Forum:Playable races


 * Moved from Wowpedia talk:Village pump

Now with all the (in my opinion) silly page moves with " of ", it would probably be appropriate to think it all over. Would it actually be wrong to have "Orc (playable)" instead of "Orc of Orgrimmar"? To be honest the latter version sounds like a strange way to somehow add a lore version to the name, while the first one is more simple. Why make it so complicated? -- 20:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Point of note its both a faction and a playable race page now. It can be used to give general pointers on how characters from the race and other races might achieve reputation for the race. Info that wasn't included in previous versions of the city and race pages in general. Gnomeregan Exiles for example is the race/faction for gnomes but was just redirected into gnomes, but makes a proper title for gnomes and the faction page.Baggins (talk) 20:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't talk about any factions here, I was talking about the playable race page. Again, would it for example be wrong to have "Orc (playable)" instead of "Orc of Orgrimmar"? -- 20:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Forsaken of Undercity? There are Forsaken of other places? Anyway, why not have something like: "Orgrimmar", "Orgrimmar (faction)", "Orc", and "Orc (playable)". That is a lot of pages, but at least it does not involve grouping things together. Think about what people would want when they type "Orc". Should that just redirect to "Orc (disambiguation)" with an explanation to what each link is for?-- 20:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Sounds pretty much reasonable to me. -- 20:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Again they are no longer just a "race page" anymore. Its also a faction page. While any of these races can be found anywhere (including humans and humans of stormwind), they are clearly tied to their factions in the game as well. If you go to the manual for WoW it also ties them directly to their faction (within the backstory and "city"). Faction pages were originally tied to the city names, but then that meant there was little faction information interspersed through the article and made it hard to find any reputation information. There was no reputation section.Baggins (talk) 20:50, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * While it may say "The Humans of Stormwind are..." in the manual, it simply means that the playable race of humans in the game are the ones from Stormwind. There is no need at all to make it more complicated than going from that the article name is "Human (playable)" and note in the article that the playable humans are the ones of Stormwind. Am I making myself clear? -- 21:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Are we going to have a general consensus here before this is going to go much further? -- 22:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm simply with Gourra here. I had a few choice words that I was going to use about a day ago, but today, I'm just going to go with Gourra... --Sky (t · c · w) 23:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

It could be simplified by just going Humans (Stormwind), Draenei (Exodar), etc. There is no reason to move Gnomeregan Exiles.Baggins (talk) 23:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well whichever you end up choosing, I vote for "Gnomes (Ironforge)" as the faction article name since we have "Dwarf (Ironforge)" and the gnomes pretty much live in Ironforge now and have been called "Ironforge gnomes" in many sources. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Technically if Gnomeregan Exiles was moved to a race ("faction") set up it would be "Gnomes (Gnomeregan Exiles)", and trolls if it gets moved out of main darkspear lore page would be, Troll (Darkspear Trolls) or Darkspear Trolls. For that matter, Forsaken could also be Undead (Undercity) based on their "race name" of "undead". I chose the manuals Undead (Forsaken) because it at least connects the race back to better known racial name.Baggins (talk) 03:31, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't they start in the same area as dwarves, and the same thing with the trolls and orcs? Also, Undead (Undercity) doesn't make sense as there are other Undead like the Scourge kind, independant kind, and who knows what other kind. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * All player undead are part of the Undercity faction, People don't play scourge and independent undead in the game. So yes Undead (Undercity) makes sense when one thinks that Undercity faction doesn't include "Scourge" or "Independent undead". The faction comment specifically points out that it isn't any other kind of undead but those from Undercity. As for the gnomes yes they start in the same place but all gnomes are playing members of the Gnomeregan Exiles. I'd recommend reading the little bit of lore on the faction page in game. Also to quell that arguement further, it works the same way for the tauren, dwarves, night elves, orcs, blood elfs etc. Those races are found everywhere, but the player is playing specifically the ones that are part of their factions (Thunder Bluff faction, Ironforge faction, Darnassus faction, Orgrimmar faction, Silveroon City faction, etc.) One final bit of info if you go to the WoW manual you'll notice that gnomes and trolls are "city-less" in their write-ups that's because Gnomeregan and Echo Islands were taken over.Baggins (talk) 03:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * They are called Undead Forsaken so people don't confuse them with other Undead. IF you call them just Undead (Undercity) why even have a name called Forsaken? I know the gnomes and trolls are "city-less" but they have adopted homes now, Ironforge and Orgrimmar. They don't start out in Gnomeregan or the Echo Islands. Why do you think they are called "Ironforge dwarves" and it is said that the trolls have adopted so many of the orcs' customs in many sources? They have pretty much adopted, for now, those cities. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 03:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually they're called Ironforge Dwarves to distinguish them from the Dark Iron Dwarves. Ironforge is technically just their version of a dwarf, the city just happens to be named the same thing. --Metalbunny (talk) 06:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)


 * This is not about the city this is about the "faction" in-game. Its not a lore thing its a game mechanic thing. As for the Undead, what are they called on the character selection screen now-adays? I.E. the race heading title on the selection screen. Is it undead or is it Forsaken nowadays? We'll go with whatever the character selection title is.Baggins (talk) 04:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It was Undead Forsaken last time I saw but I don't play that race so I am not sure now. Look, why have 6 of 8 articles look one way but 2 of 8 look another way? It looks like you actually know what you are doing if all 8 have the same format. If you have some looking one way, but then others looking another way, it looks like you don't know what you are doing. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:10, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * If this is still about a lore/mechanics divide, let's change the things to " (playable/stats/something)" rather than this city-based cluster****. If this is a lore/lore divide, then we need to know what the hell we're dividing, I lost track about three redirects ago.-- Ragestorm  (talk &middot; contr) 04:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * ...and I was originally going to go with "race (playable)" a long time ago. :p... Anywho its a "race and faction" thing. Not race and city.Baggins (talk) 04:39, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * All I have to say is whichever we choose, we should have them all match and not have half of them in one format, some in another format, and then one in a third format. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 04:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, if you think we're going to have separate pages for general race, specific race, faction, and statistics, you've got another thing coming. Naming should be simple, " " (this with optional city), " (faction)"-- Ragestorm (talk &middot; contr) 04:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Point of note Rolandius if you try to take this to other faction pages like Taunka, or Silverwing Sentinels. I.E, move the page to Taunka (The Taunka), or Night elf (Silverwing Sentinels), I'll personaly permaban you. Regardless the reaction of others.


 * Also I'd suggest looking into "disambig" rules. We don't put (weapon) behind every weapon unless it actually overlaps with something else with the same name. thus the rather pointless to move and insert disambig tag on Gnomeregan Exiles, to force it into "Gnome (Gnomeregan Exiles)", or Darkspear Trolls to Troll (Darkspeara Troll).


 * RAgestorm actually we didn't have faction pages for the playable races before. For example gnomereagan exiles was redirected into gnomes... Baggins (talk) 05:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Point of note don't threaten me. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Its more than a threat, I will definitely permanban you if you go outside your bounds and start trying to make every page "align" into a single system... Not everything needs to be "disambiged" or forced to be disambiged into something else.Baggins (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't remember putting any disambig tags anywhere, show me where. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:11, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, I am not trying to make every page align into a single system. I am talking about the pages which are all in a group. For instance, having "Dwarf (Ironforge)" and 3 other pages like that, but then having "Undead (Undercity) "Forsaken"" and 2 other pages like that. It looks disorganized Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * How did you come up with Troll (Darkspear Troll) when it says that they are "trolls of the Darkspear tribe" as much as "trolls of the Darkspear trolls"? Oh and go threaten someone else, I don't have time to play your games. Rolandius [[Image:Paladin.gif|25px]] ( talk -  contr ) 05:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * This wiki is primarily about World of Warcraft, and I feel that our naming conventions policy should include WoW-centric article name priority rules for ease of navigation. IMO pages on capitals, playable races and reputation factions should use the in-game name as the page name whenever possible (with capitals getting name priority over reputation factions if they are split). For example, IMO the main Troll article should be about playable Trolls, with the faction page located at Darkspear Trolls, and the current Troll article should be moved to some other title, such as Troll (lore), while Exodar should either cover both the city and the reputation faction, or should only cover the city, with faction information located at Exodar (faction) rather than some other title such as Draenei of the Exodar. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 05:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * While I am sympathetic to the WoW-centric idea (you can ask other admins and they'll tell you I pushed this in the past), this issue has been discussed before and included input from the Wikia folks. The decision was made to try to accommodate all Warcraft-related info and to only emphasize WoW-centricity where necessary (items are an example). So in the case of races, there is alot of non-WoW lore or pre-WoW lore, so those types of subjects will not focus on WoW, but have a prominent link to WoW info. --[[Image:gengar orange 22x22.png]] Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 1:33 PM PST 9 Mar 2009

ENOUGH
Baggins and I have thrashed this out, and this seems the simplest solution: in keeping with the original intent, we will post the statistics of the races, along with in-game mechanics at whatnot at  (playable). The previously existing pages will continue to hold lore only. Draenei will hold lore information for them, while Draenei (playable) will hold the mechanics. Exodar (faction) will hold the FACTIONAL information only, as eight of the races' "factions" are just the city name. A few exceptions The end result will be ten specific race pages with lore and ten playable pages with mechanics and statistics. The faction pages will all be at (faction), apart from the aforementioned Exiles and Darkspears. This is the only way we can see this working, so we can work on nomenclature a bit. Bottom line, this had been the end result of a horrendous series of miscommunications, so let's just move on.-- Ragestorm (talk · contr) 05:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)ADDENDUM: you many notice that Baggins has begun the reversion process. Please do not hinder the operation until it has been completed and discussed, in the interests of neatness.'05:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Forsaken will hold lore for Undead (playable)
 * Ironforge dwarf for Dwarf (playable)
 * Darkspear Tribe for Troll (playable) and Darkspear Trolls
 * Gnome or Gnomeregan Exiles for Gnome (playable) and Gnomeregan Exiles

Ok, the general work is done. I moved all the pages, and fixed the faction and race links templates. Next step is to mark all the excessive redirects with the speedy delete, except for ones that might possibly be used. Humans of Stormwind, might still be useable, but I can't of any others specifically. The links on all related pages that link to the articles will need to be fixed. Gnomeregan Exiles doesn't need the (faction) marking and I've added in-line disambig to Darkspear Trolls to seperate it from the general "darkspear trolls" article, Darkspear tribe. Thus it doesn't really need a disambig either.Baggins (talk) 06:22, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I think things turned out pretty good. --[[Image:gengar orange 22x22.png]] Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 1:33 PM PST 9 Mar 2009


 * I think it's a pretty good compromise. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 02:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Not sure if this was intended or not, but it appears the Talk page for Talk:Ironforge dwarf did not get created or moved because a redirection was previously deleted, and there are a few redirects pointing to the empty page now. I didn't want to create anything in case it might overwrite what should go there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

Permaban
Please keep the permaban threats off the Village pump please. They are both inaccurate (because I can undo the permabans and I will) and unnecessary (off-topic). -- Fandyllic  (talk · contr) 1:26 PM PST 9 Mar 2009