Remove the flag?
Since the Forsaken and Argent crusade are now the domination force over lordaeron kingdom should we change it from Alliance to Forsaken and Argent Crusade?
and Alliance History as Pre-Thrid war?--Forsakenlord (talk) 13:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Flag? What flag? I don't see any flag. --g0urra[T҂C] 13:45, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- sorry this responds to lordaeron (kingdom).--Forsakenlord (talk) 14:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Like it's been discussed earlier, this article is about the former kingdom. --g0urra[T҂C] 14:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- This article is only focused on the past?--Forsakenlord (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Since the kingdom of Lordaeron no longer exists, yes, it makes sense for it to focus on the past when the kingdom did exist. Anything in the present would affect the city and the continent, but the kingdom wouldn't be affected any more than Prussia was affected by World War II. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- If it is focused only on past and about the human kingdom then why Sylvanas Putress Varimathras and Arthas count as leaders since they all become leaders after the human kingdom was destroyed.--Forsakenlord (talk) 15:08, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- They probably shouldn't be, because they never ruled the kingdom of Lordaeron. They ruled the Undercity, which simply happened to occupy the same territory. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:14, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- There are rants of both sides of this argument on the official story forums. The Forsaken do seem to still partially identify with the kingdom. Edge of Night supports this further.--SWM2448 19:35, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- They probably shouldn't be, because they never ruled the kingdom of Lordaeron. They ruled the Undercity, which simply happened to occupy the same territory. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:14, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- If it is focused only on past and about the human kingdom then why Sylvanas Putress Varimathras and Arthas count as leaders since they all become leaders after the human kingdom was destroyed.--Forsakenlord (talk) 15:08, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- Since the kingdom of Lordaeron no longer exists, yes, it makes sense for it to focus on the past when the kingdom did exist. Anything in the present would affect the city and the continent, but the kingdom wouldn't be affected any more than Prussia was affected by World War II. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- This article is only focused on the past?--Forsakenlord (talk) 14:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Like it's been discussed earlier, this article is about the former kingdom. --g0urra[T҂C] 14:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- I think that there should be two articles: one "Lordaeron (kingdom)" for the past info, and one "Lordaeron (forsaken)" for the modern Forsaekn state. Otherwise, Lordaeron's articles should be removed from the Human kingdoms template since the actual article refers both the human kingdom and the Forsaken and Horde-aligned nation/state. --Cemotucu (talk) 16:34, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
- A similar suggestion has been made on Talk:Forsaken#Race_and_Faction. What would be on this page?--SWM2448 17:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)