Wikia

WoWWiki

Talk:Species

101,699pages on
this wiki

Back to template

Archive: Template talk:Species/Archive1, Template talk:Species/Archive2

Sub-TemplatesEdit

SimplificationEdit

This template was becoming ridiculous. I have removed all of the subspecies and split off the detailed links to the various categories. For instance, the Azeroth natives have {{Azeroth natives}} while the aliens have {{Azeroth aliens}}. This should make this template much easier to use and to maintain. As such, I am unprotecting it. Don't over-complicate it again. Thanks. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 04:03, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah it was and this is somewhat a good idea, anyway i added gnomes and relinked native to azeroth and alien to azeroth to the templates you made above, but could you make templates for the other type too plz?
Sapient Dragonkin,Sapient titanic creations and sapient demons and fel corrupted species
I think it would be best if we divide demons template into Demon section and fel corrupted section--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:32, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
{{Dragonkin}}, {{Titans}}, {{Burning Legion}} already existed and were already in use. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 13:39, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
But those have other thing in the mix and contain non-sapient species :S, those are more about factions than the sapient races :S--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:00, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Regardless, navigation would be duplicated between the two templates (as it already was). --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 14:02, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
And i can't add evolutions of the titans creations and it has warlocks and normal blood elves in the mix, and stupid species-
And it lacks information i can't add to those templates :S--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:04, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Why can't you add to those templates? --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 14:08, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Because the titan one is specificity for titanic creations and not it's evolution making some things disappear like kvaldir and sand gnomes, in the burning legion template contains normal species that are not sapient demons stupid animal demons and then divides things into major and lesser races separating sub-species from main species like gan'arg and Moarg, can't add void gods since they are not part of the burning legion,dragonkin also has many stupid races, and we already have one template for also the burning legion template you showed is a factional template like a horde or alliance template and not a sapient demons and fel-corrupted species template--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:24, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
also the creature template has it's own subcategory and isn't linked to burning legion section, actually now that i think about it could be changed to work like the mounts and creatures template--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:24, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Why did you undo?--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Why did you change it to link to the templates when the pages it was linked to were already suitable? --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:15, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Err no they are not suitable Titanic creations is a incomplete page and nature is a schools of magic, and doesn't exactly have any race connected to it, and it's better if we link all of them to templates like native to azeroth and alien to azeroth--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:18, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
How is an incomplete page worse than linking to a template? --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:19, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Because the template is a breakway from the original template, i still think this template should go the direction mounts and creature type templates took, it would solve our problems--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:23, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
The group links are not to link to the templates, they are to link to the pages describing that category of species. Then the templates for the subspecies can also go on that page. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:25, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Then some don't have articles, and what do you think of my suggestion to diverge it like creature and mount template--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:37, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Well, its preferable to link pages over templates but since those don't have pages (yet) it doesn't matter for those so much...I think it's fine the way it is now. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:38, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Could you give your opinion on the suggestion?, also it makes the ancients and elementals and angels unrepresented in the category--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:42, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Ancients and elementals and angels unrepresented in which category? --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:43, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Nature since it doesn't link anywhere--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:50, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
They're all listed in Eternals. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 19:51, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
You still didn't say a thing about my suggestion...--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:14, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
I said the template is fine the way it is. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 21:21, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Then it needs the sapient demons and sapient dragonkin otherwise it'll continue to be incomplete--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:23, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
What is it missing? --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 21:35, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
For example i can't add any of the other void demons because they don't belong burning legion and it's only connection to the burning legion is trough slavery from the warlocks, and if Blizzard decides to make more sapient demons that are not part of the burning legion, i can't add it anywhere except in the creature template which is not fit for a sapient category, same thing with the dragonflights, if blizzard decides to make to make a sapient being that is not part of the dragonflight i can't add them(there are already non-sapient versions), it also becomes different from the other templates because it has characters, stupid creatures and is divided on factional importance--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:43, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
OK, I'll add those soon. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 21:44, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
Thank you--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:55, June 5, 2010 (UTC)
I added {{Demons}} but with the dragonflight there isn't anything missing from this template except the dragonflights, so there isn't much point. We can look at it again if there are more sapient dragonkin added. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 01:39, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
I'll just add fel corrupted races.--Ashbear160 (talk) 10:59, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
Added Azotha--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:39, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
Added Titanic watchers--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:56, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
Remade the nature and eternals template--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:07, June 8, 2010 (UTC)
Added Faceless general,but links to General Vezax if possible make a article about faceless generals--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:22, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that General Vezax is the only faceless general we know of, and we don't know any information about them apart from what we know about General Vezax, including whether or not there are even any other faceless generals apart from Vezax. A separate article would be almost pointless. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:28, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
I removed it, these templates are for species, not individuals. Currently Vezak's article identifies him as a Faceless one, not a Faceless general. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 00:30, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
What about titanic watchers? User:Coobra/Sig4 00:49, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
Hard to say, but there is at least more than one known possible titanic watcher. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 00:51, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
I'll just comment that in cataclysm are going to be more and i forgot that i can't put information altered by NDA here--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:34, June 9, 2010 (UTC)
Added a link to half-breeds to below because someone complained there was no reference to half-breeds--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:47, June 15, 2010 (UTC)
Linked all half-breed articles to main template--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:17, June 15, 2010 (UTC)
Added various links to below of sub-templates--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:20, June 16, 2010 (UTC)
The grim batol raid preview showed another faceless general that is red can i now make an article?--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:12, June 20, 2010 (UTC)
On a possible Faceless general article, I would point out that Bone wraith is only made for Lord Marrowgar, as is Entropius the Void god and as was Thaddius the Flesh titan before WotLK.
And datamining (yes it's bad, but still!) has shown new Faceless general and Bone wraith NPCs for Cataclysm.
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 12:08, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
I'm not saying you shouldn't make an article about faceless generals, if you want to do that go ahead. My point was don't link to the individual rather than the species. --PcjWoWWiki admin (TDrop me a line!C62,301 contributions and counting) 12:13, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
Sure.
IconSmall Hamuul Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 12:16, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, i'm just bad at starting articles.--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:16, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to make a link to the Tol'vir, since they have been mentioned in the: Ask CDev #1 Answers - Round 1--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:40, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
With the cataclysm NDA lifted i'm adding cataclysm races(i asked a admin he allowed) if you see any red links thy are temporary until i find the correct articles to link--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:32, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
Can't find a link to aquatic faceless one so if anyone wants to remove it or fill that link with a article feel free to do so--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:45, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
I added the dark ancient that appear in mount hyjal but it currently links to Ancient guardian article feel free to change this--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:03, July 5, 2010 (UTC)
Would fungal giants be considered sapient there's a case of talking Fungal giant even though he's as dumb as ogre(which is sapient)--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:51, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
Accordying to cataclysm worgens are not from another planet and are native to azeroth, can I change this?, there's also going to be race that is currently coined as the dragonman i think we should make a template in the near future--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:42, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
I remade the Orc part in the aliens to azeroth part to include the new dragonmaw orc and dire orc--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:03, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
I changed the Nature and Eternals template so it considers elemental a category and not Nature so we can add new races to elemental category without sub-categorising to much--Ashbear160 (talk) 10:46, September 26, 2010 (UTC)
Added bog beasts because i remeber one in wetlands

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki
http://www.wowwiki.com/Template_talk:Species
www.wowwiki.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2014-42
77756
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:77HR2HKH6XVWCSQWC6S6UZ6JB4IPDGFQ
<urn:uuid:f299df06-0318-4e36-ac1c-a417b88a35a0>
2014-10-24T07:02:25Z
23.235.46.194
sha1:CYQUKGCNZC5NERQP2FZ57VMBIWZBEB2M
<urn:uuid:b09f9d4d-b626-4fa8-9cd3-f33da10bfbb9>
http://www.wowwiki.com/Template_talk:Species
response
<urn:uuid:36a8ca35-6b26-49e3-9376-581dd3d68b7c>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-16-133-185.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2014-42
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for October 2014
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf