Talk:Kodo beast

Shouldn't this article have the Warcraft III units template and not the kodo article? Rolandius ( talk  -  contr ) 02:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually an article called Kodo Beast (Warcraft III) should be made and that is the article which should have the template. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 02:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Well that article does not exist so this is the closest one for now. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge
there's no such thing as a kodo beast as a subspecies of Kodo, this is a kodo article--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:11, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * "Kodo beast" is their name in Warcraft III. Why are they not different?-- 23:45, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * There already exists a article for the warcraft unit, and this is what a person with the book said to me in scrolls of lore
 * "Just checked the source. HPG’s article does not say Kodo Beasts are a subspecies of Kodo, nor does it mention anything about a “primary type.” The world subspecies is never mentioned. In fact, the actual entry uses kodo and kodo beast interchangeably. There are two sets of stats given, but they seem designed only to differentiate between tame (riding) and wild (beast) kodos. The words you quoted are just what some retarded OCD wiki editor said. In fact, it was probably Rolandius…


 * This is the problem of wikis. Even the editors aren't checking the sources.


 * Edit: Just checked, and yes, it was actually Rolandius who added that they were a "subspecies.""
 * As of that i'm beginning to ate rolandious.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Just to be clear, you are arguing that "Kodo beasts" are exactly the same as "Kodos"? Gurtogg_Bloodboil (I checked your claims) is correct in that "There are two sets of stats given, but they seem designed only to differentiate between tame (riding) and wild (beast) kodos." Under "Kodo" there is "Kodo Beast" and "Kodo, Riding". It is true that "subspecies" is not mentioned at all, though you throw out the terms "race" and "subrace" in a similar manner. I like vaguer terms. The difference seems to be wild and tamed, but that does not necessarily negate a difference between "Kodo beasts" and "Kodos". "Kodo beast" might be their full name, but I think at some point the full/overall name was shortened. What was your point again? A merge of the two? It is not a subspecies, but I am not sure it is the exact same subject.-- 00:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I only threw the term subrace and race because of this article, and it's description is exactly like kodos, the terms are used interchangeably(if gurtogg is correct), ad there's already a article for kodo--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * They might be interchangeable. They likely are. I do not know if there is any technical difference. How do you know which is the proper name?-- 18:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Because in wow they are called Kodos and not Kodo beasts (example: Great Gray Kodo)--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)