User talk:Ragestorm/Archive4

Thanks
Hey Ragestorm,I'd just like to thank you with all the help with the Naaru/Velen Lore.You have Been a Big Help which has helped me further in my theories on the lore of warcraft and i hope to work with you to futher the content of wowwiki.-Hammerdin

Nitpicking about the Nathrezim
Hi ! Sorry to bother you when you're doing all the work and I'm just criticizing it, but when you added the race infobox on the Dreadlords page you've stated that they come from Xoroth. My answer is "How can you tell ?". Did I miss something ?-- K )  (talk) 03:16, 8 November 2006 (EST)


 * last time I read the Xoroth page, it said it was their homeworld (if so, we get into those RPG facts). I guess change homeworld to Unknown, and capital to "Xoroth (presumed)." --Ragestorm 09:31, 8 November 2006 (EST)


 * Well, then it was way before WoWwiki even existed ; if you pay a deep look at the History of the page and to the article itself it only says that this world belongs to the Nathrezim by default, as we don't know who's really in charge of this world; there are just one Dreadlord and a few Dreadsteeds known from that planet. I'll do as you said.-- K )  (talk) 10:05, 8 November 2006 (EST)

Hi, Ragestorm! I have a screenshot I want you to see because I have a question about it. How can I do? Where I have to upload it? --N'Nanz 15:12, Friday 10 November 2006


 * I've no experience with the things; ask Kirochi or Kirkburn. I look forward to it.--Ragestorm 10:19, 10 November 2006 (EST)


 * Ok, let's do it like this: if you look at the Eversong woods map, near the Southern border there are at least three miniatures like the "Woman bathroom Icon" :D  I have a screenshot with a stone with a rune like that simbol on it and the landscape looks like Quel'thalas. Maybe these are the famous runestone that High elves erected to shield from demons? Do you think I can upload in the proper page? --N'Nanz 15:25, 10 NOvember 2006


 * Screenshot published in Runestone talk page --N'Nanz 9:44, 11 November 2006

Horde Player's Guide
Well I have to say its an excellent book, as good as the previous Alliance Player's Guide. It really expands on things and even takes the time to incoporate things we previously thought were retconned out of history. You might be interested in looking over, centaur article, Garona Halforcen article, half-orc, as well as half-ogre.Baggins 19:28, 17 November 2006 (EST)


 * I've noticed. My policy on Garona remains "wait and see." I'm pleased about this whole "flavor lore" thing. This will hopefully mean less whining about retcons. --Ragestorm 19:35, 17 November 2006 (EST)

Agreed, and I also agree on the "wait and see" thing for Garona. If its to be discussed, I think it should remain as speculation in the discussion tab for that article.Baggins 19:56, 17 November 2006 (EST)

Ya, thought you might be interested to note that we get yet another refrence to high elven druidism in Dark Rangers article. So it looks like that obscure refrence in warcraft II is getting incorporated into the lore.Baggins 19:02, 24 November 2006 (EST)

RPG
Hm would it be ok to remove the forcing of categories from the template RPG? Since it's used widely on articles not straightly related to lore (ie: Gnomish Shrink Ray), it puts up certain unneeded articles in these categories. --Adys 00:19, 19 November 2006 (EST)


 * My instinct is to say it's fine, but I'm not involved with the Cat Team. Check with one of them, User:Vargehedin is the most obvious choice.--Ragestorm 10:25, 19 November 2006 (EST)

Draenei
So I was messing around in the PTR for the upcoming patch 2.0. Noticed some interesting things with the alliance draenei(uncorrupted kind) that are scattered around various places. Some have no hair, some have two horns on their heads, some lack the "artichoke ridge", some have spines in the middle of their head. If I didn't know better I'd think they were all demonic in origin, LOL. As a side note everyone at the harborage have either become Broken rather than lost ones's style "Draenei Exiles", and some uncorrupted ones have been added in as kind of abassadors from the alliance, who are trying to find a cure for mutations.Baggins 13:03, 23 November 2006 (EST)


 * Whoa, slow down! What I got from that is that there's a huge amount of customizability (is that a word?) in Exiled One appearance. I think I'm also getting that this pretty much confirms that they devolve into Broken, thence to Lost Ones (correct me if that's not what you're saying), and that pure Draenei ambassadors are now in the otehr alliance cities.
 * Are you okay? you sound different.--Ragestorm 13:09, 23 November 2006 (EST)


 * No I was just stating that draenei's customizability have various "demonic" style features, they don't just follow that standard "cranial ridge" look that all eredar we have previously seen have. You might remember in Eredar(Burning Legion) article we had some speculation about differences between demonic eredar and the uncorrupted variety, well we might have to rethink certain parts of that article. Also of note, it looks like blizzard cheaped out going by TBC screenshots that examples of demonic eredar bosses, show that the game is just using the standard Draenei models rather than using something that looks more corrupted.


 * As for the order of mutation? I think yes the majority are from Eredar style, to broken, and finally to "lost ones".


 * I also took the time to go back over various refrences to draenei in older rpg sourcebooks, and I'm rather impressed how ambiguous they left things. In that new information we have doesn't actually contradict anything written in the older articles.


 * I feel fine, :).Baggins 13:24, 23 November 2006 (EST)

Blood Elves (patch 2.0)
I don't know if its intended or not, but there are still some high elves and blood elves, that use the old style models in patch 2.0, along side the new models. I personally like it since it seems to add more variety to the races, and they don't seem to look like clones with just slightly different hairstyles.

The few blood elves npcs and mobs I could find (Aszhara mainly) seem to have a deep shade of pink almost red skin compared to "High Elves". Going to take some screenshots, asap.Baggins 13:24, 23 November 2006 (EST)


 * I wouldn't worry too much about it- it's a game mechanic glitch, and not something that needs to be addressed from a lore standpoint. You're right about tha variety thing, though. Don't you have any Turkey Day plans?--Ragestorm 13:32, 23 November 2006 (EST)


 * Ya I think its probably a glitch. Though, in some ways I'd with they'd just let it stand for variety sake ;). As for Turkey Day, ya going to have a meal with the family.Baggins 13:57, 23 November 2006 (EST)


 * I'm having turkey today ! Even though I'm French ;-) Happy Thanksgivings Day !-- K )  (talk) 14:16, 23 November 2006 (EST)

Race & Character Boxes
Well I mean I've been listing information from rpg in the templates where it was applicable. I never saw them as a "WoW MMO"-information only templates. I've personally tried to avoid speculation when adding to them, and only listing what has been confirmed in various sources.Baggins 17:00, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * I'm not saying there are. I'm talking about the desire of you, Aeleas, and Kinst to remove the classes from non-playable raceboxes. Include rpg infoin the normals by all means. And make sure you're done before you hit save, or use preview- this is my fifth edit conflict with you. --Ragestorm 17:05, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * Oh, I'm not not in agreemwent with Aeleas or Kinst, not by a longshot. If we were in agreement, Wowwiki would have no information from anything but World of Warcraft itself (which would be against everything I stand for, seeing as I actually like how it has become a comprehensive encylopedia). I might have said something that seemed like I was in agreement with them but I was trying to look for some kind of compromise. If anything I agree with you more.Baggins 17:11, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * Moving on then. Next semi-crisis! :-)--Ragestorm 17:13, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * Heh Heh :).Baggins 17:15, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * "N/A" would make the most sense to me, as it's not clear what the classes of a non-playable race mean. Are they the classes we think they would have if they were made playable, or the general roles the race fills in the lore, which would include non-playable classes?--Aeleas 17:19, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * I prefer the latter interpretation myself. Though I understand the difficulty of listing every possible occupation that a race can take up...Baggins 17:22, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * As I use it, I think of which classes most closely parallel individuals of that race, not which would they have if they could be played. Of course, it doesn't apply to all races or all characters- it's just an approximation.--Ragestorm 20:04, 24 November 2006 (EST)


 * Ya, that seems like a good way of looking at it. So mainly the classes that best represent the race.Baggins 20:07, 24 November 2006 (EST)

Re:S(a/o)ridormi
Heya, I was wrong she's indeed female in game aswell. Went through my pics and found it again. Here it is. --Adys 02:32, 27 November 2006 (EST)


 * Excellent. Thanks in part to you (but mostly to Lady Soridormi) the need for a novel stamp has been removed! Yes, that's definetly the same dragon.--Ragestorm 09:12, 27 November 2006 (EST)

Blood Elf Race/Species
I added some more info form Alliance Player's guide use of the term "race" for different kinds of elves. You can clean up my wording if you like. But I hope I was clear on how RPG seems to interpret the term race, as opposed as to some sources using the term race as if it equal to the word species.Baggins 21:17, 28 November 2006 (EST)


 * You are welcome to include it, but please move somewhere else- that's far to detailed for an intro. --Ragestorm 22:34, 28 November 2006 (EST)

Alleged Deaths
I think now we need to be pretty careful when we state someone has "died", especially if its from in-universe perspective. Since its seems that it can often just be flavor lore to make things more mysterious.Baggins 20:16, 30 November 2006 (EST)


 * Firstly, we need to be more careful about throwing the terms "flavor lore" and "retcon" about. Second, it was more than fair game for her not the be dead, as it wasn't actually shown. Third, since most of these presumed dead people are brought back for plot and shock value, it's more than acceptable to list them as dead.
 * Or should we say, "Status: Deceased, unless Blizzard brings them back and makes the previous version flavor lore"? ;-P--Ragestorm 20:21, 30 November 2006 (EST)

I touch on this a bit in my reply to your retcon discussion; Here

Draenei

 * From what I could see in patch 2.0 quests from the "Broken Exiles"(its capitalized) in the Harborage, it would seem they are offshoot from Akama's clan also known as the "Broken", who left his group for various disagreements because they had joined with the blood elves in outland. It seems there might actually be two definitions for the term "broken", when capitalized it refers to Akama's tribe. When uncapitalized it refers to mutation level of the draenei species. They all seem to still consider themselves draenei from what I can tell, broken draenei, lost one draenei, just plain "draeni", etc. I think I need access to expansion before I completely verify this though. Baggins 12:55, 1 December 2006 (EST)

New Templates
I modified the previous novel/short story templates, RPG template, and card game template to make them more NPOV, as well as created 3 more templates for the warcraft III in order to list material that is either outdated, or where status is unclear. They are also formated to be in a NPOV.Baggins 18:07, 3 December 2006 (EST)

Full Section removal
In Aiden Perenolde, and Genn Greymane articles I added sections pointing out two pictures of characters from both Gilneas and Alterac. I pointed out that they may or may not be pictures of Genn and Aiden respectively, and I have pointed out that the material is of speculative nature(as there is no way to know if it them or not). Theron the Just feels that entire section should be removed, and no remark made on the Alliance of Lordaeron picture. What is your opinion?Baggins 19:52, 6 December 2006 (EST)


 * Let's examine the facts: the one with his back turned is clearly the Kirin Tor representative. The Elf is almost certainly Alleria (the Thalassian representative in any case). The dwarf is the Khaz Modani rep, the one in the fancy hat is Proudmoore; Terenas is the one with the crown, Trollbane has the axe, and Lothar is probably the remaining guy at the head. This leaves up with Gilneas and Alterac. The one you've chosen as Perenolde (it's logical to assume that everyone there is a national ruler, apart from the elf, who is clearly not Anasterian) has falconing gloves, fitting wih the phoenix of Alterac. However, the one you've chosen as Greymane is wearing very rich clothes,of the sort we might expect from the cowardly Alterac. This man also looks bad-tempered, which would be Greymane's general attitude or Perenolde's treacerous intention.--Ragestorm 20:12, 6 December 2006 (EST)


 * He completely removed the section again... Can I say edit war? He's done this previously... I've warned him and talked to him privately...


 * Well I"m not saying it is perenolde exactly. LIke you said the first one is probably trollbane or at least representive of his nation. The one person is likely Terenas. The one we think is Daelin, if not, is definitely Kul Tiras representive due to the fancy tri-hat. The fancy "Gilneas" guy is likely Greymane or Gilneas representive as his cloak has the letter "G" embalanzed on the brooch(Gilneas or Greymane). The mage guy is likely a dalaran representive. So that leaves that last guy holding the scroll, so likely Alterac.Baggins 20:20, 6 December 2006 (EST)


 * Fair assumption then.


 * "Initializing an edit war," I did not start an "edit war" I think. "removaing of complete sections" With reason that I see as valid. "all can be viewed as vandalizing." I have to say that I cannot agree with this. Discussion is required to sort this out obviously. So, shall we?. --Theron the Just 20:32, 6 December 2006 (EST)

Answered on your usertalk.--Ragestorm 20:38, 6 December 2006 (EST)


 * Excuse me, but I think that we should discuss this here. --Theron the Just 20:39, 6 December 2006 (EST)

Very well, just a moment to clear some space. in the meantime, state your side.--Ragestorm 20:43, 6 December 2006 (EST)


 * I would prefer you or Baggins starting. --Theron the Just 20:46, 6 December 2006 (EST)

According to the RPG, it says that leaders of the Lordaeron were at that meeting rather than just "Representives" in a few different books, for example;

"Lothar met with the leaders of the seven nations of Lordaeron...The Alliance of Lordaeron was formed." Baggins 15:18, 7 December 2006 (EST)

or from the in-game book in World of Warcraft, The Alliance of Lordaeron, it states;

"the leaders of the seven human nations met and agreed to unite in what would become known as the Alliance of Lordaeron."

In that case, it's logical to assume that they were all the rulers, apart from the elf, who we can assume was Alleria or Sylvanas, and thus a Ranger-General, in a position of power and in the confidence of Anasterian. --Ragestorm 23:19, 7 December 2006 (EST)


 * Ok, I reduced, Aiden Perenolde and Genn Greymane articles with just the bare information. What do you think?


 * Oh, here is another quote from another source, Alliance Player's Guide, which states that it was the leaders, not representives during that meeting;

"King Terenas of Lordaeron calls the other human kings together to discuss the Horde and Stormwind." Baggins 23:49, 7 December 2006 (EST)

Mediation
Right, well, as I see it, this situation was started by Theron's desire to remove what he considered to be undue and unneeded speculation. Baggins, author of said speculation disagreed, and reverted your edits. Theron, standing by his position, removed it again. Baggins took offense again, and removed it again. Theron placed it back again. Some time later, Baggins questioned me on my opinion of whether or not the speculation should be included, therby alerting me to the situation. Having far too much experience with edit wars, I sought to mediate. and prevent this from getting any uglier.--Ragestorm 20:53, 6 December 2006 (EST)


 * ...that is pretty much what happened, and I am sorry about it. I have nothing personal agains't Baggins, he seems like a nice chap.

We should have discussed the changes more before the little edit war started. Mistakes were made by both of us. Baggins has already offered his apologies, and now I will do the same. I am sorry. Regards, --Theron the Just 21:11, 8 December 2006 (EST)

No, hard feelings.Baggins 21:33, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Alliance of Lordaeron
No, hard feelings.Baggins 21:33, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Ragestorm, I don't want to get into an edit war, so I will not revert back to my original edit until you check this out first and make your decision.

Can you check out these latest edits by Theron and see if he was justified? ...or was the fact that I actually quoted my sources was more valid(I can actually quote many more sources if you would like)? Also check out the talk on that page if you could please, as Theron and I are discussing the issue there.Baggins 21:45, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Ahh, never mind if his biggest issue was a quote from the RPG, I can easily change that to a quote from within World of Warcraft, itself. I've made the change, if he chooses to change it again, I'll let you decide what you think is best. I will not edit it again, so as to not make an edit war.Baggins 21:52, 8 December 2006 (EST)


 * Well, he changed it back to his own interpretation again, rather than the official quote, I put up... Its up to you to decide, I will not be part of another "edit war"...Baggins 22:04, 8 December 2006 (EST)


 * There was no real edit war in my opinion. We had a small misunderstanding. By checking http://www.wowwiki.com/Talk:Alliance_of_Lordaeron you should see this. I did not see it widely enough at first. De-facto leader. Regards, --Theron the Just 22:19, 8 December 2006 (EST)


 * P.S. Unfortunately, I am not sure if Baggings understood what I meant and that I am done with the debate.

I understand what you mean. BTW, I hope that my suggestion for a new, replacement sentence meets your approval, as I believe it is more clear, and seperates the 7 human nations from the 2 non-human nations a bit better.Baggins 22:25, 8 December 2006 (EST)

'ENOUGH. From the both of you. the matter is CLOSED.' Thank you and have a nice evening, and I hope you'll be around just after the holidays for my revamping.--Ragestorm 22:26, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Revamping
Oh what changes?Baggins 22:27, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Give a Bookkeeper five minutes, would ya?!?--Ragestorm 22:35, 8 December 2006 (EST)

Heh, heh, ok, sorry, :).Baggins 22:37, 8 December 2006 (EST)

=