Talk:Capital

Proposal
We need to cement the definition of "capital"; I just added a table to this page listing most cities, towns, villages and settlements that are the capitals (or were the capitals) of certain races and factions, here's a few questions:
 * Should a village consisting the entirety of an intelligent clan or faction be considered a capital?
 * Should the capital be the main cultural center for a particular race, regardless of faction affiliation?
 * Should the capital be the largest named village or settlement by any intelligent faction?

Let's take the furbolgs for example, Stillpine Hold is the only village of the Stillpine Furbolg, therefore it is technically the capital of the Stillpine. If that is so, then the Bristlelimb should also have a capital, which is Bristlelimb Village, then Timbermaw Hold (as a faction, it should definitely have a "capital") should be the capital of the Timbermaw (though which Timbermaw Hold is debatable), then Blackwood Den should be the capital of the Blackwood. However, none of these Furbolg tribes are the cultural center, the Grizzlemaw are (they aren't in the game, but they still count), except that I'm pretty sure the Grizzlemaw aren't particularly friendly to the other tribes, which leaves them to their own capitals. My concern is that the list of capitals will get too large.

To make things simple; What is the definition of "capital"? I'd prefer that we have all faction capitals, large and small, Timbermaw to Bristlelimb. The only problem is the list length.

PS- Oh, and if someone can polish up the looks of the tables, that would be great. --GeekOfDeath


 * Ok... I think I have it (I seem to be talking to myself here...), this is going to be how the capitals are listed (there will be 4 tables):
 * All the following are listed in Table 1:
 * Playable faction capitals.
 * All the following are listed in Table 2:
 * Capitals not currently owned by their founders.
 * Capitals that were renamed.
 * Capitals that were destroyed.
 * In game or out of game.
 * Instance or non-instance.
 * Race and faction information is not current, but reflects the condition of the capital in the past.
 * All the following are listed in Table 3:
 * All instance-capitals that aren't in Table 2.
 * Capitals currently owned, in part or entirely, by any faction that can have their reputation gained by players.
 * If any of the factions controlling a capital in Table 3 are hostile toward another, the original owner of the capital should be marked off by a "^" (or a replacement icon template) after the faction and race name.
 * In game or out of game.
 * Capitals that do not belong in any other table.
 * All the following are listed in Table 4:
 * Main villages or settlements of minor, semi-intelligent races or factions that are neutral hostile to all players.
 * No instances.
 * Not controlled by any factions with a measured reputation.
 * Notes:
 * Before all faction names in the faction column, a, , , or a * (* can be replaced by a better icon template) mark off the faction's behavior toward players.
 * Any faction with a reputation bar that can be increased by both Horde and Alliance are marked with a.
 * The * indicates a faction hostile to all players (neutral hostile). A * is not needed in Table 4.
 * If somehow a faction is both neutral in one area and hostile to a certain faction in another, both signs are marked.


 * Examples (each point is an example of an equivalent point above):
 * Table 1
 * Stormwind City is controlled by a race-faction join-able by players. Shattrath City is NOT, and therefore does not belong in Table 1.
 * Table 2
 * Grim Batol is not currently controlled by its original inhabitants, therefore it belongs in Table 2. Stromgarde IS controlled partly by its original inhabitants, and should NOT be listed in Table 2.
 * Strom was renamed Stromgarde, therefore Strom belongs in Table 2. The Undercity is not the new name for Lordaeron City, therefore it does NOT belong in Table 2.
 * Thaurissan was destroyed when Emperor Thaurrisan mistakenly annihilated it, therefore it belongs in Table 2. Stormwind was destroyed, but rebuilt, therefore it does NOT belong in Table 2.
 * Zin-Azshari is not in-game, but it still qualifies in the above.
 * Grim Batol, though now controlled by dragons and unknown creatures, should have the Dwarves and Wildhammers listed under the race and faction because it is in Table 2, which should have the original inhabitants only listed.
 * Table 3
 * Razorfen Kraul is the current capital of the Razorfen Quillboar; though they are a minor faction, the Razorfen Kraul is an instance and belongs in Table 3. Razorfen Downs, however, is no longer the capital of the Razorfen Quillboar, and should be listed in Table 2.
 * Stromgarde was originally the capital of the Kingdom of Stromgarde, but it is now controlled by the Syndicate, Stromgarde and ogres & trolls. Since Stromgarde has not been destroyed, renamed, or is not inhabited at least in part by its original inhabitants, it doesn't belong in Table 2.
 * Since it belongs in Table 3; Stromgarde under the faction column, and human under the race column, should have a "^" marked after them, signifying that they were the original inhabitants of Stromgarde.
 * Deephome is the capital (or rather home region; I think it still counts until the capital city is named) of the earth elementals, but it is not in-game. Since earth elementals are no controllable by players, since Deephome the current capital, and since the earth elementals are no minor tribe, Deephome belongs nowhere else but here.
 * See above.
 * Table 4
 * Deadwood Village is the main village of the Deadwood furbolg. The Deadwood furbolg is a relatively minor furbolg tribe (compared to the Timbermaw) and is neutral hostile to all players; therefore the Deadwood belong in Table 4. Stillpine Hold is the main village of the Stillpine Furbolg. Though the Stillpine Furbolg are part of a sea of semi-intelligent corrupted furbolgs, they are not corrupted and relatively intelligent. In addition, the Stillpine are friendly to the Alliance, hence they do NOT belong in Table 4.
 * Blackwood Den, though a minor dungeon, is not an instance, and since it is controlled by a minor tribe meeting the prerequisites of the above, Blackwood Den belongs in Table 4. Razorfen Kraul, though controlled by a relatively minor tribe, the Razorfen Quillboar, is an instance and does NOT belong in Table 4.
 * Splinthoof Crag is the capital of the Galak Clan Centaur. Since the Galak are not a faction with a reputation bar, they belong in this list. The Magram Clan Centaur, though a relatively minor faction, nonetheless does NOT belong in Table 4 because it has its own reputation bar.
 * Notes
 * The Darkspear Trolls are marked with a because they are part of the Horde.
 * Players of both Horde and Alliance can earn reputation for the Aldor. Because of this, a is marked before the Aldor's name.
 * The Razorfen Quillboar attack all players on sight, therefore a * is placed before "Razorfen" in the faction name. Since all capitals in Table 4 are those of neutral hostile factions, none need a * marked before their name.
 * All Troll Tribes are marked with a *, a and a  as some troll tribes are hostile towards all players (the Hakkari), some are neutral (the Zandalarians) and some are part of the Horde (the Darkspears).


 * If this is all confusing, though I've tried to make it as simple as possible, you can just check the tables on the page and compare with these guidelines. --GeekOfDeath


 * Oh boy... now I found out about organizations... "factions" that are not technically "factions" according to the reputation bar... I'll need to edit the tables to fix that... therefore all guidelines above related to Tables 3 and 4 are no longer valid.


 * New guidelines:
 * Table 3 now should only have factions with a gainable reputation.
 * Table 4 has all other organizations.


 * I also intend to make sure every organization; isolated or from the Burning Crusade, is in this (in a somewhat compressed format). --GeekOfDeath

Minor capitals cleanup
The minor capitals section may need a clean up to remove cities that aren't actually "capitals". Some of the cities may be just major or minor settlements rather than capital cities. The region demographics that are found in most zone pages should be used in order to establish what are considered capitals and what are considered major or minor cities in an area. That info is taken from established lore sources mainly the RPG, and any other source that states specific demographic information for an area and its population.Baggins 18:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Gilneas City
I've commented it out from the main table because it will not be a usable city in game. It's already under minor capitals. 12:01, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Overhaul
Overhauling this, cos no one stuck to what was stated for each section or what existed on the talk page. So expect a major revision shortly. -- 08:57, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Please retain from editing this page, I'm correcting Zealvurte little mistakes.
 * Thanks
 * 12:20, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Finish. You can get back to your edits :)
 * 12:39, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Isn't the Altar in the middle of Zul'aman named Shrine of Ula'tek in-game?
 * 12:42, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * No mention of it being so on the wiki, and i don't personally recall. Sadly the sub-zones for it aren't listed on the wiki either. -- 12:47, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * That'll be my afternoon run then.
 * 12:50, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's seems that Zul'Aman has no named subzones in-game...
 * 13:24, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Does look to be a good improvement! I would say that the stars in the non-playable faction capitals section aren't entirely clear. 15:46, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I had trouble to understand at first, maybe we should add it to all without the star? or just to the last?
 * 15:49, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I did it because it ended up far too long with doing it for all of them, and doing it for only the last one made it a bit unclear, so it's a bit difficult to solve. -- 16:13, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * I added an additional column to the Former Capitals list. Let me know what you think. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:15, July 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice.
 * 16:20, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Looking at it, I'm not really sure why Dalaran is in the "former capitals" list. It's been destroyed and rebuilt, but is still controlled by the same faction that controlled it in its heyday. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:15, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Because the original we knew from previous games was destroyed and the new city is nothing like it, so it's is essentially the same in name, former location and faction only, which really are the minor aspect of what a city is. -- 19:04, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * By that logic, Stormwind should be listed in former capitals too, because it was destroyed during the First War and then completely rebuilt. In any case, could you elaborate on the new city being "nothing like it"? Because I would argue that having the same name, the same location (until they moved it), and the same faction are really what make the city what it is rather than the physical structures. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:09, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * A compromise: Dalaran and Stormwind get their own section as razed and rebuilt cities (are there others we can add?). Tbh, I think it is valid info for both - and makes more sense than having only Dalaran in the 'former' section. 19:15, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Add Stormwind imo. The reason i say it's not the same, is because Dalaran was layed out differently, had different areas in and around it, all of which were destroyed and never rebuilt or rebuilt differently. I don't know well enough to say if the same holds true for Stormwind, but if it does then i don't see any reason not handle it in the same way.
 * I don't see why they need to be treated differently, as many cities listed were destroyed, rebuilt, renamed, or repurposed. Why should a change of name, faction, location or race presence -- all minor things that make a city a city -- be treated as enough to make the previous version a former capital, while a rebuilt/redesigned physical presence and structure of a city not? :S -- 19:52, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think mainly due to the potential confusion of seeing "former capitals" as the title and having Stormwind+Dalaran listed underneath. Different versions of Stormwind and Dalaran, and not contiguous inhabitation ... but it rather suggests they are no longer occupied - at least, not by the same people who claimed it as a capital before. 00:39, July 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Basically what Kirkburn said. And even then, only Stormwind didn't have a contiguous inhabitation; even after being destroyed by Archimonde Dalaran's ruins were still held by the Kirin Tor. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:49, July 28, 2010 (UTC)