Talk: Taunka

Outland?[]

Why are ancient tauren in Outland? Garrosh was always in Outland.--SWM24 48 19:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, NORTHREND. That makes scence. Sorry.--SWM24 48 19:44, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I put Outland on accident.--Ryoki 19:47, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

WTF...but also, I find it odd that the tauren were not aware of the tunka. They are all so in touch with nature and all. I think it has somthing to do with the grimtotems. There alliance with the forsaken was never resolved, as I recal.Cormundo 07:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

There's also an entire ocean separating them. Being in touch with nature doesn't necessarily mean knowing everything that's part of it. -- Dark T Zeratul 11:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Picture[]

A picture of the Taunka can be seen here: http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.wowinsider.com/media/2007/08/img_1560.jpg

Source: http://www.wowinsider.com/2007/08/04/blizzcon-day-2-wow-lore-and-quests-panel-liveblog/

Apparently they are a buffalo-looking people. RogueJedi86 03:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so...They look more like the yaks, and they are actually living in frozen areas, a bit more likely. --Hey, I'm Gerrom 17:11, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

Native American Culture[]

The picture from Blizzcon is a bit blurry but it looks as though they, like the Tauren, will be derivative of Native American culture and styles. Lets hope they remain respective as they have with the Tauren. I'd hate to see Blizz get dragged into a media war over political correctness.--Evil Iggy 10:23, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally, seeing as the Tauren NPC's still occasionally say "How" when you speak to them I don't think Blizzard is being too respectful. "Noble savage" comes to mind. I hope the Taunka are treated better. Mingonashoba 16:19, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

they say how? dang. Blizzard can be racist sometimes, like with the trolls, to some extent. Is there a page on blizzard and PCness.Cormundo 07:15, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't they say "How may I help?"

Kanaru discussion 13:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Some NPC's say "how may I aide you" but the elder NPC's still say "how." Get an MPQ viewer, open speech-enUS.MPQ. File is Sound/Creature/TaurenMaleElderNPC/TaurenMaleElderNPCGreeting02.wav Mingonashoba 20:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Note how the dwarves are obviously scottish, but no-one thinks there's racist overtones there ... User:Kirkburn/Sig3 00:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

That's only because Native Americans are a minority group. -Gilmat

Is "how" racist? As far as I understand, it's just a common misconception among the europeans that they used that phrase. The phrase itself isn't racist, is it? Maybe Blizzard didn't research their native american facts correctly. Xavius, with sig problems ATM.

Don't Scots count? Even when they're stereotyped? --User:Vorbis/Sig

I understand that the Scots are not without their stereotypes (Big beard, gruff accent, lots of drinking, etc.) that the Dwarves carry over. What I'm saying is that Native Americans have gotten it worse in history (I liked what Mingonashoba used: Noble Savage). -Gilmat

You forgot haggis! --Super Bhaal 03:57, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

WTH? the Taunka should be instant friends with the Tauren considering they are basically family. And what? "Bully the spirits?" You can't bully some of the most powerful entities in the universe... Baldr 9:34 9/12/2007

Tauren and Taunka: not instantly, no, there has been no contact between the races for thousands of years, so, while the races and their views have the same origins, they might not get along, as the Tauren shamanistic/druidic culture is based on coexistence with nature, and the Taunka (are trying to) subdue it. Of course, the Tauren already have allies/partners who are not better at all, in a way (basically all other Horde members except shamans and maybe hunters/warriors, but especially the Undead and the warlocks are rather... opposite)

Most powerful entities... The forces themselves, sure, but there have always been small portions of these powers manifested as a semi-lifeform (elementals) and those have always been subdued or fought by the races of Azeroth. ~

ŋ ɑ ϑ 10:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thats a lot of big words but then these guys are whacked lol ...oh... and... the Tauren and the Undead are best of friends ATM soooooo yeah. And despite gaming, pracktice of warlock magics within the horde is basically illegal Baldr 00:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

In a preview I saw them casting on a wind elemental frozen in a block of ice.--SWM24 48 00:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Wuh what? Link please! :) ~

ŋ ɑ ϑ 09:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd say they respected the ways of shamanism but grew a bit reckless, perhaps, the tauren could lead them back to respecting the spirits like they did with the orcs, that would be nice, maybe a quest chain idea Baldr 00:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

It is not bully as in control, it is as in weaken them or freeze to death.--SWM24 48 00:29, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"Horde" race?[]

I noticed this race is categorized as a horde race, but has it been explicitly stated that they are friendly to Horde and hostile to Alliance? As there hasn't been any interaction with their Tauren cousins for ages, they might be neutral, or even hostile to everyone. ~ ŋ ɑ ϑ 09:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yea, if it is just speculation then it should be removed. I haven't paid attention to info about the Taunka at all, apart from what little they showed at one presentation at blizzcon, so dunno what's out there at the moment. -- Raze 05:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

In any case, the expansion isn't near finished, so don't worry about it. Kirkburn talk contr 23:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Judging by the fact that the Tuskarr, a neutral faction, are "beset" by taunka i'm thinking these guys really are hostile to everyone, (which sucks).Xlel 02:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Just like how there will be bad Tuskarr there will be bad Taunka. But the second horde town in Borean Tundra is a Taunka (Winter Tauren) village. And so far Blizzard is still following their Blizzcon maps for towns and whatnot like they usually do. Actually I am curious where it was ever said they were 'beset' upon by the tuanka as I cannot find that in any article or the new Tuskarr page. Leviathon 02:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they'll be neutral to tauren.... probably not.

^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 04:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The "beset" comment is on the new page, i copied the text and put the actual word in italics: "The tuskarr's tribal affiliation is evidenced by the sigils inscribed on their tusks, and although they are a peaceful race, they are constantly beset by taunka and local murlocs." Xlel 11:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah I missed that. But just like every other race in the game (even the Tuskarr) there are likely going to be friendly to the horde Taunka and another group that hate everyone. The Winter Tauren village is likely a horde friendly group of them. Also I see why I couldn't find anywhere where it said they were beset by the Taunka. On the US page it just says "they are constantly beset by the Kvaldir and an arctic race of murloc-like creatures known as the Gorloc." and nothing about the Taunka. So now its a question of whether the euro site or the US site is right :p Maybe the Kvaldir are the bad Taunka. Leviathon 20:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Apparently the site originally said "Taunka" and "local murlocs" and it was changed to "Kvaldir" and "Gorloc", What's Blizz up to? Xlel 23:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I am just going to assume the Kvaldir are maybe a group of bad Taunka or they could even be the Grimtotem of the Tuskarr or a entirely different race. Leviathon 00:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Let Down[]

It's a bit of a let-down to see Blizz went all cheap and just uses a whiteish/blue tauren skin instead of making a buffalo looking model. Mr.X8 23:11, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

He is not a taunka. You will see them in the IGN videos. I left that because some people think that.--SWM24 48 23:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh that's good. Then we'll have to change their icons later on Mr.X8 00:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)]

If its not actually a taunka it shouldn't be in the infobox.Baggins 02:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone made an icon for them already is what I was trying to say Mr.X8 Talk Contribs

Well that's probably a fake, though apparently not simply a recolored Tauren set

. Still, they look like recolored Tauren, I recognize the male face as one of the faces you can choose from in char creation. Even if Blizz used temporary recolored textures for the Taunka in the playable BlizzCon version, I highly doubt they won't get their own models for WotLK Gold.

ŋ ɑ ϑ 10:43, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice Mr.X8 16:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I put up the picture, and yes that is the leader of the Taunka Village, all the Taunka faction members were just Tauren, my beleif is that Blizzard just used Tauren models on the Blizzcon server. Once I get my mid-term done this week, I try again to get my photoshop to work. The reason I want to use the software is to reduce file size, as I'm wowwiki doesn't want large files on their site eating up their hard drive. Even that picture I posted breaks the size limit. User:Raogrimm2

Keep in mind that what was shown at Blizzcon was preliminary. The white tauren models may indeed be placeholders. ---- Varghedin talk / contribs 12:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope so, because, it will be kinda disappointing to see that they are able to make more than 3 draenei breeds but then got lazy to make a tauren offshot like bisons. I'm pretty sure that they will use part of the walrus model (druid acuatic aspect) thing for the Tuskarr if lazyness goes far. If not, oh please, make a BISON, not just WHITE TAUREN *points to Blizzard with the inquisitively finger of doom*. -- Ravenore, the Necroshadowmancer 17:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

When Zul'Aman was half finished. They used jungle troll models for the Amani. I say placeholder. Zarnks 23:13, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

They are not going to stay "white tauren". The models are simply placeholders, which are extremely common on the beta. While the majority of taunka don't have it, some of the generic taunka guards have the "guild name" underneath their names that indicates a placeholder.Mibluvr13 (talk) 17:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I uploaded a better version of the icon. Fits the new model,

. The Taunka females currently use the normal tauren female models.--

^{{T1337 to the extreme.•CThe dragon protects me...that and my MG 30 glock of course..)} 19:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

No offense but that icon is pretty hard to make out... It looks like a violet blob, its very low res.Baggins (talk) 01:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i know its a glitch with my program. does that some times.--

^{{T1337 to the extreme.•CThe dragon protects me...that and my MG 30 glock of course..)} 03:43, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hostile to all?[]

I don't know but from all the info I've gathered it seems the Taunka are pretty hostile. They bully the spirits and raid Alliance and Tuskarr settlements. I know they are "cousins" of the Tauren but it says Garrosh only discovered them. Seeing as the Tuskarr are going to be pro-Horde I'd think it be best to label these guys as no affiliation until Blizzard states that they are explicet allies of the Horde. ~~Aroka~~

The second horde town in Borean Tundra is a 'Winter Tauren Village' which obviously means the Taunka and so far Blizzard has stood by their Blizzcon concept maps like they always do with even all the current info. It's pretty understandable that they would bully the elements to survive in a pretty much frozen wasteland to survive but just like every other race even the Tuskarr there will be bad Taunka which are probably what the Kvaldir are (as Blizzard edited out the Taunka on the Tuskarr page). Leviathon 01:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Taunka factions heading[]

We now know of one faction, the Kvaldir, who apparently, constantly go all 'Grimtotem' on the Tuskarr's asses, but is just one faction name enough for a taunka faction heading?--Mondoblasto 00:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

How do you know the Kvaldir are taunka?--SWM24 48 21:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

(Nods) Fair question! "Note that the line "...although they are a peaceful race, they are constantly beset by taunka and local murlocs." was secretly changed to "...although they are a peaceful race, they are constantly beset by the Kvaldir and an arctic race of murloc-like creatures known as the Gorloc."" "The Kvaldir are a faction of taunka that will appear in Northrend when Wrath of the Lich King is released. Not much is known about them at this time, except the fact that they are constantly waging a war against the tuskarr."--Mondoblasto 09:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

While it's a reasonable assumption, the fact remains that it IS just an assumption (also, the Kvaldir page is entirely a result of that assumption). The name sounds more like a Vrykul one to me. -- Dark T Zeratul 10:40, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree...Just read the names. Taunka, Kvaldir. They sound like differant languages to me, but I'm the crazy one....And maybe they changed it to make the Taunka neutral?Aliron 00:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Official Picture?[]

Now that they've updated the beastery, can we replace the horrid fuzzy picture of the taunka with the staff? They put up the full picture.Aliron 23:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Classes[]

it says that the taunka have connections with nature like their tauren cousins, although they bully the elements rather then ask for their aid. Im pretty sure its safe to say that they have shamans then. Im going to put under classes that they have shamans with speculated in ()'s. If anyone thinks that we should just wait instead please say so. Im also going to put that they know taurahe with speculated as well, it makes sense that they would know the language of their cousins.--Whitedragon254 (talk) 20:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it's probably a better idea to sit tight, as "bullying" the elements hints that they won't be orthodox shamans... maybe something else entirely? Also, their language is unknown: I don't see pandaren speaking Ursine. --User:Vorbis/Sig 22:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually i think they can speak ursine. I think i saw something once that said they could but i cant remeber where. Still Blood elves stole the power of the light for their paladins, so the taunka simply bully the elements for their shamans if you look at it that way. But i guess it can wait, i just wanted to fill in some of that Info Box.--Whitedragon254 (talk) 14:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Pandaren speak pandaren. They can learn more or less any language, however.Tweak the Whacked (talk) 22:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Since it does state that the Taunka "bully the elements", I highly suggest replacing the Shaman class with Dark Shaman. Dark Shaman don't ask the Elementals for aid, they force it, as the Taunka do. Westin318 (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Capitol[]

its safe to say that Icemist Village was once their capitol. But i just undid an edit that someone put that says Camp Winterhoof is their capitol. Camp Winterhoof is only a town, and i think that the taunka there are barely holding it. Its not their capitol because it was around before the destruction of icemist, just because their capitol was destroyed doesnt mean it automaticly changes to one of their towns, if that was true then the gnomes capitol would be that new village they made in northrend. And Chieftain Ashtotem isnt the leader of all the taunkas, thats Roanauk. Each of the towns there had like one person with the title chieftain. So theres nothing to back up the theroy of camp winterhoof being their capitol.--Whitedragon254 (talk) 21:29, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Icon[]

I made a better looking icon:

What you think? I barely could see what the last one was representing.

-- 08:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Much better.Baggins (talk) 08:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah sorry bout my icon, it looked WAY better before i saved it as Gif. it always does that for some reason, taunka majorly messed up. Frost dwarf still looks good at least. oh and btw, dont take the female icon out. The taunka females currently match the icon.--

^{{T1337 to the extreme.•CThe dragon protects me...that and my MG 30 glock of course..)} 03:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Sooo....[]

Is this a new horde race?; or at least a new skin avaible to the Tauren? Or is it an entirely differnet race that has absolutely no playability; made up word...I think. Lost-Blue 22:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Not a new race or cosmetic feature, but a Horde faction. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Taunka Females[]

From what I can tell, Taunka Females are identical to Tauren Females, can someone verify this? --Venixer (talk) 08:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I myself haven't taken the time to learn about them, so either bliz didn't want to take the time to make 'buffalo' females... or they didn't change as much as the males did over generations. But yes, they do use the same model as the tauren women.

^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 09:00, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

That's slightly annoying to me. I mean damn, Blizz, you went to the trouble of making unique human models for Kalec and Arthas...how hard can it be to make female taunka look a LITTLE bit different than tauren? Also, when I was in Tuurem once I noticed that although there were no Broken females, there were draenei females there. At first I assumed that they were emissarries from the normal draenei, but now I'm thinking that those might be what female Broken look like. >_> --Illidan Rocks (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

basicly they are all in a light blue color thats all that makes them different.--

^{{T1337 to the extreme.•CThe dragon protects me...that and my MG 30 glock of course..)} 01:19, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Well to be fair it would fit the official artwork for Tundra Coldhoof, if she herself is a taunka.Baggins (talk) 04:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Taunka/The Taunka[]

Note: Below conversation was originally on Talk:The Taunka.

I think this article should be merged with Taunka because, like the Tauren, this is the name of both their race and faction. Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Except that the Tauren's faction is Thunder Bluff, not Tauren.

^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 07:19, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

According to Template:Races, there are no other factions of Tauren except for the Tauren in Thunder Bluff. So this is the same thing with the Taunka. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 07:29, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

We've had this discussion before... The Taunka is the faction, Taunka is the race. I don't think I'll have to tell you that one more time. g0urra[T҂C] 08:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't remember talking about this before. What is the difference between the Tauren and the Taunka situation? Rolandius

(talk - contr) 10:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Taunka is the race, The Taunka is the faction. Why is it so hard to understand the difference? g0urra[T҂C] 10:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Due to the fact that there are no other Taunka really other than the faction. We might as well change the name of the article Tauren to Thunder Bluff Tauren. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 10:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Now you're taking words out from nowhere. You said that, not I. Apparently you can't grasp what I'm trying to tell you. g0urra[T҂C] 11:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I am confused as to what you are saying I guess. What I am trying to say is that the faction and race are one and the same just like the tauren. One page should exist about the taunka as it is with the tauren. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 12:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

And once again, Taurens are not all in the same faction... Is every tauren you meet part of Thunder Bluff? No. Is their faction page on their race page? No. How are the taunka just like the taurens, in this sense? The articles will remain separate cause Taunka talks about the race as a whole and The Taunka is the faction of taunka loyal to the horde. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 20:59, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

The faction page is on their race page for the Tauren. That is the whole point. I don't see anything but one Tauren page. That is how they are like the Taunka. Am I missing some hidden Tauren page? I am just going with WoWWiki on this. Just check out the Template:Races and you will see that there is only one group/faction of Tauren. Also, the "official" quotes I have read about the Taunka say that the faction and race are one and the same. One group of Taunka exists and they are loyal to the Horde. I don't see any other Taunka groups running around. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 02:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Apparently you forgot about the Grimtotem. The race is the tauren, the faction is Thunder Bluff. Look up your facts. g0urra[T҂C] 08:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I could say the same to you. I did not forget about them. I think you are missing my point. To help you, I will point you to the pages. Go to Template:Race_links and tell me what it says about the Tauren. Go to Template:Races and tell me what it says about the Tauren. Both pages say Tauren, not Tauren (Thunder Bluff|playable) or Thunder Bluff tauren. I am trying to say that with what we have on WoWWiki right now, Tauren would be the name of the race and faction. Now if you are going to say that there is the race Tauren and the faction called Thunder Bluff, those two pages should be changed. Now over on the Taunka subject, that should be one page due to the quotes that I have read (aka facts). Now if "The Taunka" are a faction but "Taunka" is the race, what are the names of the other groups of Taunka? Rolandius

(talk - contr) 10:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Apparently you can't seem to grasp the difference between a faction and a race. I'm done trying to argue with you. g0urra[T҂C] 10:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ever hear of the Forsaken? An example of a faction/race. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 10:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Now we have more example. One of them being The Frostborn and Frost dwarves which was changed, yet my idea wasn't good enough? Rolandius

(talk - contr) 04:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I support Rolandius on this.

...Ummm...ya. Not much else to say, since he said most of it already, lol... Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Umm not going to get into this arguement other than to say I had another reason to merge frostborn and frost dwarves for a completely different reason (race alternate titles), see Talk:Taunka. If I get this straight going by this policy someone will create a The Frostborn page specifically for the rep?Baggins (talk) 04:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

"Ever hear of the Forsaken? An example of a faction/race."

Actually in game the faction for the Forsaken is Undercity, and the race is Undead Forsaken, or simply "Undead" (according to the wow manual), you can check that in game for yourself.Baggins (talk) 04:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Point is though, Taunka and The Taunka are one and the same though. The Taunka is the only group of taunka I know of at all besides a few ghosts in Borean Tundra (and they don't really count, since they're...well, ghosts).

Please, explain to me why we cannot murge these two articles in simple words. I just cannot understand why we cannot do this. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Infact, The Taunka even has the phrase "the taunka race", which once more implies that they are the same. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ignoring Rolandius' extremely poor analogies, I personally don't see any reason why they can't be merged, other than who ever merges them would be crossing Gourra. ...and crossing Gourra is well not a good idea unless you like having your testicles bit off...Baggins (talk) 04:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ouch. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 04:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll cross Gourra if it means getting two pages that SHOULD be merged merged, but aren't being merged for...well, no reason really, except that Gourra simply doesn't want Rolandius to win this arguement...or something like that. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 05:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, I see no problem if you merge them. If gourra tries to eat your heart (or attempts retribution) I'll stand in defense of merge action.Baggins (talk) 05:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Yay :) Now, one question...how the hell do you merge? Lol XD Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 05:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Copy the releveant parts of one page to another, and turn the former page into a redirect.Baggins (talk) 05:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

And how do you turn a page into a redirect? Sorry, haven't done this stuff before, so... :> Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 05:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

#redirect [["insert page name to redirect to"]]

Also remember to merge the talk pages.Baggins (talk) 05:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thx. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 05:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

This proves that no one likes it when it is my idea. I am this close to not editing WoWWiki any more. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 05:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

No...no offense, but it proves you use poor comparisons...

I mean, you used TAUREN! Tauren's the least useful thing I can think of in a situation like that! Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 05:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I also said that The Frostborn and Frost dwarves articles were merged. Either way, my idea to merge the two pages was denied...and then merged? Rolandius

(talk - contr) 06:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Frostborn/Frost dwarves is also a poor comparision, it is not equal to The Frostborn/Frostborn & The Taunka/Taunka... Had you said "The Frostborn was merged into Frostborn" months ago you would have saved yourself a lot of problems.Baggins (talk) 06:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

As usual I have no idea what you are talking about. Why would I say something like "The Frostborn was merged into Frostborn" months ago? I think you are missing the point that when I asked if these pages could be merged you said no way, and then ended up merging them. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 09:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Baggins wasn't in the arguement before. That's why they weren't merged before.

Real simple concept when you use your head. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 03:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Toran is right, I was never in the arguement before, thus I never once said "no way" to anyone relating to this subject despite your baseless accusation.Baggins (talk) 03:20, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Tbh, from what I can see, that whole arguement was more about tauren, Thunderbluff, and all that stuff. Due to admins who apparently were too prideful for their own good, the pages were never merged simply because Gourra and Coobra didn't want to admit that you were right in that the pages should be merged. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 03:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

That's probably true. However, I wouldn't count out the possiblity that many of the faction pages might be split out as seperate pages to the lore pages in the future, to follow the Thunder Bluff (faction) page style and keep things to a single style. In which case it was decided to seperate faction specific information from the city specific information and also to seperate the Darkspear Trolls and Gnomeregan Exiles out of Darkspear Tribe, and Gnomes respectively). However, the new faction pages will have alot more about the faction than they currently have. I.E. those pages need to be expanded beyond being stubs. Add some specific quest by quest reputation guide (at least for the seasonal and repeatble quests).Baggins (talk) 03:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Neither Gourra nor Coobra stated that once in the arguement.

If that was their reasoning, I'm an insane troll called The Switch who refers to himself in the third person, all the while carrying a raft on his back. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 03:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, I doubt that was part of their reasoning. I mean considering that the idea to seperate out the faction pages especially the ones I gave examples was only discussed recently.Baggins (talk) 03:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Reputation gain[]

Note: Below conversation was originally on Talk:The Taunka.

Is there any way to grind "The Taunka" reputation ? (I mean fully, not ~honored) Loremaster A'noob, Godfather of the Noobhoof Clan (talk) 18:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

No, that's why they removed them (among others) from the achievements.... Maybe in the future, but it doesn't seem likely.

^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 23:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Makes no sense[]

Okay so Frost dwarf and The Frostborn is now merged, yet this cannot be merged with The Taunka? Rolandius (talk - contr) 04:05, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand it either, so don't feel alone =/ Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

It seems like if an admin comes up with the idea it is awesome. If a user comes up with the idea it is crazy. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 04:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are referring to, but the reason why frostborn and frost dwarf were merged has nothing to do with "faction reasons" but another reason altogether. The race frost dwarf and frostborn are alternate titles for the same thing. Kinda like how winter tauren and taunka are the same thing. We aren't going to create a page on "winter tauren". If another source calls the taunka specifically icemist tauren, we will merge that into the taunka page as well

If there is some kind of faction arguements for merging other factions into races I'm not awhare of them and can't comment. But my merging had nothing to do with "factions". If I get this right though someone might go and split "The Frostborn" as a faction page?Baggins (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Taunka and The Taunka seem to be more or less interchangeably as well, though. I mean, most, if not all taunka belong to the faction, and most sources imply that the faction and race are one and the same. Heck, even The Taunka speaks more for the race itself then the faction.

I simply do not understand why we just cannot merge these. Please, enlighten me, and don't use big words, for I am a dummy. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused, I'd ask Fandyllic about this issue. The only reason I could see them being split was if was to keep the lore page from becoming "bloated". The same reason why we split the faction/player race material out of main race pages... or why the class pages are split into several pages.Baggins (talk) 04:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well The Taunka doesn't have very much more about rep on it then the Taunka page does. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Infact, I think it may even have less about rep then Taunka. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Well my opinion either we have all the "the "faction"" pages seperate or we have them all merged. Your right it does seem there some contradictory policy going on. I think Fandy is in charge of this is he not? Maybe it also has something to do with the fact that there are taunka factions that don't belong to the "The Taunka"? Are there any evil taunka factions or non aligned?Baggins (talk) 04:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree, 'Taunka' for the race and 'The Taunka' for the faction.--Killogwil (talk) 09:56, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Only a few that I can think of, but they're ghosts, so I don't think they necessarily count. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

So what was the reason for not merging them if it won't cause any issues?Baggins (talk) 04:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

See Talk:The Taunka. I personally don't understand most of it myself. Toran Wildpaw of the Frenzyheart (talk) 04:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

GG, after reading it, it just makes me more confused...Baggins (talk) 04:45, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Maybe there is a good reason but I sure don't know what it is. It just looks so much similiar to the whole The Frostborn and Frost dwarves situation that I don't see what the difference is really. Rolandius

(talk - contr) 04:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Your analogy is flawed like usual, frost dwarf and frostborn are two different words.

You would have had a stronger analogy by pointing out that The Frostborn was merged into Frostborn already. So why isn't The Taunka merged into Taunka? Despite your weak analogies likely being the reason why you failed at explaining yourself to Coobra and Gourra; I can see what you were trying to get at. You could have been a bit more clear and picked better analogies that weren't comparing apples and oranges.Baggins (talk) 05:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I said over on the article The Taunka that The Frostborn was merged into Frostborn already. Do I have to say it on both pages? Rolandius

(talk - contr) 05:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Two problems actually.

1. Don't create two conversations for the same issue. If you must, give a redirect link on one page to the main conversation page.

2. Actually all you said was "Frost dwarves was merged into Frostborn" which on the surface doesn't sound anything like "The Taunka" being merged into "taunka". If you had said specifically "The Frostborn" merged into the "Frostborn" you would have made alot more sense.Baggins (talk) 05:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok I see... Rolandius

(talk - contr) 05:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

List of tanuka tribes/clans[]

Are there any tribes or clans of the tanuka race? Jlog3000 (talk) 16:52, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Split[]

Would the new blood of editors be in favor of splitting the article back into the racial and the in-game reputation page? --Mordecay (talk) 18:11, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I would personally prefer that, yes. --

DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 18:14, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

No opinion. Xporc (talk) 18:43, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Since the reputation doesn't actually do anything, I don't see what the benefit would be of a split. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. Other than a reputation grind and no rewards, I don't see any reason to split it. It only move the quest section off this page and duplicate the rest onto the new.

(^Sssss/_Slithered) 23:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Wowpedia