!" when it was still an undead creature versus "It's not alive...but moving around...but dead!" Someone like Archimonde is a "deceased character", not a ghost NPC who can still do things like sell you food, give a quest, end a quest, etc. By the way Gourra, the Ghosts category is not even in the Deceased characters category. The Deceased characters category only has the Characters category. The Ghosts category is the one that has the Deceased characters category in it. The way I read and thought I was told is that it would look like these three examples:


 * Melia
 * Race = Ghost
 * Creature = Undead
 * Status = Alive
 * Category = Eastern Plaguelands NPCs, Ghosts, Humans


 * Gregory Ardus
 * Race = Human
 * Creature = Humanoid
 * Status = Alive
 * Category = Humans, Weapon vendors, Stormwind City NPCs


 * Archimonde
 * Race = Eredar warlock
 * Creature = Demon
 * Status = Deceased/Killable
 * Category = Eredar, Deceased characters, etc. --


 * I'm still not sure what you're getting at Melia can't be alive, she died. Gregory is quite an obvious example of someone who is alive. Archimonde is deceased according to lore, and in World of Warcraft you can travel in time to kill him, but he's still deceased according to lore; thus both statuses can be applied. -- 12:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well maybe the word can be worked on but Melia is "active". Obviously she died at some point just like all the other ghosts, Forsaken, Scourge, etc., but is back as a ghost and can be "seen" with Sammy. Some ghosts even can fight you, sell you food, give you quests, etc. Archimonde is deceased. I never said he wasn't. That is why he would get the Deceased characters category because he died and to my knowledge no one has seen him, bought food from him, got a quest from him, etc. after his death. To me it seems like you are saying that as soon as a character died, they went under the Deceased characters category even if they became something like a Scourge, ghost, Forsaken, etc. barely 10 seconds later. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, she could be "active" then, or "undead". She is still a ghost and ghosts are people who have died and come back in the same form as in they were in before they died (exceptions include Cursed Sailors).
 * I never said I doubted that Archimonde has deceased, I merely agreed with you.
 * "To me it seems like you are saying that as soon as a character died, they went under the Deceased characters category even if they became something like a Scourge, ghost, Forsaken, etc. barely 10 seconds later."
 * I never said that. -- 13:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If you don't think a character goes under the Deceased characters category as soon as they die because they turned into a ghost, Forsaken, Scourge etc., then why do you want to keep the Deceased characters category inside the Ghosts category article? It seems contradictory to me. You agree with me that characters who turned into ghosts do not go under the Deceased characters category, yet insist that the Ghosts category article must have the Deceased characters category in it... Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay I'm going to make myself very clear, and if you don't understand me now then you must be dense: someone who is a ghost is a character who is deceased, dead, not alive, not living. If they died and were brought into undeath by other means, such as necromancy, then they aren't considered deceased. -- 13:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you are relying too much on Wikipedia and not enough on Warcraft. You are trying to say ghosts are some special kind of "creatures" who are deceased characters even though they have become "active" just like any other Forsaken, Scourge, etc. character. Also, necromancy wasn't involved with most ghosts so they can be called deceased characters? I know they look "translucent" and you can tell what race they were before pretty easily, but that doesn't mean they should be called deceased characters while Forsaken, Scourge, etc. characters are not allowed to be called deceased characters. This doesn't have to do with how they came back. It has to do with the fact that they are back in the first place. The deceased characters category should be for characters who are currently deceased. If a human falls of a cliff and dies they are a deceased character. If a Forsaken is poisoned by the Scourge and falls on the floor dead they are a deceased character. If a human is talking to you and shaking your hand or something they are not a deceased character. If you buy some bread from a ghost and then start fighting with them or something they are not a deceased character. It isn't a category for characters who are currently deceased plus ghosts. We already know that ghosts died sometime during their life. Why do we need to know that a character that is a ghost also died at some time during their life? We sort of know that or else they wouldn't be a ghost running around still. It is like pointing at some ghost named John Doe and telling the person next to you "Did you know that John Doe died before he became a ghost?" Well I am going to just repeat myself so I am going to sleep. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 14:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Despite all the times I've been trying to tell you my point, you never seem to get it, do you. It seems like you have to be told by someone else what the difference is between a ghost of a dead person and someone who is alive. -- 14:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The problem I see here is that ghosts are a type of undead and ghosts are deceased characters, so that means that undead are also deseased characters, yet we don't include the category deseased characters in the undead category. I want to ask why? Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 18:16, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * A Ghost is a type of Undead.
 * A Ghost is a Deceased Character.
 * An Undead is not always a Ghost.
 * An Undead is a Deceased Character only if he is a Ghost.
 * VOTE A.
 * 18:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Which I've been trying to say the whole time. Glad that someone else understood me. -- 18:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Wait, I can do better: the POTATOE SCHEME !
 * 19:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

What I want to ask is why you guys think undead (besides ghosts) aren't "Deceased" though. They still died. They're technically deceased. Therefore, you may as well say that the Forsaken are deceased. You may as well say that the Scourge is deceased. You may as well say that almost every single undead THING is deceased. Why are ghosts so special? They died, and they came back. That's the same thing that happened with most, if not all other undead things. 19:22, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It's all about the bodied/desembodied thing: Spirit vs "Living" Body
 * 19:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I have one more question. Where is it told that the body is still "living" when someone become an undead? Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 19:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * "Living" body for an undead is mainly "reanimated" body.
 * Deathwing said to Gorefiend "[...] if you fail. I suggest you don't, not if you wish to remain alive--well, at least as alive as you are now."
 * 20:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I'd like to vote but I need to pause and simply state my opinions. I've tried to decipher these options, and what the question even is, with progress but no success. So my opinion (based on wowwiki history and personal preference) includes: Ghosts can be classified as Undead on this wiki, due to game mechanics, even though I would argue they are not really undead (see ). We have a distinction here between "Characters" and other less distinctive creatures; there are ghosts of both types. Ghosts are, by definition, (the spirit form of) deceased beings. So, we have a concept of a "ghost character" -- the spirit of a deceased interesting character. So, I think the "Ghosts" category should not be in the "Deceased characters" category -- all ghosts are deceased, but not all ghosts are characters. There could be a new "Ghost characters" category, within "Ghosts" and "Deceased characters". Or, each ghost character could be in both categories. If any of this aligns with one of the options, I'll cast my vote there. Oh, and Fairbanks for example is Undead but not Deceased. -- Harveydrone 22:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to point out on the link you gave (and originally from Wikipedia) it says "ghosts are a common form of undead in folklore". -- 22:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, Fairbanks is deceased: "Fairbanks was subsequently murdered by the remaining crusaders for his blasphemy". -- 22:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * My point was my opinion that re-animated corpses like Fairbanks (in the context of Scarelet Monastery) do not usefully fall into a "Deceased" category, since they are still around talking and fighting and generally interacting. And I was looking at the dictionary def of undead, not conventional usage, but I concede the point that the dictionary def is probably irrelevant here. -- Harveydrone 22:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * They must be deceased to be unliving. You're entitled to your opinion, and since you conceded the undead point, B appears to be closest unless you want to make another option. -- 22:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the tacklebox of worms that is . If not for the "undead are not deceased", option D would be close.  --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's pretty funny, I had thought I'd narrowed it down to A or C. I think it would help if someone could make similar Venn diagrams to explain the other options. (And yeah, I had a falling out with OOP in general some time ago. Prefer dimensional modeling these days.) -- Harveydrone 16:00, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * OK:


 * -- 16:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay I guess I will say this again. The Ghosts category is not even in the Deceased characters category article on WoWWiki. I am not sure how that option came about in the first place. The Deceased characters category is what I am talking about. I removed it and it was thrown back into the Ghosts category article which to me was saying all Ghosts are Deceased characters, which is not what the Deceased category was created to address I thought and read. The Deceased characters category only has the Characters category. It never had anything else to my knowledge in recent times. This looks like it is getting pretty complicated for an easy problem. Ghosts, Scourge, etc. all were "deceased" at one time. Ghosts, Scourge, etc. are all undead. It says that in WoW and it says that in the RPG. The only thing changed was that in WoW, the Forsaken had to be changed to Humanoid so that they were not affected by spells that hurt undead creatures and people who were playing as Forsaken were not given a big disadvantage. Besides that, just look in the RPG or wherever and it says "Undead" then lists Ghosts, Wraiths, Zombies, etc. I am not saying Ghosts are clones of zombies or anything. Also, there is a category already called Independant undead which seperates obviously "independant" undead versus those controlled by the Scourge. I think a new category just for Ghost undead isn't needed or else we would end up making more categories like "Undead who still look human", "Undead who are translucent", "Undead who don't know they are undead", "Undead who know they are undead but still fight for the Scourge", etc. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know what you're smoking but the Ghosts category is in the Deceased characters category. -- 03:33, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well I must be using WoWWiki lite because I am looking right this second and it shows Category: Characters as the only category inside the Category: Deceased characters article. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:41, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're reading it wrong. Deceased characters is in Characters, not the other way around.  Ghosts is in Deceased characters. -- 03:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I will say it a different way. Deceased characters "has" the Characters category at the bottom of its article and does not "have" the Ghosts category at the bottom of its article. My argument is that the Ghosts category should not "have" the Deceased characters category at the bottom of its article. It should only "have" the Undead category at the bottom of its page because ghosts aren't the only type of undead to have "deceased" before turning into a ghost, zombie, etc. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:04, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is what the vote above is about. Not everyone agrees with you. -- 04:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. Well, I just thought of a scenario which may help people see something new. Okay, now let us say a book comes out and you read it and it says something like "A paladin saw the ghost John Doe who was once a human. The ghost John Doe screamed at the paladin and the paladin screamed at the ghost." The book then ended. You then go to WoWWiki and create an article for John Doe and add the "Ghosts" and "Humans" category to it since some people think all ghost characters are deceased characters. Okay, now the next book comes out and you read it and it says "After the paladin and ghost screamed at each other they began to fight. The paladin slew John Doe." Now what do you do? John Doe the ghost just died. Are you going to create a new category called "Deceased deceased characters" or "Deceased again characters"? My argument is that after you read the first book, you would go make an article on WoWWiki and put the "Ghosts" and "Humans" category at the bottom of John Doe's article and the Ghosts category would not have the Deceased characters category at the bottom of its article. It would be added because John Doe's "race" is ghost. Human is added because it was decided or popular on WoWWiki that the category of their former race should be added. After you read the second book, you would then go update the article and add the "Deceased characters" category to John Doe's article because John Doe the ghost just "died". If you call ghost characters "Deceased characters" then you are not able to update when a ghost character "dies" or is "killed". This is the same for all the other undead types. If you are fighting against a ghost character but everyone keeps telling you that the ghost character is deceased, then you are fighting your imagination? You can't really tell the ghost "Hey quit attacking me you are deceased". Deceased characters are not around fighting players, selling bread, giving out quests, etc. If you go to the ghost John Doe and kill it, then it is a deceased character. So, if John Doe the human dies and you never hear a word about him again he is a deceased character. If you are walking around the Plaguelands and run into John Doe the ghost he is a ghost character. If you kill John Doe the ghost he is a deceased character. If you leave John Doe the ghost alone then he stays a ghost character. I don't see why wraith, zombie, etc. characters would be treated differently from a ghost character. If they are running around currently they are undead. Undead means not alive but not deceased, even though they "died" at some point. They are not alive because they are undead. They are not deceased because they are punching you in the face. The only exception would be Forsaken characters who are categorized as Humanoids in the creature type for gameplay reasons. If a Forsaken character dies though, it would get the Deceased characters category just like any other character who gets killed, be it the first or second time in its "existence". But you are not going to go to the Forsaken category, Zombie category, etc. and add the Deceased characters category at the bottom of the page. It should apply to either every undead and Forsaken or none of them. If it applies to every undead and Forsaken character then we don't even need the Deceased characters category. I am pretty sure everyone knows that a ghost, zombie, etc. died at some point if they are back as a ghost, zombie etc. What we want to know is who is a Deceased character according to the latest news. Is Erthalif dead or alive? He is a Deceased character. Is Deathstalker Fry dead or alive? He is a deceased character. Is Rhonin alive or dead? He is alive and you can find him in Dalaran. Is Quinn Yorick alive or dead? You can find find him in the Silverpine Forest. He doesn't look that great, but he is "alive" as a Forsaken. If we met Quinn Yorick in WoW 1.0 and he died we would have put Deceased characters into his article. If WoW 2.0 came out and he was back as a Forsaken then we would remove Deceased characters and add Forsaken. The same thing with any other character. If he is killed then Deceased characters goes back to his article. If we never met Quinn Yorick until WoW 2.0 then we would obviously only put the Forsaken category. I am not very good at graphics but it would go something like this. If a human, gnoll, etc. character dies they become a deceased character. If they become a ghost, wraith, etc. it supercedes the category and they are not a deceased character any longer. If that ghost, wraith, etc. goes on to get killed then the deceased character category is applied to them. Just because ghosts are translucent or whatever doesn't mean they can't attack you, you attack them, etc. just like like any "alive" character or undead character. Your sword or spell still hits something and if they are a vendor than something is giving you bread or drink. Okay this entry got long. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * We would just move the character from the Ghosts category up into plain Deceased, since he is no longer a ghost. -- 12:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If I could paraphrase what I think Rolandius is saying, we used to have a category for what he means by "Deceased" -- no longer interacting with the game world in any way. Undead characters were only "Deceased" if they were killed/destroyed again. We used to, in fact, call this being "Deceased". Some (all?) of the options now on the table include re-defining "Deceased" to mean what it more conventionally means -- having experienced death at some point, possibly to be resurrected/reanimated/not-quite-gone later. I think it's still useful to categorize the first case, even if we no longer call it "Deceased". Maybe "Inactive", "Departed", or something. A reasonable word for it eludes me right now. -- Harveydrone 16:06, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If the cause of their loss of the interaction with the game world is death then "Deceased" is still appropriate. Inactive would probably be the best for anything more temporary. -- 19:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Harveydrone mostly said what I am thinking. We don't need a new category saying that ghosts, wraiths, etc. died. It is a given. If they are a ghost, wraith, etc. I think we can guess that they must have died in order to then come back as a ghost, wraith, etc. It is like saying we should have a category for characters who can breathe or eat. I think we can fairly assume that someone like Khadgar breathes and eats. We don't need a Category:Breathes for Khadgar's article. Category:Deceased characters should be for characters, be they human or zombie, who are no longer "active" in the Warcraft universe. For instance, Cho'gall is not a deceased character any longer after the info from that comic so we took that category out. Quinn Yorick is not a deceased character because he is still interacting in the Warcraft universe. The only situation where we would say that a character is deceased and a ghost, wraith, etc. is if we run into something like Spirit of Udalo and Udalo. Udalo would be a deceased character because he is on the floor dead. Spirit of Udalo would not be a deceased character because he interacts with us. It looks like one group wants/wanted for Udalo and Spirit of Udalo to have the Deceased characters category. My argument was against that part. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Option C

 * A Ghost is a Deceased Character.

Exceptions: Ancestral Grounds, Ancestral Spirit (NPC), Ancient Orc Ancestor, Fel Spirit, Phantom Stagehand, Forgotten Captain

Yes, they all died. Yes, they're all ghosts (ancestral grounds aside). But a Forgotten Captain is only as much a deceased character as a Restless Shade is. We don't know anything about the character that died. And we don't care.

A deceased character is notable for who he was in life, and that he is no longer alive (whether undead or not). Ghost characters (or undead characters, or whatever category name is interesting) are unambiguously undead, AND interesting for who they were when they were alive.

Option C says that option B doesn't go far enough. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Option D

 * Ghosts are undead, undead are deceased. Separate named characters from unnamed mobs.

Basically option A but moving all undead under deceased, because...they are. Lore characters and named in-game characters should be separate from unnamed mobs (creatures vs. characters, mobs vs. NPCs) -- 20:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed. That's it ! Ghost c Undead c Deceased Character !
 * And maybe Category:Deceased Lore Characters and Category:Deceased Characters
 * 20:36, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hmm... I think you may have missed a step, Pcj... are you thinking: (using A'noob's format)
 * * Deceased characters c Deceased (new)
 * * Ghosts c Undead c Deceased
 * * Ghost characters (new) c Ghosts, Deceased Characters
 * Conceivably also "deceased lore" c Deceased characters
 * --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Depending on how many articles are in each level I would say characters should be separate from unnamed creatures as far up the line as necessary to divide them further, so all the way up to:
 * Deceased characters > Undead characters > Ghost characters
 * Deceased creatures > Undead creatures > Ghost creatures
 * Or as little as:
 * Deceased > Undead > Ghosts > (Ghost characters + Ghost creatures)
 * The naming might be different, but that's the way I think it should be. -- 21:08, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Guess you kinda answered the initial question I had: of "Deceased > Deceased characters". --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Seems fine to me.
 * 21:34, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm about ready to support this option but have one clarification question. Will Forsaken, as a whole, be categorized (at least indirectly) as Deceased? Right now, they are a subcat of Humanoids, not Undead, yet by the above logic, they have all died, so should be Deceased, correct? And, "dead undead" like Deathstalker Fry will not get any special categorization due to their status, right? (PS thanks for the Venn diagrams Pcj.) -- Harveydrone 16:55, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Forsaken are Undead except for game mechanics. Undead are a subcat of Deceased (since they are unliving).  We might move Forsaken as a subcat of Undead, don't know how far reaching this needs to be. -- 17:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)