User talk:Rolandius

Older comments moved to:


 * User talk:Rolandius/Archive1


 * and


 * User talk:Rolandius/Archive2


 * and


 * User talk:Rolandius/Archive3


 * and


 * User talk:Rolandius/Archive4

Early unblock
I unblocked you early (block was supposed to end June 23rd). If you get blocked again, I expect an entry at WP:V explaining why with a link to the offense. If not, I will unblock you. Put a note on my talk page at Wikianswers. -- Fandyllic  (talk · contr) 5:10 PM PST 19 Jun 2009


 * Okay. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't fret if you end up banned, there's a wild west style lynch mob out for blood picking easy over right. There's no room for alternate thinkers in their world. Just remember that it's them that can't contain it, not you. --Lundt (talk) 09:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The Truth is Out There. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 23:25, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Narnie
Instead of just saying "Narnie isn't a critter" why not expand the Template:Cats with another section instead of just deleting the poor animal.TherasTaneel (talk) 11:50, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I will move Narnie to the Housecats section of Template:Cats. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 11:52, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I can hear it purring allready TherasTaneel (talk) 11:55, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Narnie is back with all his friends. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 11:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

RE: Clarify

 * Moved to Forum:Deceased characters

RE: Abyssal

 * Moved to Forum:Abyssal

Redlink: Talut
I intuit that Talut is a Kodo, by your including him on the list. However, could I ask that you support such additions with the page for the character/mob/whatever itself? At the point you add links like that, you have more knowledge at hand about the subject than anyone had previously paid attention to, as judged by the redlink created. Flesh out what you know, mark it as stub if you think there's more to say about it. Add Screenshot if you think a screenshot would be useful.

Some folks have been cranky about "creating redlinks and leaving it to someone else to create the page". Where the subject is a specific mob, item, object, or the like that someone can point to in the game, I doubt anyone would object to your creating a page for it. And if you'd like to talk about it beforehand, my talk page is always open. :) --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Sandwichman asked if I was willing to take over for Fandyllic on mentoring for you while he is on sabbatical. (The "always open" part, above.)  I'm not an admin, I'm not strong on Lore, but hey, I'm willing to help.  I can't promise prompt responses, my wiki time varies.  I don't know if that fulfills "mentoring", but what can I say?  Up to you, friend, if you want to take advantage of it.--Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I was just following the way other users, including admins, did things in which a redlink is okay if it is an existing NPC or Mob in WoW. I thought I was told not to make redlinks of non-NPC or non-Mobs. Many examples exist of redlinks on WoWWiki of NPCs, Mobs, and even things from the RPG created by users and admins. I am not sure why I am the only one that is questioned on it though. This kodo is an NPC in WoW. I know I didn't go further and create a whole article on Talut but that isn't exactly an offense. Any user can expand on it. I am sure if you looked, you will find redlinks on WoWWiki that have been sitting there for weeks, months, etc. without an article being made out of them. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * On the mentoring thing, I think I am okay. I can still contact Fandyllic if I need to. I am not exactly a "new" user, so it feels to me like some people just want to block me out of WoWWiki — both literaly and figuratively. I am the 7th most active user on WoWWiki — according to this "Top users" widget at least. That doesn't mean we can't help each other out though if something comes up. For instance, you asking me why I linked Talut and moving some of my questions to a forum are positive. It is much better I think then if you "blocked" me — if you were an admin I mean — because of the Talut incident without asking me any questions or "banned" me — if you were an admin I mean — for asking why Abyssal was removed from WoWWiki or any other question similiar to that one. I really think half of the problems I run into would be resolved easily if I was given an answer versus being told "figure it out yourself" or "well we do it this way for this one and another way for that other one even though they are exactly the same." Many times I have actually quoted and pointed at a rule on WoWWiki to show why I did something and told I was still wrong. It confounds me. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk  -  contr ) 02:14, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm strictly a volunteer, no admin powers. There's a fresh instance where, had I been more on the ball, I could have helped out:  you were saying Deceased characters are in Ghost, and later rephrase what you meant as "Deceased characters "has" the Characters category at the bottom of its article".  I didn't think to comment on it, because *I* understood what was meant. ;)  A better way to refer to the relationship is (for example) "Ghost" is a subcategory of "Deceased Characters".  Uses terms well known, and is shorter as well.  As I said, though, I'm around, if you think I could be of service to you. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with linking NPC or mobs that exist in the game. In fact we suggest you do, so the article will get created, either then or eventually. People tend to ignore white names in a list, compared to red names. 02:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay then that is exactly what I did I thought. Talut = NPC that exists in the game. Rolandius = Linked Talut so someone, maybe a user who likes making kodo articles, sees it and expands on it. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It does lead circularly back to my earlier request; that when you make the link, you already know about the NPC in question, are in the best immediate position to create the page. Not a requirement, just a request. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Gol'Bolar Quarry
You added an aka for Gol'Bolar Quarry that had a non-standard character included on it. As I was unable to determine what character was intended, I commented it out for the moment. Does the character reproduce validly on your browser? If it does, could you describe the name of the character to me, so I can try to find some code that will generate it correctly for both of us? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No, you can tell its an apostrophe, by looking at a few words before it at Not all is at peace in Dun Morogh, however. The Dwarves insatiable digging at the GolBolar Quarry unleashed a men... 19:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but on my browser, it is written as a box, with the numbers "00" over "92". A bit further research:  In at least some fonts (but not the one the page is rendered in) this resolves to a "back-quote", or unaccompanied .  It STILL resolves to a character not found in the default font the browser chooses to use for the character.


 * I can't support a character that does not resolve correctly, even if that was the exact typographic character used in the source material. May I recommend U+2019 (’) (right single quotation mark), or U+00B4 (´) (Acute Accent) as a replacement?


 * If this is still not the character you observe, this illustrates why I have a problem with your character. If you see the same (0092) character that I do, then I maintain my protest that it does not resolve to an actual character.  And this in spite of the extreme similarity between "Grom'Bolar" and a hypothetical "Grom’Bolar", which to me is merely a typographical inconsistency, not indication of an actual separate name.  Even in typing this up, I note that the "edit box font" renders the right single quote mark quite differently than the font in general use for text on the wiki.  This may be a property of the skin, but no separate font selection preference ability appears to me.  --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Seems I misinterpreted your comment, Coobra. (Especially with the label "reverted" involved!)  I feel my arguments do hold, though, for inserting character codes that do not accurately resolve to characters in the default font.  I see the very same character code on a good number of web pages, and it drives me freakin-nutz.  Is it something that perhaps resolves correctly on a Mac, or in some non-unicode European font, do you know?   And for reference, I went to wikipedia to identify unicode IDs, and used the windows "Char Map" utility to reproduce likely candidates, if that helps, Rolandius.  --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I have a programming editor, and IME/Unicode windows support installed. The editor uses the New Courier truetype font, and was able to resolve the "0092" character as the 'quote variety' character I then ranted on.  I have no idea why Firefox resolves it differently. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The US International keyboard layout is different than the US standard layout. This "backwards apostrophe" seems to be more accessible on this keyboard (at least as accessible as the standard apostrophe) and I have seen it used somewhat often on the wiki (typically breaking links if used inside a page name reference).  Obviously the standard apostrophe is preferred.  The EU website people must have a weird character set in one of their editors which didn't translate well to UTF-8 (though they should've used the normal apostrophe to begin with). -- 20:59, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * /rates Pcj as +5 informative. Once it translates on my screen into something comprehensible, my level of interest/concern drops dramatically.  Not a complaint about using the irreproducible "dot" character in various nav templates. :) --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not sure what is being asked. I added "a.k.a GolBolar Quarry" to the Gol'Bolar Quarry article because I saw it on that citation I gave spelled like that by Blizzard. Gourra said the missing apostrophe ( ' ) was not enough of a difference to count as an a.k.a and reverted my edit. I am not sure if you were asking about that or something about the way "Gol'Bolar Quarry" is spelled on WoWWiki. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It was not missing... the character was not available to you from the site. You didn't put a blank there you put this -> GolBolar 04:09, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * So you are saying that on the site it is spelled "Gol Bolar"? Or are you saying on the site it is spelled Gol'Bolar correctly? My browser (Safari) showed me it as "GolBolar" so I thought nothing was missing and it was an alternate name. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:32, 27 June 2009 (UTC)


 * See my above description of the character in question. It appears that your browser renders the character... by not rendering it.  Thus, you see nothing, I see a square with numbers, others see a back-quote character.  Try doing a copy and paste on the string, pulling it into Notepad.  What do you get there? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 22:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I have a Mac, so we have TextEdit instead of Notepad. I used Safari and got "GolBolar". I then used "View Source", which I think is what you mean by getting the string, and I got "GolBolar". I then tried a copy paste and got "GolBolar" in TextEdit. I then went to Firefox which shows it as "GolBolar" with a "box" and the numbers "00" over "92" like you mentioned above. I went to "View Source" which showed it as "GolBolar" with a "box" in between Gol and Bolar but without numbers. I did a copy and paste into TextEdit but it came out as "GolBolar". Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I hate to say this, but your above message reads like a comedy routine. :) (ala "the affairs of state must take precedence over the affairs of state." but without the italics...) Each of the strings you posted has the same characters, and so displays identically (to each other) in any context you wish to display them. Thus, while I follow your steps, I have no way of following "what you saw" except where you've explicitly said (firefox). --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:49, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well I simplified it as much as I could. You said try doing a copy and paste on the "string" which I have no idea what that means. I thought you meant look at the "View Source" of the webpage and copy the web coding. Is "string" something different than "View Source"? Either way, Safari and Firefox are two popular browsers and should be able to show "characters". I think it is a server side problem or something to do with different keyboard layouts being used by that site and people browsing like Pcj mentioned. That site must be "US International" versus "US Standard". I will try one more time to explain it. Safari shows it as "GolBolar". Firefox shows it as "GolBolar" with a "box" and the numbers "00" over "92". I can see apostrophes with both web browsers on other WorldofWarcraft.com pages. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:26, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Sign issues

 * You should consider making a template for you signature, which would avoid a bunch of 230 characters being included in a talk page every time you sign.


 * In User:Rolandius/sign place the code of your sign and in User:Rolandius/signX place.
 * Then go to Special:Preferences and put as a sign. (don't forget to check "Brute signature")
 * You will then be able to sign with the ~, adding date&time in the same time; and placing only 30 to 50 characters.
 * Have a nice day!
 * 10:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know much about signatures. I just did whatever the admin(s) told me to fix my signature. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:41, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're fine, no bigger than most other users. 03:52, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok cool. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Policy pages
I know you're just trying to help... but you've been told about editing policy pages... 05:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay then, revert it I guess. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

RE: WW:3RR
If you were starting to listen and stop being so obstinate, I would not have to broke rules.

13:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Edit: You broke that rule too.


 * Edit: It is called "3RR" for a reason. You reverted the edit more than 3 times, I did not. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 13:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You did revert 3 times Rolandius, therefore you are in violation of 3RR and are banned. -- 14:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like this 'blew up overnight'. My own rule of thumb is, if someone directly reverts my edit, it's time to either a) surrender, or b) put it up to a vote (either with or without re-reverting). At that point, it is clear that ideas/preferences are in conflict, and further editing threatens 3RR action. Votes established on the forums (to date) seem to get more attention than those on talk pages, so community consensus can be achieved much faster. By the way, when proposing a vote, do make sure that "what will be changed" is clear. The Deceased Characters vote, I added that detail and folks were able to build on that to make yet a further option that folks did agree on. Hope this will help, once you guys get back. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 17:18, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 3RR says more than 3 times not just 3 times. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you reverted 4 times. -- 01:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 3. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Stop arguing, you know you were involved in an edit war... admit to it, and come back in 2 weeks. For being a repeat offender you're lucky its only 2 weeks. 02:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am the one that reported the problem. That makes no sense. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You were in the wrong, so you actually look like a vandal, not him. 02:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The article says that they are a subrace of vrykul, not a subrace and clan. Show me where it says they they are a clan and that I should not have tried to correct it. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 08:26, 2 July 2009 A'noob (Talk | contribs | block) (3,797 bytes) (I made it, don't tell me what it is supposed to be for) (rollback | undo)
 * 08:20, 2 July 2009 Rolandius (Talk | contribs | block) m (3,839 bytes) (It is under the Clans section which talks about the Skadir.) (undo)
 * 08:17, 2 July 2009 A'noob (Talk | contribs | block) (3,840 bytes) (So a box on the Skadir article if you want them to have one. This box concerns the Kvaldir-named mobs) (undo)
 * 08:15, 2 July 2009 Rolandius (Talk | contribs | block) (3,839 bytes) (Read the article before you revert my edits so many times. "Subrace of vrykul"...) (undo)
 * 08:12, 2 July 2009 A'noob (Talk | contribs | block) (3,840 bytes) (It is an organization, Skadir is another. The "Kvaldir clan" exists, though not directly named. Do a box if you like in the Skadir article) (undo)
 * 08:09, 2 July 2009 Rolandius (Talk | contribs | block) m (3,839 bytes) (Kvaldir is a race not clan...) (undo)
 * 08:06, 2 July 2009 A'noob (Talk | contribs | block) (3,840 bytes) (that is the Kvaldir clan box, do one fo the Skadir on the skadir article) (undo)
 * 08:05, 2 July 2009 Rolandius (Talk | contribs | block) m (3,839 bytes) (The clan is called Skadir.) (undo)
 * 17:50, 1 July 2009 A'noob (Talk | contribs | block) m (3,839 bytes) (→Named vessels) (undo)
 * Grats, hopefully you can figure out how long two weeks is because obviously you can't count to 4. This conversation is over. -- 02:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Trying to correct something on WoWWiki and then getting banned when I am the one that was pointing out WP:3RR in the first place? Good times. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 07:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Rolandius, it wasn't your trying to correct something that got you banned. It was how you went about it.  By the time you pointed it out, it was already too late.  You were both at fault by that time.


 * 3RR says more than 3 times not just 3 times.
 * 3RR: This does not imply that reverting three times or fewer is acceptable.
 * "I reverted only 3 times". By this you're telling me you still feel justified in continuing an edit war fully up to that limit.  That's not the point.  I don't care about why it happened, or who was right or wrong, or even if you stood within the strict letter of the policy.  The point here is identifying as soon as possible when you're in a direct editing conflict, and find a way of resolving it that doesn't involve an edit war.


 * I only see a small sliver of you through this conversation, Rolandius. And that small sliver says you are still focused on justifying your previous actions, instead of modifying how you react in the future.  I'm sure you will try to avoid an edit war in the future, but your comments here do not reflect that.  That worries me. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:33, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I tried resolving it by saying repeatedly in the edit summary that the "article" itself agreed with me that they were a "subrace" of vyrkul and not a "clan". The "clan" is called Skadir. The "article" currently says that they are still a "subrace", yet that "clan" infobox is in the middle of the "article". This tells me that either I was right and people just want to ban me or I was wrong but no one wants to correct the "article". Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You really don't understand at all... with no official written lore in lets say a source book, everything on that page is based off observation... I could simply add a few words "and a clan"... does that mean the article now agrees with it also being a clan? According to you... yes it would. 02:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am sure you want to see me say something like "Oh I did a bad thing. I will now in the future be very good." I have been on WoWWiki for awhile. After numerous bans, I found that no matter how I "modified" my reactions for the future, something either new or made up was used against me. I have been through it all. You try talking to the other user and you are accused of "threatening" them. You try to talk to an admin and you are accused of "making admins fight other admins". You try saying 1 plus 1 is 2 and they tell you it is not. Those are just a few examples. It is just politics. Some users who defend me are then attacked and driven crazy. I remember another user saying they "always defended me" but for some reason sure does not show it. Ssss. The only good thing I see lately is that newer users are questioning some of the actions people do on WoWWiki and using the forumns to vote on various things. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Wow look who it is. If everything is based on observation then why is it okay to say "subrace" in the article, but then tell whoever treats it as a subrace that they are wrong? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Fine, I'm done defending you. 03:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I already knew that. You know, with the threats of bans and stuff, I sort of figured it out. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Lets make one thing clear.. I have never personally threatened you with a ban, nor have I ever placed a ban on you. But since you want to continue arguing about every single thing, I will no longer help you or give you advise. You like a few other notable bad editors will be on my watchlist. 03:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Saying "I will ban you" is not personally telling me I will be banned? Ok... Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I would love a source of this "quote" if you wouldn't mind. 03:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay check out User talk:Rolandius/Mentor where you say "...I will personally give you a small temporary ban..." and also your "advice" on an article got me in trouble. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Way to take things out of context, that was not a threat to you in general, that was about messing with your review page... but taking things out of context is what you do. Respond if you like, I'm done with you. 03:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The truth is out there. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to randomely jump into the conversation, but Coobra, you did say you never threatened Rolandius personally with a ban. While you're right in that it wasn't a general threat, Rolandius is correct in that you did personally threaten him with a ban. 04:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am a bad editor Coobra? So I guess All Females in WoW are Males unless proved and Argent Dawn templar are examples of great edits? Besides the first example being questionably as even an article, it is kind of not spelled very well in the title or within the article itself. Meanwhile, the second example had a user change the spelling of the class within the article, which is supposed to be lower case in the third word, and any race mentioned into all capitalized words throughout the article. Those are some things that should be on your "watchlist". Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I tried resolving it by saying repeatedly in the edit summary - and that landed you in 3RR. using the forums to vote on various things. - worked out well so far. And yup, it's politics.  It always is, when ya get folks talking.  You've got a good bit to be bitter about, sure.  But I don't see that expressing that bitterness is helping you get along with folks.  Perhaps you aren't seeing ANYTHING helping, and that you are discouraged by that.  I ask: please keep trying.  Cutting down on biting retorts would be a start; in my experience, adding emotion to a response seldom helps your cause. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Playable Races
I think we should add to Races the ones in the RPG which are playable. It would be a good addition. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 02:40, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Article naming
Rageclaw tribe, Bloodpaw tribe‎, Snowfall tribe‎, and Howling tribe‎? I thought I remember someone saying don't make articles with extra words like "tribe" attached to the name without a source(s) or else the article would have to be named with just the word i.e. "Rageclaw". Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 04:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Wrong image name?
This image File:Owlbear.gif seems to be a Wildkin. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 01:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Redundant category
Category:Yetis is redundant as there is already a Category:Wendigo (which should be spelled Wendigos) which says it contains wendigos, yetis, and sasquatches. It could be changed to a subcategory of Category:Wendigo though. By the way, sasquatches are not wendigos, but I am sure there is a reason it was placed in Category:Wendigo. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 03:24, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Apparently done, by Coobra --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Cyrukh and Ragnaros
Ragnaros does look like he belongs to a subrace of fire elemental, but Cyrukh looks like he would belong to a subrace like "fel giant". If he is really a fire elemental then they should change him to look a bit more like Ragnaros, but stay with the green. That way it would make sense just like entropic beasts are fire elementals which were tainted and turned green in the RPG and infernals are similiar to abyssals on WoWWiki, but just a different color. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 03:53, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Concept art articles
What happened to the "articles on just a piece of concept art should not be made" rule? Woops, broken. Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 05:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not familiar with that policy. Would you point it out? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It is likely something he was told and not a true policy. If you tell him it is not a rule, he will create several pages based on concept art. If you tell him it is a rule, he will make a bigger deal about that page. Yes, I made it. No, that is not my point.-- 19:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You made the page back in May 2008, he was told about not making pages based off concept art in August 2008. Whether this page is deleted or not, doesn't matter, since he's obviously at this point trying to get on peoples nerves. 19:38, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Race versus mob
Maybe someone could explain this subject. In the RPG, there are entries that are treated as mobs on WoWWiki, while others are treated as races. For one example, the RPG has the Wildkin entry and underneath that are the Wildkin and the Owlbeast. On WoWWiki, the Wildkin mobs are under the Wildkin race but the Owlbeast mobs are under the Owlbeast race (or the Moonkin race in some cases). I am not sure if in the RPG they are saying that the Wildkin and the Owlbeast are two subraces of Wildkin or two mobs of Wildkin. They seem to look similiar to each other in WoW. If the Wildkin and the Owlbeast are two subraces of the Wildkin, where do the Moonkin and the Owlkin come from as races? I don't see them mentioned in the RPG which was published after World of Warcraft and even World of Warcraft: The Burning Crusade. Some of the quest text I read called some of the Moonkin mobs the Wildkin. The second example would be something like the Lava Elemental. Under the Lava Elemental section, they have the Lava Elemental and the Lava Surger. On WoWWiki, the Lava Elemental is under the Lava Elemental race but the Lava Surger is also under the Lava Elemental race. So I am just wondering how we decide that something like the Lava Surger is just a mob, while something like the Owlbeast is a race and not just a mob of the Wildkin. Just to contrast with those two examples and probably make more confusion, in the RPG there is a Dinosaur section and a Dragon section. Each of the 5 dinosaurs (Devilsaur, Diemetradon, Pterrordax, Stegodon, and Threshadon) and the 4 dragons (Black dragon, Bronze dragon, Green dragon, and Red dragon) have their own dedicated subsection under the main section instead of just being listed as names directly under the main section. It would seem like they are trying to show some creatures as races and their subraces versus some creatures as races and their mobs? Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 07:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Quick question
I'm afraid, you really did not choose the good person to ask such a thing.

00:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Category
I agree this is Category:Elemental lords, but it seem we make no difference between "Elemental lords" and "Elemental Lords". So why would you change it?

00:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I was just pointing out that the title of the article is lower case, while within the article it does not match the title's spelling. Sort of like how we have "Blood elf" as the title of an article, but within the article we are not supposed to suddenly spell it "Blood Elf". We have it like the title of the article, "blood elf", in lower case. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Another category comment: The fewer the relevant articles, the more overpowering the argument has to be to justify creating a category for them. Thus, I have been removing "wanted categories" with few entries, particularly when there seems to be no sign that the category will be expanded to what I feel a minimum size is. Hope you don't take offense at that. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Not really. I have seen a lot of categories with only one article in them and asked why do we have a category with only one article? Also, there seems to be some categories that overlap each other. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup. In order: There are, You're right to ask, and There are.  Pointing out the inconsistencies is a valuable, and oft-irritating, service you do. :) --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 17:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Your point about "at" and "in the"
What's your point at using "in the >place<" instead of "at >place<". Just curiosity, I'm unsure about which one is more correct. I always use at with proper-name places, but you edited me, so I'm unsure now.--Lon-ami (talk) 14:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "at" place implies "occupying or filling" a specific location. "in" implies "contained within". I don't know of references to "The Dragonblight", which R's change implies, but I agree with "in Dragonblight", as far as that goes. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It depends on how you use it. For instance, "This NPC is located at the Dragonblight zone." doesn't make sense since it is a zone/region. You would say "This NPC is located in the Dragonblight zone." Was that what you were talking about? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok, so "in the" for zones and "at" for subzones, nope?--Lon-ami (talk) 16:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It isn't always "in the". For instance, "This NPC is located in Westfall." and not "This NPC is located in the Westfall". Some zones though are shown in lore with a "the" in front like "the Dragonblight" or "the Storm Peaks". For subzones, I think, you would use "at" if it is something like Chillwind Camp but "in" if it is something like Goldshire. For instance, "This NPC is located at Chillwind Camp." and "This NPC is located in Goldshire". Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Necromancer category
Rolandius why are you removing from all the necromancers articles the necromancer category? Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 03:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, don't hide it behind "correcting s/g" either. -- 03:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not hiding it behind s/g. WoW does not have NPC classes remember? They are NPC titles now. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:30, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I may have loose something, but where does WoWWiki decided that? I mean Shadowy Necromancer is obviously a necromancer... Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 03:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You are hiding it behind s/g and other incorrect edit summaries:


 * http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Image_of_Heigan&diff=prev&oldid=1949525
 * http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Salramm_the_Fleshcrafter&diff=prev&oldid=1949541
 * http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Wyrmcaller_Vile&diff=prev&oldid=1949537
 * http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Necrolord_X%27avius&diff=prev&oldid=1949533
 * http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Necro_Overlord_Mezhen&diff=prev&oldid=1949532
 * http://www.wowwiki.com/index.php?title=Naxxramas_Necrolord&diff=prev&oldid=1949530
 * And I could go on. I would suggest you let other people make blanket edits. -- 03:37, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I said the same thing you did but was told that WoW does not have classes. Except for players of course, and maybe class trainers. The "character class" thing is for lore characters or lore characters who are also in WoW. WoWWiki made a category called NPC titles instead. I will look for the talk page where it was discussed right now. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr )


 * All my edit summaries are true. Some of those were factual corrections and correcting s/g too. For instance, having the race infobox say "necromancer" is correct to you or something? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Removing categories is not a factual correction, it is not correcting spelling or grammar, it is removing a category (you got it right in some of your edits). Dissembling is lying. The only discussion on this I can find is Forum:Magister class.  I don't see any specific directive or decision to remove the necromancer category from every page. -- 03:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No, it's not correct to have necromancer as a race, but you shouldn't have deleted the category. You deleted the category even when it was confirmed that it was a necromancer by it's name and, if you analize carefully, the Shadowy Necromancer is supposed to be the Necromancer (Warcraft III). Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 03:53, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Removing categories is a factual correction if it is not supposed to have the category isn't it? Why are you linking that when you deleted one of my articles citing "go to wikia" and you just used wikia. I said I was looking for the talk pages. I found one here at User:Rolandius/Mentor. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I meant link to Wikipedia/Wiktionary for real-world definitions (like cocoon), which is what I did (do not create pages for stuff like that on WoWWiki per WP:DNP). Categories are not "facts", it is a change of wiki structure not a change in content.  You should not perform blanket edits without explicit permission or a consensus.  I would suggest making test edits and getting someone to check them over before going forward with wide-scale stuff (or just leave those edits to someone else).  Especially since (as you said in the mentor link) this topic confused you. -- 04:06, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Benitoperezgaldos, I said the same thing you did awhile ago. According to what I was told, it is still just a mob in WoW and not a lore character or lore character plus a person in WoW. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't link to a real-world definition. I got the term from the WoW models and put a note on the article just like Spark and the other articles which are unofficial names. So I am guessing Spark and the other articles on WoWWiki are WW:DNP? I was confused but Fandyllic and I talked about it so I don't see why it is wrong to act on what I was told. By the way, you didn't even put a reason on the reverts you made of all my edits but you get mad because I didn't write every single thing I did in my edits? Also, you reverted Category:Necromancers when all that info is true. Prestige class? Yup. Necromancer is spelled lower case? Yup. Undead? Not all of them. But you reverted it all. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * About, "I would suggest making test edits and getting someone to check them over...", I have noticed that a lot of my "rejected" articles and ideas are being made on the main page by other users. So obviously making a test edit does not work because for some reason something made by me will be seen as a bad article or edit, while if it is another user it is seen as okay. I don't mind other users making them. I just don't get why it was bad when I tried, but then okay when they tried. And no, their articles are not "researched" more than mine. They are equal or in some cases have less info than mine. Short term memory of admins or conspiracy? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You are muddling the issue. We are not talking about other users, we are talking about you with your history.  It is not necessarily "okay" for another user to do it either, you just do it more.  -- 12:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * How do I do it "more" if I never created the articles on the main page? They are in my sub pages. If you are talking about my whole "history", I did make some crazy edits before but I have been on here awhile. I am talking about more recently, not the whole 14 months I have been on here, where I would ask "How about this article or idea?" and would get a "No way." so I had to just leave it in my sub pages. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:34, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, if you seem to be having more success with your subpages you should stick to them. Cocoons did not need to be defined on WoWWiki. -- 12:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it is different than spark, projection, and some of the other creatures we made up on WoWWiki. I got the name from the model files just like some of those other examples and there are around 12 mobs that are "cocoons". Right now, Riven Widow Cocoon says unknown. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Pcj, you still really haven't explained your actions and what justifies them.
 * Since when is Necromancer a race? How can you justify that?
 * Necromancers are not all undead, see http://www.wowhead.com/?search=necromancer#npcs and look at Type. Removing NPC titles may have been okay, but leaving just Undead is wrong.
 * Cocoons in WoW are not the generic types of cocoons in the real-world so they do deserve an article, since real world cocoons usually hang from branches or are stuck to walls whereas WoW cocoons are almost always on the ground with almost only creatures or eggs in them.
 * Please stop focusing on Rolandius and justify your actions. -- Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 8:37 AM PST 17 Jul 2009
 * I did a wholesale revert of all related changes pending an actual consensus on this. Back off, Fandy. -- 16:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see how my edits show no sign of improvement, Pcj, when you are putting "Race=Necromancer" back on articles, putting categories back on articles that have nothing to do with the article, changing the spelling of "necromancer" in a sentence to "Necromancer", and removing a category like Prestige class from Category:Necromancers when it is in fact a Prestige class. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:47, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Undead characters' place in category hierarchy
I must disagree with your edit to remove Category:Undead characters from Category:World of Warcraft creatures... It is likely that the category needs to be renamed. It is even likely that different parent categories should have been chosen. However, I abhor leaving a category with no parent whatsoever.
 * 1) While it may eventually become justified, it currently leaves a non-empty category without a parent.
 * 2) There is currently a C2C tag on Category:Undead, pointing to Undead characters.  (and Undead creatures).

You should, I believe, have at least consulted with the author of the category to plan out what changes should be made. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Category:World of Warcraft creatures is only for "creature types". Those are: Giant, Demon, Humanoid, etc. which are 10 in total. "Undead creatures" is not a creature type. "Undead" is though. I am trying to fix these categories so they do what they mean. If a category says "this category is for creature type and there are 10 types of creatures" why would it be filled up with extra stuff? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: Difference
I never moved any of those, so I'm not sure what you're getting at. I moved the NPC articles. -- 12:25, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Nevermind. I thought you moved them. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 12:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

s/g vs cat
IMO, correcting spelling is usually a trivial thing; I feel confident in marking such edits minor when I think of it. Correcting grammar is usually a minor thing; but I only sometimes mark that minor. Changing how a page is categorized is a much bigger issue, and I try to always mention that in the edit comment (with not 100% success, I admit). I am not alone in considering category changes a much bigger issue than grammar. Thus, the aggravation from finding "changed s/g" without mention of category changes. If you do both at times (change cats, don't change cats, both with s/g changes), it should be simple to mouse-select the correct edit comment of the two (if your browser supports partial completion of web form boxes). --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If you click on "minor edit" it links you to the definitions. It says spelling, categories, etc. are minor edits. I went by that. If it is wrong then that article should be changed or deleted. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:53, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll check there. A compromise that might work, if you're changing a LOT of category pages, is to leave the first few edits "normal", as a flag for editors monitoring you, then continue (same edit comment helps, here) flagging as minor edits.  No guarantees, in any case. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Pcj pointed to Meta Help page, which seems to track a bit closer to his and my own view. The primary idea on Minor Edits is the thought that "there can be no reasonable objection".  I fear that that standard is higher for you than for other editors, due to past disputes. :( --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay. Categories are not minor edits. I think it is confusing that WoWWiki says they are minor edits but then Wikipedia, which I hear WoWWiki is not Wikipedia often, is the one we are following. Don't you think that could confuse some users and accidently get them in trouble? These are the sort of things that get me in trouble I can say. I could say "I followed WoWWiki rules" but then someone would answer "That is not what Wikipedia says". I would then argue "This is WoWWiki though" and they would say "You complain too much so you are banned". That is usually how my time on WoWWiki has been spent. I am going to go with what you said, but to me it sounds like I am following a rule that WoWWiki says not to do. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:33, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. See Kirkburn's talk page for my pointing this out to him.  If Wikipedia is a city (or even a small town), WoWWiki is an extended household, with all the problems that entails.  Which means that dispute resolution is often a matter of interpersonal relationships, rather than a set of rules.  Learn what things set which people off, and make a point of asking their approval when contemplating wholesale changes... or even changes to things they have a vested interest in.  Politics, compromise, appeasement, hand holding, yes, it's all of that.  You get better with practice.  --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * While that is true to an extent, sometimes you might get info from one admin and a different admin will think it is wrong. Since we don't want to be accused of "getting admins to fight each other" then the user is stuck being wrong even for following what an admin told them was okay. Sometimes the original admin will tell you that they cannot get you "out of trouble" for following their advice because they don't want to contradict the second admin or something. Pretty much there are situations where the user is "wrong" no matter how "right" they were. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Joanna Whitehall
"She was once married to a soldier named Reuben." it seems you have been the editor to add this, where is it from? TherasTaneel (talk) 19:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Let me add it. It was one of the scrolls from the "second" Scourge invasion. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, right. Yep. TherasTaneel (talk) 02:51, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Giants as RPG creatures
I think while you're *probably* right about removing the "RPG creatures" tag from the category, there is still some room for debate, as some 'Giant' articles are lore articles, and it would seem likely that some giants do appear in the RPG. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I may be wrong, but I thought the whole reason the category of "RPG creatures" was created was for creatures only in the RPG. If a creature is in both WoW and the RPG then there is a good chance we already have a category for it. For instance, a lot of the creatures in Appendix III would fit in that category because they are not present in WoW or anything. Now that Appendix III has been knocked down, the category would be for the rest of the creatures found in the RPG but not other sources. "Giant" is something found in many sources not just the RPG. Also, "Giant" is more of a "creature type" in the RPG like "Outsider" or "Aberration" and not so much a "creature" like "Panderan" or "Nerubian". Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Moving pages
Please remember to fix all the redirects to the page you move it in the future. 00:05, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I was told that admins did that part or something? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 02:00, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No, its the responsibility by the person who does the moves to fix the redirects. 04:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

RE: What is it?
I think it's a feral spirit controled by the blue player. The feral spirit can be from any color of the players or black if it's a creep. But it is normaly red because Thrall and the other far seers are of the Horde, which is almost always represented by the color red; that's why it's red in battle.net. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 14:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, as he isn't invisible, he can't be a Shadow Wolf; and for his size I would say it's a Spirit Wolf (Warcraft III). Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 16:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * So it is a known creature but just a different color? I think they should show only neutral colors so it doesn't confuse people when, giving examples at least. They show them as red and black like you said except that one image they show it as blue. In WoW, they also make them blue in color so I thought something was confusing. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

NPC/mobs in WoW
Hmm, I've been thinking and found some more;
 * Vectus and Marduk Blackpool after presenting them with Dawn's Gambit
 * "Crowleg" Dan after exposing him as a traitor
 * the ghosts in Summoners' Tomb until you challenge their leader to a fight
 * several in the Grim Guzzler if you start a barfight
 * Raliq the Drunk, Coosh'coosh and Floon when trying to collect their debt.

Then there are ones that is only beaten instead of killed like "Dirty" Larry but thats another story TherasTaneel (talk) 14:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * So I guess there is a small group of these guys. Do you think those articles should have both the NPC and Mob category then? Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:47, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, usually the npc-interaction part is very, erm...slim? So, not sure if they need to have both. Perhaps the forums should decide, power to the...people, eh. TherasTaneel (talk) 19:27, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The distinction between 'named mob' and 'NPC' is a little blurry. Is their main purpose "to interact with them" (NPC) or "to kill them" (mob)?   (edit: I'd call most of TerasTaneel's cases as 'mobs' on that basis.) A forum for this could not go far wrong.--Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, you could ask if they are able to be fought always or only during certain circumstances. For instance, usually you can fight a mob anytime you want as long as it has spawned. Someone like "Dirty" Larry is only a "mob" during one quest or two. Before and after the quest, he is just an NPC in his little area of Lower City. I think it is the same with Raliq the Drunk, Coosh'coosh, and Floon. Someone that would be a "named mob" and an "NPC" would be the prince guy because he is not hostile until you kill the demon. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 01:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Welcome to the blurry zone. Without knowing about the quest, I would consider "Dirty" Larry an NPC.  Having done the quest, I would consider him a mob, as I realize that neither before nor after the quest do I have any interest in him.  How is he different from an elwynn Sheep, other than having a name?  Consider Tapoke "Slim" Jahn:  Again, he's an NPC most of the time, then you fight him, then you do a quest with him.  Him, I'd classify as an NPC because the fight is part of your quest interaction.  Which leads me back to Dirty Larry and swings me back to "NPC" for him too. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:10, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Pluralization
The groups are generally not pluralized when refered in the quests. For example: Daggerfen is not pluralized in Quest:Message to the Daggerfen. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 04:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess it might be just groups that are also races or something like "Dark Irons". Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the only groups that I can find pluralized are also races, sub-races or species. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 04:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Scrolls of lore

 * Do you know if anything happened to scrolls of lore i keep getting account suspended and can't see nothing in there...--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:04, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

How do you do Warcraft 2 screenshots without crosshatching on minimap?
Hi, I saw your File:Warcraft II Tides of Darkness - Orcs Mission 03 (game demo).png (compare to one of my screenshots: img220.imageshack.us/img220/4884/dareregionofthechanneli.png and was wondering, how do you do Warcraft 2 screenshots of the minimap without the crosshatching/fine grid put over on the minimap of areas not currently visible to make them darker?

Even when I use the cheat (press enter type 'showpath' then enter again, that one) it just displays all of the map and stuff that isn't currently being 'seen' by one of your people is greyed out/crosshatched out on the minimap. So not sure how you took that screenshot? Thanks for any info :)

Might be good to post the info on the wiki for others so it's common knowledge, especially if you know how to do the same for the other games like Warcraft 1/3 etc! I have only just been trying them out cos I was curious about the background story behind world of warcraft --Kittymew (talk) 12:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)