Outland Arena charactersEdit

We would appreciate it you either used a blank citation template on the specific details you're questioning, or else something on the talk pages. We're not telepathic- we can't fix it unless we know what's supposed to be wrong. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 03:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

How would I use a blank citation template? --Austin P 12:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Type {{fact}}; that should make it say [citation needed].--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 12:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay. But the problem is is that it's the whole article. The only place I've seen that information is Lunar Falls, and we know how they are with fabricating backstories. The reason why I didn't put anything in the talk pages was because I'd be repeating myself. --Austin P 12:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

You should have at least put something on one of the talk pages. Just slapping an accuracy tab on an article without saying anything doesn't do anything except make someone annoyed, who will then remove it and be wary of you.--12:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

My analysis of Illidan StormrageEdit

This is my take on Illidan Stormrage. I've thought a lot about his motives and methods, and think that of all the characters in Warcraft, he's the one who deserves a deeper look. Let's begin at the War of the Ancients.

Illidan's a bit of a jerk throughout the saga, but for the most part I don't think he was bad, just thoughtless. He does what he does with no regard to the consequences, and once he's set on a path he won't consider another unless he's forced too. During the fight with the demons, Rhonin is put off by Illidan's brutal methods of dispatching them. Personally, since they're demons I don't really care how he gets rid of them. He could kill them by forcing them to eat themselves for all I care. However, later in the story, Illidan's erratic spellcasting leads to the death of several Night Elves. Rhonin attempts to tell him, but is interrupted before he can do so. Illidan can be faulted for being reckless, but we never find out how he would've reacted to the news had Rhonin reached them. Later still, Illidan is fascinated by the news of the Nathrezim raising the dead, although he wisely doesn't tell the others so. I don't think this was evil, I see it as Illidan being pragmatic. After all, raising the dead worked wonders for the Scourge in their conquest.

Then we get to Illidan's rejection by Tyrande, even though she claims that she hasn't chosen yet. At this point, Illidan still doesn't realize the value of Malfurion's druidic abilities, and he ironically thinks that Malfurion's actions are too dangerous. Illidan's frustration is understandable. All his life he's been told that he was destined for greatness. Indeed, he's one of the most powerful spellcasters among their number, easily killing many of them despite not being of the Kaldorei elite. And yet, he lost his love to his brother, even though he worked harder to win Tyrande's favor. This brings about conflicted feelings. Even Illidan doesn't want to hate his own brother. Unfortunately, Xavius is there to manipulate Illidan's thoughts and nudge him down a darker path. A little while later, Illidan apparently defects to the Legion.

Unlike in the original version, this time Illidan is planning to screw up the Legion's plans and cast them back to the Nether. Soon after, Sargeras grants Illidan his new eyes and auguments his powers. Illidan becomes increasingly dangerous after this point, especially when he meets back up with Tyrande. It's not directly said that Sargeras' gifts negatively affected Illidan's personality, but it seems very possible. While it's not impossible for a person to use the demons powers without becoming corrupted, it takes a lot of careful use and Illidan's not the type. He throws himself into his power and assumes that he'll know how to use it properly. And hey, why would Sargeras increase the power of a stranger without doing something to heighten the chances of him truly serving him?

After all's said and done, the races are regrouping at Mount Hyjal, and Illidan's not a happy camper. Even though he still doesn't see what was wrong with his plan and how he went about it, the night elves still misunderstood what he meant to do. They think that he really turned, and that it was only Malfurion's influence that brought him back. Upstaged by his brother, and this time for no reason. Illidan is also miffed that the Night Elves even look upon Malfurion's antlers with awe, but react with disgust to his new eyes. Obviously, since Illidan's eyes came from Sargeras, and Malfurion's antlers came from the druidic magic that helped save Azeroth, anyone would have to side with the Night Elves on this on. But even so, Illidan's eyes sound much more useful than Malfurion's antlers, and the racial vanity of the Night Elves make it significant no matter what the circumstances.

After Illidan's done brooding, he sets to work creating a new Well of Eternity. Halfway though his task, he's discovered by a group of Night Elves. Illidan's developed a strong sense of paranoia by now and thinks they want to keep the Well's powers to themselves. Shocked by what he's doing, they order him to stop, and when they bring up his brother, Illidan snaps and opens fire on them, killing several and is then subdued by Malfurion. I like to think that what he did he did in anger, not a calculated intention of killing them. It doesn't make them any less dead, of course. This happens in the first book as well, when Illidan nearly kills Brox after Tyrande scolds him for harming him.

Many people in the Warcraft universe blame Illidan for the Legion coming back, thinking that if the Well was never created they never would've bothered or been able to return. I have my doubts about this. The Legion's goal was to destroy all life in the universe. Consuming any magic along the way was just a side benefit. Assuming they could've found Azeroth, surely they would've tried again. Hundreds of planets destroyed and species extinguished, and yet this one planet was able to drive them back. The obsession of the one that got away.

Fast foward 10'000 years to the Legions second coming. Tyrande frees Illidan, who's glad to see her but still holds grudges against Malfurion and the other Night Elves. Let me point out that Illidan says that he'll help because he once cared for Tyrande, as if his feelings for her have diminished. Later in Felwood, Illidan is seething that Malfurion and the other Night Elves still see him as no better than the demons. I think this shows that while Illidan openly rejects the Night Elves, he still desires acceptance and understanding from them. Anyway, Arthas comes along and points him in the direction of the Skull of Gul'dan. Illidan fights his way to the skull and considers the power the skull holds. Even though he's had 10'000 years to think about it, Illidan still hasn't quite figured out why absorbing power wielded by pure evil may not be the best idea. Regardless, he consumes the skull and proceeds to wipe Tichondrius off the face of the Earth. Malfurion banishes him, and he goes without a fight.

It's unknown what Illidan was doing or planned to do after leaving, but not long after he's visited by Kil'jaeden. He takes up Kil'jaeden on his offer to destroy the Lich King. He summons the Naga and sets out for the Tomb of Sargeras. Along the way, he and the Naga apparently decimate several Night Elf villages. Yeah, I've got no justification for this, especially since Illidan and his crew could've traveled by water and bypass the villiages, and probably could've stolen the boats easily. After obtaining the Eye of Sargeras, Illidan sets his forces on the Watchers. One could argue that right or wrong, Maiev was trying to capture him so it would make sense for him to defend himself. But Illidan had Maiev vastly outmatched, and likely could've walked away any time he chose. Malfurion and Tyrande arrive and lay siege to Illidan's base. Illidan is bothered by Tyrande's presence and is upset to find out that she regrets releasing him and thinks he's become a monster. Again this shows that despite Illidan's attempts at hate or indifference, he still habors feelings for Tyrande and desires some form of understanding.

Once on Azeroth, Illidan has his naga set up the Eye to destroy the Frozen Throne. Of course, the spell doesn't strike just at that particular spot, and Illidan thinks nothing of the side effects of the Eye's spell. After the Eye is destroyed, Illidan is furious because he was trying to wipe out the Scourge, but is taken aback when Malfurion tells him that Tyrande is dead. I think this is a significant turning point in Illidan's character. Even though she ended up being alive, the news that Tyrande was dead finally brought him to his senses and made him realize that his actions may have consequences. If you'll notice, after this point Illidan becomes much calmer and more willing to think out his actions. After rescuing Tyrande, Illidan decides to make peace with Malfurion and leave. In addition to escaping Kil'jaeden, perhaps he felt that there was nothing left for him on Azeroth.

I don't know if Illidan had any other plans after taking Outland, but from the missions in the Frozen Throne it seemed to me like he just wanted a place where he could rule and be left alone. Everything he does on Outland is to demons and fel orcs, so no problems here. Sadly, it doesn't quite work out and Kil'jaeden confronts him anyway (He was nice enough to wait until Illidan had conquered Outland though). Kil'jaeden's a pretty hard guy to say no to, so Illidan decides to try for a direct strike at the Frozen Throne. Illidan invades Northrend, engages in a massive fight with the Scourge, but is still unable to prevent Arthas from freeing Ner'zhul.

I haven't played the Burning Crusade so I can't comment much on it. I can look up information, but I can't be sure that I haven't missed any subtleties. But it's very easy to see why Illidan lost his mind. He's given up so much for his power; his family, his race and his home. Yet despite his sacrifices, he's almost always put into a position where's he forced to go up against someone stronger than him. It must suck pretty bad, to have given away everything for ultimately nothing.

I wouldn't argue with any official classification that Illidan is evil. But from my personal perception, I don't see Illidan as a bad guy. I don't even see him as an anti-hero. Illidan is just Illidan. Like the instruction manual says, his affiliation is none. Sometimes he does bad things, sometimes he does good things, and often he does bad things with good intentions.

A side note about Malfurion. I like to think that Malfurion doesn't so much hate Illidan, as he does the fact that he's forced to hate him. He doesn't want to hate Illidan, but Illidan kept making new mistakes without accepting and learning from his old ones. Even a peaceful guy like Malfurion would be put off by that. --Austin P 02:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind if I comment here... I just wanted to say that I really like this analysis. It shows you've put a lot of thought into this character and his circumstances. I, too, believe Illidan has tried his best and ended up with poor results - I like to think that he's an example of the phrase, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". What I think is kind of sad is that there are so many tiny "ifs" that could have prevented EVERYTHING - if Rhonin had reached him, if Tyrande hadn't shoved him away so harshly (book 2 of the WotA trilogy), if he hadn't made the new Well, if Arthas hadn't caught up with him - the list rolls onward. What I find most tragic about his story is that he was labeled Betrayer for what he did in defecting to defeat the Legion - and in the end, he became the betrayed (i.e. Kael'thas, Akama). I also agree with you about Malfurion - even the most patient person is eventually gonna wear down and snap, especially since Illidan hasn't exactly been good about explaining his intentions. Anyway, kudos for this! - Aladara 05:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I was hoping someone would comment on this.

My overall perception of Illidan is that he's misunderstood, but like Brox says, he misunderstands a lot himself. --Austin P 14:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I definitely agree with that. Add that to his natural impatience and impulsiveness, and it's not too surprising that he's ended up where he is now. I do wish there were some way to redeem him, though. - Aladara 16:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I really enjoyed this analysis of the character. While he clearly is capable of evil, it's very clear that he is also capable of good. He simply seems to think that the risks he takes are acceptable. He has often been misunderstood or simply been a victim of circumstance (eg. Tyrande's love for Malfurion). I can't think of any other character in the Warcraft universe with a more compelling story or with a richer, more layered personality. After all the character has been through, he really ought to be called "Illidan the Betrayed". Even though his death appears final, let's hope Blizzard resurrects him in some way.
By the way, I have a theory that Maiev's obsessive anger was fueled in part by jealousy over Illidan's love for Tyrande, and that her personality is somewhat reactionary rather than sterile hatred. It would certainly explain why she hated both of them. I may be fanwanking here, but it's fun to suppose. Dorvelle 22:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Taking side with the "Illidan-Fans", I'd like to comment on this too, even though I might be a bit late :) I love the character of Illidan. Like previous posters said, he's mostly a victim of circumstances. I don't think he's pure evil, he couldn't be, since he does probably still love Tyrande, and he does in fact rescue her, despite that he is already hated by everyone around him. He didn't have to. He could have let her die and watch his brother weep. That would've been evil :) Of course, he's often reckless, but like Aladara said the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I wondered last night what would've happened to him if Tyrande had chosen him instead of Furion. I think I can agree with all the comments here. And I too hope he's coming back again ;) Poor guy has been through so much, he deserves a better ending :) --Ayun 01:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Ragnaros RebirthEdit

Actually it happened during the War of the Three Hammers.Baggins 16:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. I thought that might have happened, but the way the article phrased it is that happened after Ragnaros came to be, and all the sources I've read say that the Bronzebeard Clan took over Ironforge before Ragnaros was summoned.

How do you guys respond to changes so quick, anyway?--Austin P 16:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Bronzebeard was in charge of Ironforge long before War of the Ancients. Bronzebeard is the ruling clan of the Ironforge dwarves, and Ironforge clan. As for catching it? I read your edit message, and checked your edit.Baggins 16:29, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Minor editsEdit

Minor edits are fine. I think the minor edits to articles are fine, as long as its editing user contributed material rather than quoted and cited material.

However some of the stuff we have included is quoted and cited verbatim in order to show the original author's interpretations, and to show historical published record. Yes some material may have been retconned, but we feel it its easier to see what was retconned, and see developmental history when quotes are left in the format they originally were in. For those clear fix transcript errors, but avoid altering the text from what it originally said. Also if something needs to be noted, where future material differs, it should be added after a citation, at the end of the paragraph. Hope this helps clear things up.

BTW, I appreciate it when you have caught where quotes were altered by editors from the the original text such as in frostmourne article. Keep up the good work. Baggins 05:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. But what specific edits are you referring to where I altered official quotes? I can't think of any off the top of my head, aside from an edit to the Sunwell article where I changed Illidan's description from "demon" to "demon/night elf", which I only did because I wasn't aware the article was directly quoting something else.--Austin P 23:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you have changed any wording's intent, that I know of. I was just commenting on how you are cleaning up rpg information in pages as a whole, and pointing out something just in case you didn't know. Also you have probably noticed that sometimes we paraphrase sentences that combined lore and rpg game mechanics in order to distill the lore intent, but avoid it sounding to mechanical.Baggins 19:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I have noticed that. And to confirm one last thing, when you add notes to specifically point out an inconsistency, do you prefer the note to be in italics? That's how I usually see them.--Austin P 02:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Ya, italics, at the end of a section usually. For things that are fairly unclear, with multiple interpretations, or needing more than one line to explain, putting it into a speculation section, or note section is also preferred, with just a link to that section.Baggins 02:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Paraphrase vs. Transcription ErrorsEdit

By the way there is a difference between, "transcript errors" and a "paraphrase". Some cases the later is needed in case of an obvious typo, or editorial error. I hope you can tell when information is paraphrased rather than "trancribed wrong". A good example would be Tooth_of_Eranikus, which for some reason had "black dragon" rather than green dragon. Other examples is time setting for a book. A book's present may actually be the past in relation to the World of Warcraft, in which cases exact referencs to time may be paraphrased into past tense, and exact references to time removed entirely (I.E. "happened a few weeks ago", "three years ago", etc).Baggins 23:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe I've had any problems so far. Whenever I come across what appears to be an error, I've added it as a note but have not changed it. As for time, the timeline is by far the thing Blizzard is most inconsistent about, so I don't touch it.--Austin P 23:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, just letting you know that you don't have to correct every single sentence or comment from a book if paraphrased in grammatically correct way and maintains the essence of the original source, or between sources. Unfortunately its not always easy, but we have to maintain Fair Use and copyright as best as possible, thus why I try to avoid adding every single article in existence (although I'll admit that it may not look like I do, :p). In some cases I don't add an entire article unless the info relates to something people are asking about at the given time, in order to retard straighforward taking of information.Baggins 23:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
BTW, another use for paraphrasing may exist in articles if it fits the flow of the article better (a good example is taking Brann's information and converting it to a more formal style) for uses in articles.Baggins 23:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually I don't fix little errors because I think someone expects it, I'm just being a perfectionist. I'm a stickler for accuracy, so I like to make sure it matches up as much as possible. Though, I wasn't aware Fair Use could be a potential problem.

I also don't mess with articles if it's edited in a way to better fit the flow of the article, or if the information is rearranged in a way different from the books (such as in the individual Titan articles)--Austin P 23:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reason as to why there's two seperate articles for cloud serpents?--Austin P 00:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Lower case designates a race types (I.E. it should have a section "types" and list all members of the type), upper case designates an individual mob. The lore should only be on lower case page, and mob page should link to it.Baggins 00:37, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I gotcha. And just so I can get a better sense of the standards you typically go by, why did you remove the MG information from Carrion Grub? Too much information for such a insignificant mob?--Austin P 00:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Its already on the species type page, Carrion grub.Baggins 00:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I was doing these articles by searching for the names, and that didn't show up when I entered "Carrion Grub". I'll watch that in the future.--Austin P 00:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

note that some lower case pages may not be created yet, and you may need to do that.Baggins 00:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Why did you make crowd pummeler 9-60 upper case? I'm pretty sure it isn't in the book? If its lower case it should remain lower case. Similar to how we treat race names.Baggins 02:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It was like that when I got there. All I did was add an additional citation page, because the information was spread out over 2 pages, not 1.--Austin P 02:44, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm maybe someone else messed up what was already there, or added it to the page like that? Care to fix it?Baggins 02:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean the article title? Because I'm not sure how to edit those.--Austin P 03:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm finally finished. I went through nearly all of the articles in the RPG category as well as almost all of the monsters and creatures who have entries in the books. It was the longest and largest wowwiki project I've ever undertaken, but I found it very satisfying. Onward to potential issues.

The Harpy article, while containing most of the information relevant to the games, lack the RPG information given about their mentality and society. Since other creeps such as Quilboar and Gnolls have that information, I think the Harpy article should too. The Imp and Infernal articles don't contain information from the Monster Guide and Manual of Monsters. I was unable to find lower case articles for the Crypt fiend and Rock borer. The satyr article doesn't have the MG information, which doesn't tell us much about their society but tells us things like how they function at a faster level than Night Elves and how some care more about causing pain than to who they cause pain too. The Worgen article has MoM information, but not the MG information that tells us just how cruel they are, and also gives us a few tidbits about their society. The Mur'gul article says that they were warped by the Maelstrom, while the transcript says it was the Burning Legion. I wondered if this was new information, but I haven't seen it anywhere else. Other creature articles that don't have RPG information are Threshadon, Chimaera, Gryphon, Hippgryph, Mountain giant, Kodo, Thunder Lizard, and Wyvern. I also noticed that there usually isn't information from the Creature Class sections of the APG and HPG in the articles. Though I added certain information to several of the articles, in these cases I thought I should consult you first.

I suggest that the Sundered Monument article be deleted, since the creator just misread "Monolith".

Finally, citations. I expected to come across several citations that didn't have the correct page number, but this happened way more often than I expected. And almost none of the W3Man citations matched up with my Reign of Chaos manual. This made me wonder if there were other versions of the books that might have had the information spread out a little bit differently.--Austin P 18:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

First off, I meant making all references to crowd pummeler lower case. Obviously you can't do it for the title, but information itself you could.
More than one version of sourcebooks and manuals? I'm not sure about sourcebooks, but it may be the case for manuals. There is at least two versions of Warcraft 1 manual, the original, and one released with Interplay release of the game. Warcraft II has at least original manuals, and the edition version. As for Reign of Chaos info, some originates from the Warcraft III Mojo Stormstout site [[1]], and others from the manual, there may be two versions of the manual.
In some cases, a lack of citation might be because main lore was limited to one page, and other pages were more game mechanic information.
Worgen are from LoC not MoM. I don't recall that there is an imp article in Manual of Monsters, only in Monster Guide.
I'm sure we'll add more info to various articles, but it will take time. Crypt fiend and rock borer should get their own lower case articles later, once we get around to it. Some of the quotes, such as your example in "mur'gul" may have had been altered by over-zealous fans trying to incorporate their interpretations. I suggest just fixing the original quote. Edit: Definitely the case, look at the history. Someone completely altered the quote from its original version, totally changing the context, after it had previously been posted verbatim. Changing the context at that level, is not a fair use of paraphrase. (if it was a fix to typographical error, or to change tense of the sentence that would be fine.)
As for creature classes, I don't include all of it, but sometimes the info is interesting, and I put it in where it makes a point in an article discussing similar themes. I usually leave it out since it takes alot of work to reparaphrase, and seperate the lore from the game mechanics. Usually once you do remove the game mechanics the quotes are fairly random, and would not fit format of a reasonable paragraph, but just alot of random facts.
Again I don't update every single article too quickly, to avoid fair use and copyright issues. I've mainly updated a race page if it had info important to a discussion, in some cases this is because of Future race ideas page, or had little info to begin with.Baggins 22:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I meant LoC for the Worgen. I knew the Imp didn't have a MoM entry, but the Infernal has one for both books. And one article I forgot to mention that lacks RPG information is the Storm Crow article. Regardless of what you choose to do, I thought that I should bring them to your attention. Thanks for your help.--Austin P 23:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Ya if I get around to adding any of that info, you can check to see if I inadvertaintly added typos or not. As for paraphrases, you make sure if I wrote it grammatically correct, :p...Baggins 23:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Will do. On that note, I should warn you that while I'm a decent speller, I never mastered the rules of grammer and puncuation. It wouldn't surprise me if at some points I had rewritten parts that were actually changed because Blizzard had made a mistake.--Austin P 23:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Ya, I've had to add a word or two to some sentences, because the word was missing from the sentence to begin with. Without the word, the sentence didn't make much sense, or sounded improper. I've only done this as long as it didn't outright change the meaning of the sentence. I've noticed some people rewrite cited sections assuming that it was a paraphrase with improper grammar, or written in passive voice (they changed it to fit active voice), :p... I've had to fix it explaining that was original version of the text.Baggins 23:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW, a good case where a paraphrase is better than just verbatim quote is with the Al-mi'raj. Since original information involves a comparison to how its existence differs between Azeroth and other RPG worlds, the reference to other rpg worlds is not needed, only explanation in warcraft lore is essential. I've taken the liberty of leaving out any comparisions to other rpg worlds out of content from first chapter and appendix 1 and 2 from the book, where they existed. They fall too far into the "gamey" side of the rpg.
BTW, there are a few other cases where MoM mixed up the Third War and the Second War, but the intent of the article is rather obvious as to which war it means, I.E. reference to Scourge, or the Burning Legion. In those cases the trancript has been fixed so that context is maintained but that the correct war links to the individuals, said to be involved.
Some other paraphrases involve removal of any real world references, that made it past the editors, such as a few references in Monster Guide Web Supplement, to "Africa" in some cases. These have required paraphrases in a few places, to remove those references, but maintain the intent in lore, that its supposes to be a creature found in Azeroth.Baggins 07:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Daelen and Tides of DarknessEdit

Can't believe you didn't know of all the references where Daelen is referred to as one of the Kings of Lordaeron. One of the biggest sections is actually on page 72 ane 73, where there is a huge paragraph about the kings, and a paragraph about the "non-kings".Baggins 04:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

See, I was aware of that, but because they didn't specifically refer to him as a king, I wasn't sure if it fit the standards of citations. I thought that they might've been using kings as a general term.--Austin P 12:16, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair UseEdit

Well thought you might be interested. Here is a good example of a discussion, Talk:Scarlet_Crusade#Fair_Use_Issues, discussing the concept of "fair use", and what constitutes as going "to far" for quoting or even for paraphrasing information.Baggins 02:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.--Austin P 09:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


Hmm weird one here... I'm pretty sure my hard cover copy of HPG said, "to rough to be human" (I don't have my copy with me, so I can't check it). But I notice that the pdf says, "too bestial to be human and too clean to be orc".Baggins 09:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Ahh never mind I looked at the edit history, it seems the 'too rough' was something Angry Ogre slipped in during one his edits.Baggins 09:18, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Horde PopulationEdit

I worked out the math, if your interested, see Talk:Horde.Baggins 03:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Gul'dan Edit

Regarding your comment about how Gul'dan went out like a punk for how powerful he was, that has a lot to do with the fact that Blizzard decided how he died ong before he decided how powerful he was. He raised the Hand of Gul'dan out of the ground himself, he wiped out a tribe of Arakkoa with one spell, and they retconned his death to make it seem a lot more epic in TFT. Lckyluke372 (talk) 22:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not following your comment. "He died long before he decided how powerful he was"? And are when you say TFT, do you mean the game itself, or that they changed the events that took place during the game?--Austin P (talk) 14:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

bookkeepers Edit

After a lengthy absence, the WoWWiki:Bookkeepers are returning. Our goals will be the same as the previous group, maintaining and improving the lore pages, et cetera. This is a formal invitation for you to join out the group. You'd be doing much the same as you've been doing, but you would also be involved in Bookkeeper projects and initiatives. I've watched you grow from a speculationist to a serious lore authority, and I'd like to have you on the team if you're interested. --Ragestorm (talk · contr) 16:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I do greatly apperciate the offer, but my interest in Warcraft wavers, which means I may not be able to deal with the responsibilities of being a bookkeeper. Not only that, but I only have a passing familiarity with the site's policies and wiki techniques. It's not a yes or no, I'm just not sure whether me being a bookkeeper would benefit anyone.--Austin P (talk) 15:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.