Wowpedia talk:Village pump

Template:WoWWiki:Village pump/Intro

Start a new discussion!

The Name's "Passive"..."Racial Passive".

Greetings, fools! I'm back from my four month exile imposed by HughesNET! I found a solution that WORKED! HOT DIGGITY! Guess Wikia won't be needing that secure server after all! Alright, on to the meat...

Rolandius recently brought to my attention that Racial Passive abilities such as [Hardiness] or [Quickness] are lookin' a little...well...redundant. As you can see by the table on the right here (removed due to the issue being fixed), it doesn't say just "Passive", it doesn't say just "Racial", it doesn't say just "Racial Passive"... No...it says "(Racial Passive) (passive)". Maybe this was someone's silly idea of a joke ("Passive racial is passive"), but it does seem a bit redundant...
Now, normally I'd just fix this myself. However, I'm not at all sure what to edit and what NOT to edit in order to make it not do that anymore. I tried changing the Cast Time variable, but it not only changed "(Racial Passive)" to "(Racial)", it also changed "(passive)" to "(Cast time: 0)". So...yeah. Just thought I'd mention this.

As always, thanks for reading! ~ Doc Lithius [U|T|C] 07:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. g0urra[T҂C] 15:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks, Gourra! ~ Doc Lithius [U|T|C] 16:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wowrp

This might not be the right place to ask this, but I started WoWRP.com a couple of years ago, and it grew quite fast. But then it died due to a couple of server moves, exploits and the like in the WikiMedia software. Anyway, what I was wondering was, would anyone be interested in helping me get it up and running on Wikia? The wiki has been approved and I'm looking for sysops to help get everything on its feet. It can be located at wowrp.wikia.com and any and all help would be much appreciated.

As it's stated in the wowwiki article for the site, it's not there to compete with WoWWiki, but to let users post their stories and characters and build upon the lore (without ruining it of course). The old site already linked to a lot of wowwiki content, and so will the new site.

Thanks for reading this, and like I said, just give me a holler on Wikia site if you want to help. -- Eluna (talk) 10:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Did you talk to Wikia about importing everything that is currently on WOWRP to Wikia? That would be a big help to getting it really jumpstarted, unless of course, that you do not want the current content. --Sky (t · c · w) 14:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

They can do that? --Eluna (talk) 18:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Found the page. I've imported all the articles from the old site. Thank you for suggesting this. --Eluna (T/C/e]) 23:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Screenshot of large things

I'm assuming this Image:Red_Proto_Drake.png was flagged because of all the noise around the mount. But it was so huge I couldn't take the screenshot and not be in the frame at the same time. It could be improved with a new location, but I don't know how to avoid having two characters in the picture. I definitely don't have the skills to "photoshop" myself out. Any suggestions?-Howbizr (talk) 15:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I imagine it was because the picture is a little busy. I didn't flag it though, so I can only guess. You could try taking the picture in flight, up in the sky where there's nobody around. Check out Category:Mount screenshots or even better check out Category:Nether drakes. I just saw some absolutely gorgeous ones of the nether drake mounts. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 22:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually here's a perfect example Image:Swift nether drake.png -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 22:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Even if I screen shot it in the air, I don't own the mount, so I can't get myself out of the screen shot (it's just too darn big!). -Howbizr (talk) 23:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried zooming the camera all the way in and backing up? When you zoom the camera all the way in it basically gives you a first-person view where you don't see yourself. Also, a screenshot of a tauren on a red proto drake looks extra silly. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 5:15 PM PST 27 Jan 2009

If you zoom in all the way, you can get great shots of most things (without being in the shot). Appreciate you trying to make it better, but cutting it out of the image is not the solution, please feel free to revert it... and it can just stay like that for now. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 00:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Mmm if I click undo for this revision, it says the edit can be undone, but then nothing changed. Could someone else revert it, since I'm not having any luck? -Howbizr (talk) 00:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Reverted. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 03:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Missing events in Events API

Try doing a search (google search via the sidebar) for the event named PLAYER_TOTEM_UPDATE. Hits show up; it was listed on Events_(API) until recently. Now try to jump to the actual entry for the event; it's no longer present.

What's bugged? The event itself is certainly still in the game. I have no idea how the events list pages get generated, so I don't know where to begin looking, or to check what other event entries got dropped.

-- farmbuyer (talk) 10:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Crit chance goes down when I level...?

im a lvl 44 NT Elf Rogue. i was @ 15.35%, lvl 43....leveled up, everything went and then i look @ my crit chanc & it went down to 14.96%. i was told thats me lvl compared to others in this same level....so obv., when i get @ the top of 44, my crit chance will be higher....and the process starts over...right? thanx, jeff aka narun (malfurion)

-- Elbastardo1 (talk) 20:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

This isn't the best answer, but I believe this is a result of diminishing returns. Hopefully someone can give you a more specific answer. -Howbizr (talk) 05:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

See Combat_rating_system for an explanation, Narun. farmbuyer (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

The gist of it is that for every level you gain, you require more crit rating to gain 1% crit. So every time you level, the crit rating on your gear has less of an effect on your actual crit rate. This very issue bothered me most of the way through wrath, made every single level bittersweet, especially as I wasn't finding better gear. Graptor (talk) 10:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Dead according to lore

certain major lore characters like Illidan and onyxia got the status of Deceased (lore), Killable (WoW) which is all fine becaue we have in game or out of game confirmation about their death. but what about the more minor lore characters like Teron Gorefiend? since their lore importance is low the chances for us to ever get direct confirmation about their death is slime to none. therefor, their status should be changed from killable to Deceased.

in all of the Warcraft games and in WoW there is not a single case of a characters who was dead and came back to like without an explanation. and they were considered dead in the storyline until such event as happened. -- Gargar (talk) 11:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

The issue here is not him coming back to life (ironic you bring this up teron but thats a discussion for a different time), it's if he ever was killed in black temple. It's true, confirmation of his death is highly unlikely, but that's irrelevant. Without that confirmation deceased does not belong in his infobox. That exactly why we use Killable instead of dead or alive.Warthok Talk Contribs 11:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

since i know you're basing this on the fact you believe our actions doesn't consider lore i will just copy and paste my reply in Teron Gorefiend's talk page. out actions does considered lore. there are numerous examples of this. let's look at the wotlk manual. about Kael'thas "Rather than see the prince's plan reach fruition, Out'and's heros defeated him" next about Illidan "they began by overcoming one of Illidan's top lieutenants , the naga witch Lady Vashj. the emboldened fighters then stormed the gates of the Black Temple and confronted Illidan himself, ultimately killed the Betrayer" it goes on and on about Zul'jin and Kil'jaden. while i wish it was Maieve and Akama killing Illidan (and we acting as their army) it is not. the one and only character in game which was killed by us and was later retconed was Onyxia. Nefarian death was never truly confirmed. the closest we got to this was Sinestra stating that "he has fallen" she doesn't say by who in any other source including day of the dragon.

also, it is not strange i took Gorefiend as an example, as he was Ressed by US! again, another example of our actions considered lore by Blizzard.Gargar (talk) 12:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Warthok was referring to the irony that the centrepiece of your argument about lore death was, in fact, undead.

The "Deceased (lore), Killable (WoW)" status emerged as a violation of standing convention for two reasons: 1) because certain individuals were unable to accept that Illidan was dead and needed to be publicly reminded of that fact, and 2) because questions kept being asked as to why Onyxia was still listed as Killable even though her head was on display. The "Killable" status, in fact, is meant to include any character killed as part of plot or quest progression, and who is still in the game to be killed again, regardless of outside confirmation.--Ragestorm (talk · contr) 14:11, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand that. however, that is a good status to have. the lore is going forward with every game and expansion. Blizzard does threat events in the former expansions and games as history. or lore if you want. so should we. if you give the killable tag to everything which is killable in WoW why not expand it? you can still kill Blackhand in WC1 if you want. so he's still technically killable.

I believe we should give this tag to dead characters to differ between past events and current events (current expansion/game) so unless we know that a certain character survived the current events (Arthas/Illidan WC3) Kael'thas (Tempest keep) we should simply assume that characters we killed are dead by the end of that expansion/game.Gargar (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Minor problem with your last statement - WoW doesn't end. Even though we have new expansions, bosses like Onyxia are still killable, not deceased. edit: I see your argument that you can replay the Warcraft series. However, those games have a clear ending, whether you choose to start over or not. WoW is a perpetual world that never has a clear ending.

another edit with an example: I never killed C'thun, or Nefarian, so in my version of WoW they are not deceased. A perpetual world is a different experience for every player. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 16:48, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

you may have never killed him, just as you may have never killed Zul'jin for example. yet, he his still officially dead. i believe you can see my point here. Blizzard takes the outcome of the current expansion/game as official lore. if C'thun can die in the game he is officially dead in lore. same for the rest of the big guys we killed in WoW and are now dead in official lore. also, every WoW expansion is considered as a new part in the total Warcraft saga. this is why the WOTLK manual specifically states our past deeds. same with TBC manual again, Blizzard does take our actions as lore. we got so many example for this. i think we should adept this policy too and in the end of every expansion we should post a killable status with that corresponding game/expansion (be it WC2 or TBC) and deceased according to lore. it is so much more logicalGargar (talk) 23:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

"yet, he his still officially dead" Says who? The only thing going here in favor of blizzard considering them official is your word. Only the things blizzard specificly states are considered canonical. Theres very little room for speculation. Illidan is considered dead for this reason but i don't see any claims of "heros once again banishing" or "putting down the death knight Teron Gorefiend." (And no, Illidan's defeat is not proof) Theres plenty examples of player action being ignored, see Baron Rivendare, Onyxia, Nefarian, Azuregos, original Naxx, Scarlet Monastery, along with 90% of PvP actions. Part of the reason killable is used is partialy because of the shifting timeline. Were in northrend fighting Arthas but the defias still roam in Westfall. So when is something considered done/past? When it's released? When the first guild kills them? When you as an individual kills them? When the next expansion comes out? Varian just returned and killed Onyxia just before Wrath of the Lich King, after the events of the Burning Crusade though according to your logic she was already dead as soon as Burning Crusade hit shelves. And don;t go claiming retcon, i used Onyxia as an example but theres others and if you claim everything is a retcon than nothing we ever do has any impact and it's counterproductive to your own point.

Lets be perfectly honest. I don't disagree with you. I am in complete agreement that most of the big events we the players do are considered to have happened by blizzard, but thats just my viewpoint, i have no basis, no evidence, Chris Metzen is not on speed dial where i can just ask him. I just have my own conclusions, so i'm not gonna try and put that in an article. I consider Teron dead. It's a slippery slope, it opens up the door for more speculation, which is something to be avoided at all costs. It's a very tricky and sensative field all around which is why Killable was decided upon a reasonable comprimise. claiming everything as deceased when many of them may not be and misinforming wowwiki users is not logical in any way shape or form.Warthok Talk Contribs 04:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

look, i will try to make it short. maybe i'm not explaining it well. Warcraft works by timelines. this is why you can kill the Defias in the deadmines yet still fight Arthas in Northrend. they are located in a different timelines, this is specifically stated in TBC manual (take place 2 years after WoW) and WOTLK (1 year after TBC) about your "yet, he his still officially dead" you are not reading! in the wotlk manual he is specifically stated to be dead alongside Illidan and the rest. Naxx comeback is explained directly in WoW. you (the player) give Kel'thuzad phylactery to Father Inigo montoy way back then 3 years ago (by game timeline). this is also explained by Eligor Dawnbringer in Northrend. Rivendre was probably resurrected by Kel'thuzad as he was his servant. however, this is indeed not directly stated in game. Nefarian killer is not stated anywhere. just that he his dead. i got day of the dragon book and not a word in there about the matter. timeline is the key here, not the fact that it is all WoW

So when is something considered done/past? obviousl, when the next chapters in Warcraft shows up. TBC is the second one in WoW and advances us by 2 years. WOTLK is the third, it advances us by another year. WoW was done when TBC came, no more events will happen in that timeline. it's like that in all of Warcraft.Gargar (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, look, "killable" is a term being used by this wiki, it's not a Blizzard term. It simply means that in WoW you are still able to go back and kill a character. I'm not too familiar with the finer points of the lore, so I'm not going to discuss the "deceased" term other than to point out the difference in terminology. But here's my take on "killable": In WoW, you can take the same avatar with the same equipment and the same skills, etc and kill Onyxia, or Nefarian, or any other WoW mob, as many times as you want. In the single player Warcraft games, you would have to start over, recreate a character, build up their skills and gear from scratch and play through the whole storyline to do the same thing. "Killable" is simply a term used to describe the type of timeline inconsistency that is inevitable in an MMO. If you list characters as simply "deceased", it is misleading to WoW players who can take an avatar that killed Kil'jaeden and go back and kill Onyxia again. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 15:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Gargar i'll make it even shorter. It's not that you are not explaining it well, i get what you are trying to say, i got it from the very first post. It's the fact that you have no basis for your claims. No proof, no evidence, just your own opinion, and a indefensible one at that. That's the issue. I've already showed you exceptions, half of them you misunderstood (Naxxramas i was refering to our initial invasion never occouring, Darion doing it instead and most of Naxx's bosses never being defeated). You want to call Teron Gorefiend deceased?, provide a source other than the MMO that calls him that. Yes, the MMO advances, we know that from the little snipets blizzards posts ever time a new expansion comes out about the heros of azeroth. But the only events we can be sure of are those that they specificly state, like Illidan and Kael'thas. Or those events the storyline advances past in a different source (Novel, etc...)Warthok Talk Contribs 17:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Lore characters who are "Deceased" are confirmed to be deceased by Blizzard, in either an in-game book, comic (Onyxia), book (Sintharia), or other sources. Characters who are killable does not mean they are deceased when they've been killed by players, unless Blizzard confirms it in other written pieces. g0urra[T҂C] 16:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Seems like this could use a WoWWiki article to explain the differences for future reference. I know we have a category for game terms, but this is a wiki term. Where would something like this go? -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 16:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

A policy or guideline page somewhere. I think a 'List of wiki terms' page would be stupid.--SWM2448 21:37, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

How to make a RP char's page?

How do i make a characters RP page?? cant find it :S please someone help!

-- Spaxes (talk) 23:06, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I think this is what you're looking for: WoWWiki:Policy/Naming/Player character pages -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 23:18, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Ooops it occurred to me that you might have meant this page: WoWWiki:Policy/Writing/Fan fiction -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 23:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You might also consider posting RP stuff at the WoWRP Wikia wiki. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 6:04 PM PST 30 Jan 2009

Help me pls:)

Hi everyone!All my freinds know me as Rampaige AKA Ramp.I'm new to this site so im really not sure how all this works yet!But i'm sure if some very generous people will assist me with a small project i would be much abliged.IV been away from WOW for a little while and in order to get back in WOW i need to get in touch with some Freinds of mine so i can jump back in the great world of WOW i would like some of you WOW fans to locate a few simple people if this is no prob,My phone broak and i dnt have any of there numbers and my best freind has taken a little vacation while i was away.But pls if there is any (REALM) (ULDAMAN) players here i would be very greatfule if you could locate these few peaple for me:)Locien,Loctide,Prophanity or Gizmotech!My Email address is (streetsmart15@yahoo.com)when they email me i will ask a question or two so i know its really them and no body is fooling around with me.Who ever is nice enouph to do this task for me,You will not be forgotten,When i get back in WOW you will be rewarded.

Your freind Rampaige!

Almost thought your account was compromised, Rage. Don't do that unless you leave a note you transferred it from somewhere else. o.o --Sky (t · c · w) 03:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Spam or sponsor?

Druid PvE guide has an update that is a horribly intrusive spam ad right in the middle of the thing... but the edit comment says "(adding sponsor link - see http://www.wowwiki.com/WoWWiki:Working_with_Wikia for details)". I didn't remove it due to that, but if we have to have stuff like this, could it be put at the bottom or something, instead of right in the middle? --Azaram (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Fandyllic and Murph are our representatives working with Wikia on some new advertising techniques. They'll probably see your message here, but you might want to mention it on one of their talk pages as well. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 04:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I noticed this yesterday. What concerns me is that the whole decision was so hush hush. I visited WoWWiki alot in January but I dont recall seeing a header on a page I was viewing or any information on the front page. The consequences of this decision affect all WoWWiki users. I really dislike seeing adds on any Wiki. I would have gladly had voted for the domain change. So, why was there no header on the pages directing the community and users to vote on this important issue? Only 15 people voted on the WoWWiki talk:Domain page, that hardly counts as a consensus. I will post something on both Fandyllic and Murph's pages. Ifandbut (talk) 14:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I wish you had seen it too. =) I hate seeing ads myself. I'm not sure where it was posted or how I stumbled on it. As other people mentioned on the discussion page of the vote though, there's no guarantee we could have stayed ad-free indefinitely (while logged in) if we had gone ahead with the move. Fandyllic and Murph understand our concerns and will hopefully be able to work out something reasonable. Just let them know your opinion on the stuff you see. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 14:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Not sure how you missed it... it was on this page, see WoWWiki talk:Village pump#Domain name, which continued to WoWWiki talk:Village pump#A proposal - that would require you to designate a representative and then WoWWiki talk:Village pump#Looking to the future for database type content. It was never a hush hush thing. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 17:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply but the thing is I did not even know about the Village pump section until recently when I decided to try to get involved and start editing. Before last week I was just random user #39583 looking for some quick information. I'm sorry but something like this should have been right at the top of the main page or in an alert header on the top of every page with a dismiss button.

Also, I'm sure WoWWiki gets thousands of users looking at it every day. How could anyone think that 15 votes is a consensus? Ifandbut (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Because only a few of those thousands of visitors actually edit the site. Special:Wikiastats says that of all of our users, 637 have made more than 5 edits in January, and only 23 have made more than 100. --k_d³ 19:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, however it is those thousands of visitors who have to deal with the dumb ass gides trying to trick nobies into buying them when the same information is freely found online in several places. At the very least make them blockable by ad block plus, if not then move them to the bottom of the page so that the article flow is not interrupted. Ifandbut (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

They're also the ones that drive the ad revenue in the first place. By the very simple fact that they are the majority of the site's visitors. If they decide it's too obnoxious to be worth coming, WoWWiki will either be dead or a shadow of its former self in surprisingly short order. It's already seriously lacking in Wrath updates if you hadn't noticed. Graptor (talk) 10:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

spam filter blocking picture upload

http://www.wowjutsu.com/sealbuilder/build.php/442382/53.png is the site trying to put it on guild website but will not allow me to can anybody help me out or tell me how to fix it thanx alot :P -- Geesex (talk) 06:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 15:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

how do i make a new expansion idea page

im really new to usin wikis and i was looking through here and i saw the expansion ideas page but i couldnt figure out how to make one can anyone tell me how —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaberwaki (talk · contr).

You can make a new page by substituting the name of the page you want in the URL. Your page name should start with User:Jaberwaki/ and then whatever you want to call it. So maybe User:Jaberwaki/Knights of the apocalypse or something... I'm not very creative ;). When you go to your new page, you will be presented with the option to edit that page. Then you save it and your page has been created. You should look at WoWWiki:Fan fiction guidelines for the other requirements of your page.

And always sign your comments on Talk pages like this one with ~~~~

-- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 01:02, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Advertisement Bullcrap

Not to flame or anything, but seeing advertisements in the middle of wiki content pages is bullcrap. I don't come to wiki to see Killerguides links slammed into the middle of a page. Infact, I come here for just the opposite, that I don't have to deal with guides or tips or insider lore for the low low price of $29.95.

Get your act together please. This is a very shocking change to wiki and if Ward Cunningham was dead, would be spinning in his packing peanut stuffed grave. Not to mention that this is not only an insult of what Wiki stands for, but the editors and thousands of viewers that come to wowwiki. In short. Are you willing to pay those that add and edit content and pages for their work that wikia is making money from?

Please read as follows.

Advertising and use of free content

Often Wikia has expanded by acquiring an existing wiki's domain name, userlists and databases from a founder or co-founder. The original wiki is then shut down without consulting its editors or wider community and the domain redirected to Wikia's version of the project. In at least two cases the content is used under a Creative Commons non-commercial license, raising the question of whether the wikis themselves can legitimately be sold to Wikia for commercial use.

Once a wiki is on Wikia, there can be problems with inappropriate advertisements or advertising in the body text area. There is no easy way for individual communities to switch to conventional paid hosting, as Wikia usually owns the relevant domain names. Those communities who have left Wikia find the company continues to operate the abandoned wiki using its original name and content, adversely affecting the new wiki's search rankings. -- Gorivan (talk) 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Look like it is time for me to stop editing WoWWiki. I don't want to spend hours of editing so that someone else can earn more money, or help those game guides company to trick newbies to buy their stupid guides. --WakemanCK (talk) 08:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. If anything the adds should appear at the bottom of the page or in some form that can be blocked by ad block plus. I felt very in the dark about this whole thing as I stated above in the Spam or sponsor? post. I think it is only a matter of time till more people start getting angered by these ads like you Gorivan. Ifandbut (talk) 15:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Something getting blocked by AdBlock is really contrary to the interests of the wiki. Also, advertisers don't really pay well for ads at the bottom of pages. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 15:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Well yes, I realize this. However, users (like me) of AdBlock have grown accustomed to not seeing ads on websites (you cant imagine how much I wanted to kill myself every time one of those "Congratulations, you have won a iPod Nano" ads appeared). I know it was only a matter of time before sites started to find ways around AdBlock but the LAST place I expected to see the first one was on a Wiki. Ifandbut (talk) 15:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but unless you want to start paying for the upkeep of the wiki there is no other way for us to raise money. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 16:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Phooey! How about you ask for donations, and if that fails, pay the upkeep on your own instead of using the wiki as a form of income. Why should viewers pay for your mistake of moving it to a payed, for-profit server. Furthermore, are you willing to account for every penny spent? Money that is to be earned, from advertisements that are "for the upkeep." The main issue is the trade of free information. Information none the less that others input for you. I ask, how long will it be until a premium membership is needed to view content.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gorivan (talk · contr).

They don't need to maintain the site, you know. Neither are they doing this for themselves. This website has been ad-free for quite a while, but it's grown and that's necessary. Even Wikipedia raises money because *gasp* bandwidth isn't free. Not for a website of WoWWiki's size. If you want the quality it provides, you'll have to deal with it. Adesworth ^{talk to me} <imagelink>IconSmall Mage.gif|Special: Contributions/Adesworth</imagelink> 14:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

All of us that edit this wiki does it without getting paid, and all voluntarily. We are not forced to maintain this site, but most us that does do it because we like it. As been said before, you have no idea how much it costs for server maintenance, support etc. from Wikia.

I'd much rather pay donations than letting people see ads on the site - I don't except for the new ones - but sadly I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon. Wikipedia got donations in the end, maybe we'll see that in the future. Nobody knows. g0urra[T҂C] 09:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I to would rather pay donations then see the ads. I am wondering why the donation option was not even considered. From what I have read, it was not. Ifandbut (talk) 14:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind the ads. They're not the way to go - in my opinion - but I don't mind them. What I said a few times back still stands, however. Rather than attempting to raise more money to pay for server load, improving the software is a better investment.

Despite being written in a god-awful language to start with, MediaWiki is still a very good and fast platform. I don't know what Wikia did with it, but there's so much cruft that could be removed... so much room for improvement. Poke me on IRC about that if anything though, but yeah there's plenty of harmless ways towards a higher profit for wowwiki (and wikia in general). User:Adys/Sig 06:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Usually I don't mind ads either. But Priest#Sponsor is just ridiculous. There should be other ways to implement ads that have no influence on the actual article. As if the ad is a part of the content.--Iggey (talk) 18:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. I wouldn't mind at the bottom or maybe in a (left) sidebar or something, but reading 'useful information, useful information. ZOMG SPAM!' is annoying. As to telling them to pay for the site themselves, not really cool. We do all use it, and the money has to come from somewhere... but incredibly obtrusive ads is not the best way to go. --Azaram (talk) 13:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

You hit the nail on the head. With the ads being put right in the middle of the of actual content it ruins the flow of useful information. Even putting it at the top of the page where the "Project Page" and "Discussion" tabs are. Ifandbut (talk) 14:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Frankly, I would find the utter death of WoWWiki better than the current situation with these in-article ads. If they aren't completely removed within about a week I'm going to leave, going to very bluntly state to the advertisers in question that I will never ever buy their crap as a result of their agreeing to place the ad, and will do my damndest to discourage everyone I know from using WoWWiki in future. The exact opposite, in short, of what I did after I first discovered WoWWiki. This is neither negotiable nor a request. Ads? Whatever. Ads in the articles? No. Still trying to figure out how to delete my useraccount though.Graptor (talk) 09:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Prepositions and articles in quest titles

It seems that Blizzard does not work consistently with prepositions (in, on, before etc.) and articles (the, a, an etc.) in quest titles. While some are written correctly, others are just capitalized. For example:

• Quest:The Might Of The Scourge
• Quest:In Search of The Excavation Team
• Quest:Cleansing of the Infected

Should I just follow the spelling Blizzard used in the game? I prefer to write prepositions and articles in lowercase. The naming policy does not mention this.--Iggey (talk) 14:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It does too. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 15:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

If you refer to "followed by the exact name of the quest", that is just what my question is about. I don't know if this implies capitalized prepositions and articles as well.--Iggey (talk) 16:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, exactly as Blizzard renders it. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 16:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

WoWWiki Skin

I'm creating a wiki for my guild's website, and I like the WoWWiki theme (not the default, the one you can choose as "wowwiki"). I'd like to use it on my site, but I have no idea how to go about doing this, or how to get permission to do so. If you can provide either, I would be very happy.

Thanks, -- FarFromUnique (talk) 22:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It's mainly based on the Monobook skin seen at Wikipedia (and default MediaWiki wikis). Wowwiki skin CSS can be seen at [1]. You should also probably check out the further tweaks at MediaWiki:Common.css and MediaWiki:Wowwiki.css. Hope that helps. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 22:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Split and merge Glyph pages into Talents and Talent Builds

Hello all! I'm new to WoWWiki, so forgive me if this has been proposed or discussed before.

I was thinking it might be more useful to visitors if we were to split the pages for each class's glyphs into a list of glyphs and a list of recommended glyphs, and merge them with the Talent page and the Talent Builds page, respectively.

For example, the Warrior talents page has a list of each talent and what it does, and the Warrior builds page gives recommendations on what talents to take. The Warrior glyphs page contains both a list of all glyphs and recommendations on what glyphs to take.

Since glyph choice and talent choice are so interrelated, I'm thinking if we were to merge the informational aspect of the glyph pages into the talent pages and the recommendation aspect of the glyph pages into the build pages, it would make it easier for visitors to find what they were looking for and eliminate redundant information. Instead of saying "this glyph goes with this specific spec" on the glyph page and "this specific spec needs this glyph" on the talent build page, we could merge the glyph descriptions into the talent description articles, and the glyph recommendations into the talent build articles.

Thoughts? Obora (talk) 23:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Most of the glyph pages don't have recommendations, in fact only warrior does... but I'm all for merging them with the build articles... However, glyphs should get their own page just like everything else here does. It prevents articles from getting to large. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 23:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Recommendations are bad, because what works for you may not work for me. Frex, the 'recommended' beastmaster hunter glyphs on one website include the minor glyph 'revive pet', (No pushback when casting it). I don't use that one, because I have heart of the phoenix, and rarely need to revive my pet more than once in a fight. A list of the ones that may work would be ok; again frex, my beastmaster build does not include aimed shot, so the aimed shot glyph would be useless for me. Same with glyph of trueshot aura. Personally, I'd recommend the glyph of mend pet, which makes you have to feed the pet less often, but many people wouldn't. Thus, recommendations are bad. --Azaram (talk) 02:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Recommendations are not bad. What works for me might just work for you. What recommendations should have is a reason behind it. If you do spec into aimed shot then getting the glyph of aimed shot would be useful because of X. I'm not sure how you could integrate glyph recommendations . Maybe put them on the talk page or create a new page for glyph recommendations and reasons behind them, or you could edit the page for the glyph with reasons why you might want to use that glyph. Some glyphs should just be avoided and it would be a good idea to let that be known. As one example I give you  [Glyph of Possessed Strength]. Ifandbut (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

If recommendations HAVE to be made, it'd be better to put them on the individual skill pages...like "If you have this skill, glyph A, B and C improve it" like the 'talent improvement' section on Swipe, frex. The biggest problem with recommendation is either you have one person who is allowed to make them, whose way of playing won't fit a lot of people, or everyone makes them and you end up with a jumbled mess, like the talent build pages all used to be. "This build is exactly the same as the one above it but I put one point in Sparkly Flowers because I like to see the flowers" type thing. And while I agree that the glyph of posessed strength is a good contender for 'most useless glyph', some people may like it. Wowwiki should be neutral, encyclopedic, or you end up with edit wars. --Azaram (talk) 02:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, you pose a completely valid point. I guess the discussions on why this glyph is good with what talent spec should be left to Thottbot and Wowhead. However, maybe we should add a section to the skill pages that say "This skill is enhanced by glyph X because it does Y"? Ifandbut (talk) 16:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

There's already a section known as "Improvements" which glyphs can go under, for the ability and talent pages. Just no one adds them... Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 20:27, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Data needed

The table on the championing page is a great idea to have in one place, but we could really use some more data. Thanks all. -Howbizr (talk) 14:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I am wondering how you go about getting the numbers for the rep table. The rep you get depends on how much trash you kill and in all the instances there are ways to get through it with killing a different number of trash mobs.Ifandbut (talk) 14:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The way it was done in heroics articles in the past was the typical amount of trash killed was given, with a full clear number as well. Obviously some number is better than none while data is being collected. i.e. ~1300 rep (1900 full clear). -Howbizr (talk) 14:28, February 9, 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I'll keep an eye on my rep tonight when I do some heroics to try and fill in some missing numbers. Ifandbut (talk) 14:43, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I went to enter some numbers from last night and it appears that Nalumis beat me to it. Ifandbut (talk) 18:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

And with mobs now giving full rep upon death, numbers may be different than when initially created.

Icon broken

Can I get help fixing this? The image doesn't work with the {{tooltip}} template for some reason. See  [Recipe: Fish Feast] for example. -Howbizr (talk) 15:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The image isn't thumbnailing correctly, I've alerted Wikia. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 15:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 00:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Is that the same issue with  [Magroth's Meditative Cincture]? -Howbizr (talk) 05:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the problems lies with Wikia. g0urra[T҂C] 10:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Colon in summaries

In my watchlist, why do all the headlines (in grey) have a colon (:) after themselves? -- 17:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean a semicolon? For example, "WoWWiki talk:Village pump;" -Howbizr (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

(diff) (hist) . . WoWWiki talk:Village pump‎; 12:09 . . (+174) . . ShandrisForever (Talk | contribs) (→Colon in summaries: new section)

It does that for everyone's watchlist. I assume it's to differentiate between the headline and any editing comment that might be made. It does look kinda silly if there's no comment, but it doesn't really hurt anything. -- Mordsith - (talk|contr) 03:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

YEs that was my concern, it shouldn't show the colon unless there is a comment =P -- 11:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Noob with a desperate plea!

I've been a wow player almost since day one (well OK I started 6 months in!) And I've always loved the games lore and history. Before long I couldnt help but get my tech savvy brother to help me explore all the hidden content - from Hyjal and the great tree to a wierd place filled with groovy mushrooms that will probably never see the light of day. Then of course were the unopened areas of eastern kingdoms that when hacked are just empty spaces (such as, on the other continant, the Pandaran starting area)

My irrational interest in unaccesible Azeroth brought me to wowwiki, but I can hardly find anything that satisfies my craving! Yes thiers bits on the Pandarans and not even half as much as I now on Hyjal. Am I looking in the wrong places or does wowwiki have a plathora articles on the hidden/ un exploited content I crave? If so can someone point me in the right direction! If not can I plea with the eager contributors of wowwiki to add this stuff. As such information from what I can gather is slim I will do what I can to addto it , but I'd love it if wowwiki had a whole/fuller section on this stuff. -- I'd love to know more about Southern Kalimdor - Theres space in between Silithus and Ungoro almost doubling HFP thats just not used. - What about all the various stuff scattered across the coastlines? - Or the inaccesible areas with no names on the proper maps? --- What about Nessy? - What are the hidden Islands about you can find when you hack the game? - Or the massive maps (like the mushroom filled terrain I found) found in hacking sessions, what were they ment to be? Was the one I found a prototype Zangarmarsh?

theres so much more locked hidden or obvious that I can't find questions to. Please help! --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Benji mon (talk · contr).

Most of what you are looking for is expressly against our policy. Sorry. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 21:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Mithril ore price

i would like to the the going rates in all servers for a stack of mithril ore. just to compare the diffrence in price. if u have time check the iron, gold, truesilver,ect. the more info the better. thanks. i will write my servers prices after i get back from work.

-- Chachi6971 (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

check Wowhead - (average) Buyout price: 1 50(for a single ore, a stack would be 20 times that)

WoWWiki is not the place for this, though. Especially not hand-gathered prices, which can vary heavily over time even on the same server. ~ Nathanyel (talk) 18:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The most accurate way to answer pricing questions in general is to run an addon like auctioneer to collect data overtime, or to look at all server averages overtime (median & averages available) on Allakhazam. There might be other tips and tricks on various auction house pages. -Howbizr (talk) 00:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, wowecon is probably more what you have in mind. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 14:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy Poke: Quest: Field Duty

I've tagged Quest:Field Duty for renaming. Please go here and suggest other names if you wish. Or perhaps, try and talk me out of it. :) --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Village Pump page length

At 262k, is it time to archive parts of this off again? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. g0urra[T҂C] 07:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 23:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Noobie's question

Hi all,

I'm totally new to this whole Wiki thing but I wanted to create a page for my guild (following the guidelines and restrictions of Wowwiki of course) but problem is that I simply can't get it "out in the system" once it's done. If I type guild name, server name and location into the search engine, it finds nothing. Although I saved my work and all that.

I've read most guides in here and wasn't able to find anyone explaining how to make the pages appear on the actual Wowwiki but if it's right under my nose, I apologize sincerely. Same thing goes if this is the wrong place to post these kind of questions :)

Thanks in advance,

Drenaus of Runetotem EU -- Drenaus (talk) 12:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Your guild page was moved to Guild:Prophecy (Runetotem EU)‎ as it's the proper name - the server name should be in brackets, which was not the case with "Guild:Prophecy Runetotem EU". g0urra[T҂C] 12:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Images needed

If anyone is good at adding images in batch, we seem to be missing the ones for the Honorable Kill achievement line. See here. -Howbizr (talk) 14:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

To what are you referring... the icon? Look here Category:WoW Icons: Achievement PVP, I personally added all the off colored ones. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 21:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Personal names in section headings

My main interest in this is in talent builds. I had some problems recently with another contributor replacing common builds with ones named after himself and getting in a tizz when I edited the content and removed his name (I figured it's now 30% mine and I ripped 40% of that from a previous revision by another user, why should one person's name be at the top?). I was reading WW:PA and the policy says some very sensible things about the subject such as personalised content discouraging edits and the problems of giving credit once multiple people have edited it, but the policy seems to specifically apply to article names and not to any smaller units of content.

The logic seems to apply just as well, I thought I'd garner some opinions on whether the policy should be extended, whether it actually does apply as it is, whether talent builds are exceptional because they're by definition based on opinion (I disagree with this but thought I'd mention it), whether it's not worth bothering with and just wing it if it comes up again, or if I'm just wrong...

My problem seems to be solved after another editor got involved so I'm only interested for the future. -- Binkyuk (talk) 18:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

"Branding" in main namespace article contributions is not friendly to the wiki metaphor of multiple editors. Personalized stuff should be kept to the user namespace as much as possible. --PcjWowpedia wiki manager (TDrop me a line!•C207,729 contributions and counting) 18:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Talking on behalf of Mr.X8

He told me that for some reason the spam filter is blocking hum from typing the words "hi", "fa", and the letter P. We would really appreciate it if you could fix it. Thank you! --User:Airiph/sig 03:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)