User talk:Coobra

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Leaving a question/comment in the middle of the page and not at the bottom will be ignored.
Past discussions archived to...

Category:Something Awful Emoticons

I came across Category:Something Awful Emoticons through random perusal. User:Unaz seemed to think it questionable and I am in agreement. I don't think these files should be on Wowpedia but they are used in varied places and I'm not confident I could straighten it all out. Would you be willing to tackle this? Aliok (talk) 05:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)


With new 'Relic' items coming in Legion (the equivalent of weapon drops), it seems we should move the current Relic article (which was RFG in MoP). However, there seem to be 300+ links to the article, mostly from relic item page. Assuming moving it does indeed make sense, a bot would be very helpful to fix all those links. -- Taohinton (talk) 02:53, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Most of the links involve item pages, so a bot won't be helpful. We'll have to change the code in {{itemtip}} to point to the newly moved article, but it might be best to wait on that. Blizz loves to change the names of things. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 03:34, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, and sure, that's definitely a possibility. -- Taohinton (talk) 23:17, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Named night elf characters category

Hello there,

In the past, I have repeatedly had to sort through the night elves category, which frankly is a mess. FOr the research that I am doing, it is important that the information is better sorted, which is what I was doing. Did I do something wrong? --Sacredless (talk) 18:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

If your research only calls for night elves, I'd recommend creating your own list somewhere either on your userspace or a spreadsheet. This way not only can you have it organized the exact way you want it, it can also have all the named night elves that don't have an article created for them yet.
As for the messy racial categories, do you have any suggestions, that avoid creating more categories? Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 22:04, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
I am more so curious why you are trying to avoid the creation of more categories. I did the research and found no policies that would indicate that a reductionist approach is undesirable. Why do it on my own again if I know me or someone else is going to need this category later?
Either way, you can't make categories more organized while avoiding categories, that's paradoxical. Instead, breaking the main racial category into several subcategories would help. Unique characters, categorical characters, objects, subjects, organizations. Something of the sort. Something less specific than "silverwing sentinels", which is a subsubcategory in the same category.--Sacredless (talk) 00:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
More categories just means more upkeep. I'm constantly having to move NPC articles from Category:Trolls into Category:Jungle trolls (and other subtypes), so to add more subcategories to each and every race for the purpose of different ways to organize them does not seem like a way to make things less messy.
Now the category "Silverwing Sentinels" exists because its a faction, specifically for the NPCs and rewards apart of it. It was never meant to help organize the night elf category. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 02:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
To drill down information, sub-categories aren't optional.
Can you recommend a tool by 48 hours of work which I can more easily mark the pages of unique, named night elves, so I can analyze their names? Because you are proposing that I do something that takes easily which I could have done in 6 hours. My userpage doesn't have the tools neccesary to categorize and sort all night elves. Can't you just let me do my thing, so I have an overview of what I'm doing? It seems like everytime I try to contribute to this website, someone wants to undo my work for an obsure reasoning or another and it's pretty frustrating. Sacredless (talk) 13:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea what the extent of your research is going to be about, so I'm not sure the best way to help you.... tell you what, go around and do your category thing. Link to this discussion so other editors won't undo your work and when you're finished let me know so that it can be undone. I know of no other quick solution since you're pressed for time it seems. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 21:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Don't forget about the elves in Category:Night elf ghosts, as they're not in the main night elf category. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 21:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
This is awkward, but... How do I link people to this talk? ._. Sacredless (talk) 23:34, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
[[User talk:Coobra#Named night elf characters category]] --DarkTZeratul (talk) 23:50, 19 August 2015 (UTC)


Ho there,

does Gul'dan (Warlords of Draenor) links need to be changed to (alternate universe) on pages?--Mordecay (talk) 10:25, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

They can be if you want to. After everything is ready we can just have a bot go through and change all of the links. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 05:01, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
On second thought a bot should be enough :D I realized too late that there are more than 50 links -:-/ --Mordecay (talk) 13:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:Blackrock Clan

The pages with Category:Blackrock Clan has been corrected and it's ready to be... whatever it is gonna to happen to that category page. --Mordecay (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Crashin' and Burnin'

Crashin’ Thrashin’ Commander can be deleted. I made the mistake of clicking through from Patch 6.2.2, the text on which used the curly kind of apostrophes; the page had already been created. -- Taohinton (talk) 20:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)


What say you, boss?

Categories are always a pain to move, unless we have a bot involved. I flagged it for {{c2c}}. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 23:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Celebration Package

There was no  [Celebration Package] for the 10th Anniversary. I asked Aliok about it, just to double-check, and she agreed with me. -- Alayea (talk / contrib) 03:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I know, its why I added a comment that it did not go live. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 19:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Varian Wrynn's article

Coobra, will you please protect Varian Wrynn's page once more? A different user has changed the succession and the NPC's status to deceased again. I reverted the edits but I feel it's going to keep repeating unless normal users are blocked from doing so. Please see Talk:Varian_Wrynn#Varian_is_Dead?. Aliok (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll protect it again if things get out of hand, but for now I'll just set up a notice on the page. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 22:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Article changes to items added to Toy Box in alpha

Hi Coobra, I noticed you changed several items to identify them as toys and add the patch change. I'm confused; I thought we aren't supposed to do that sort of thing until the next expansion is live? I was told once that articles should reflect the item in its current state, so PTR changes to existing items shouldn't be made until the changes are actually applied. Is that wrong? Thanks, Aliok (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

All changes made are commented out and are not shown. Only thing that is seen is the patch notes. So the articles are staying in their current form. Once Legion is live then we can removed the <!-- --> . It's just for easier editing. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 21:23, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Ahh, sorry. I didn't catch that at all. My bad. Aliok (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Source being changed to Sources by Coobbot

Hello Coobra! I follow a number of articles where your bot has made changes. I'm glad to have the new parameters to use for toy and reagent items, but why is your bot also changing the section heading Source to Sources? Aliok (talk) 19:53, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

That seems to be apart of the "general fixes" that AWB does, I suppose I can turn that off, though that would prevent many good changes from taking place. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 20:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't mind fixing it back to Source from Sources, I just want to make sure that it wasn't a style change which I was unaware of. Aliok (talk) 01:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
I've been looking for a way to stop it from just that one change, can't seem to find a way. Seems to change it cause the wikipedia stuff considers Source just like Reference and makes both of them plural. =/ Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 17:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


Hey Coobra. I see your bot is fixing up the lootbox to itembox issue. One thing I noticed when changing some of them myself was that on some pages, the lootbox template was set up slightly different. In a way that doesn't work in itembox that is. Some pages were set up in manual rows or columns by adding extra vertical bars "|". As you can see was the case here. I think that format is quite rare, but just changing lootbox to itembox, may create a few issues, that I think might be hard to track. Unless there's a way to find pages with incorrect itembox templates. PeterWind (talk) 20:31, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

There was well over 2,500 pages using lootbox, to my knowledge it is a rare occurrence and not something I'm going to inspect on an individual basis. Doubt you would want to as well. As for tracking the addition parameters on the itembox, its not really an error, so it can't be tracked. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 20:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
I noted that most articles that do have that issue going are bosses that drop tokens (cause it was used to split the tokens from the gear) and armor set articles. So that at least narrows it down for us. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 22:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Alright yeah. The others I saw were either vendor NPCs or old quest pages that was in need of updates anyway. But yeah even if I might have, in a way, liked the idea of doing that manually, I think the pros of just having a nifty bot do it, outweigh the cons anyway. PeterWind (talk) 02:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

I've reverted the itemtip change which caused issues with {{lootbox}}. — foxlit (talk) 16:35, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure how these lines broke the lootbox... testing through the {{Itemtip/dev}} shows it working just fine. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 18:50, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
testing /dev
testing /live
I've corrected the test cases above to actually use {{itemtip/dev}} ({{lootbox}} controls which template is used to render the tooltips within, so both tests were using the live {{itemtip}}). — foxlit (talk) 10:03, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Gotcha, thank you. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 20:54, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hymdall photo

i was going to give the halls of valor images for themselves as placeholders, any reason why you removed hymdall photo? - borgri (talk · contr) 02/04/2016 19:18

Anything smaller than 250x250 is too small for the infoboxes. Can barely tell what it even was at 150x150. More information can be found at WP:IMG. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 18:24, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
well, they are meant to be placeholders, so when someone ingame finally takes better images of them then they can be replaced, but i can try taking closer screencaps so they dont look blurry - borgri (talk · contr) 02/04/2016 19:50
JPG files are preferred so it would have been replaced anyway and the PNG file floating in the database unless someone actually tags it for deletion which doesn't happen all the time. Also the {{ss}} tag on top of the article stands out more (and it gets tossed into a request category) rather than a blown-up placeholder. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 18:56, 2 April 2016 (UTC)


Thank you for your welcome! ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xporc (talk · contr).

You're welcome. :) Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 21:21, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

An increasing problem with RTS topics

I am all for documenting the RTS series, but let us say that I wanted to look up the human town hall...

For Warcraft Orcs & Humans we have
For Warcraft II we have
For Warcraft III we have

And then there are the Navigation boxes. Any thoughts?--SWM2448 21:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I'd merge the individual stat pages into the main Town Hall page and merge Warcraft II Buildings and Warcraft II Structures (how is that not redundant?). I can theoretically see the use of having a main page with all the structures, and the manual pages are useful reference. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 21:52, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Maybe this should be a forum post. It was always a little redundant. Most Warcraft III creeps have a lore and a statistics page. One Wowpedian made Warcraft II buildings and the individual pages over the last few days.--SWM2448 22:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Yea, probably best for a forum post, cause I wouldn't even know what to do with all these articles getting created. It's crazy. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 23:40, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Continued on Forum:Redundancy problem with RTS topics.

Spirehawk vs Firehawk

Why would you undo my Spirehawk page? Fire hawks don't have the same name, the same background, not even the same appearance. The "Aspect of Rukhmar" is also a spirehawk. Xporc (talk) 19:56, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Same with the solar flare mob from the Rukhran encounter. Where do we have the firehawk name as a description for Rukhan and Rukhmar? As far as I've seen, only the  [Blazing Firehawk] uses that name, and that pet is listed under both the former but also fire hawk. While the mobs and the pet using the model of the spirehawk mount could simply be younger firehawks, I'd say that the blazing firehawk pet speaks against that. Do we have the name from a quest description or? PeterWind (talk) 22:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Spirehawk has no source except for the name of a mount, we don't name a creature after mounts. Firehawk has a source, Rukhmar (tactics)#Dungeon Journal.
Now, here is what I see. Solar Flare (from Rukhran), Energized Phoenix (from Rukhmar),  [Firewing], Aspect of Rukhmar, and  [Solar Spirehawk] all use the same model. So they are either phoenixes or firehawks. The  [Blazing Firehawk] may use the Firelands fire hawk model, but its clearly meant to be a firehawk/phoenix of Draenor. I'm fine with moving all these creatures to phoenix with Rukhmar/Rukhran being firehawks. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 03:19, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Ah yeah you're right I missed the dungeon journal part. But yeah it's not easy either. Because as you say, one of those you mention has phoenix in it's name, while the mount is called a hawk. The model of the  [Blazing Firehawk] may just be that of the fire hawk, but it is closer to that of the two confirmed firehawks, than the Firewing. The solar flares from the Ruhkran encounter does the whole rebirth thing, ashes and all, so that fits well with the phoenix part. Without having a confirmed name for those birds, I think you're right about moving the aspect of ruhkmar and the mount to phoneixes, and just having ruhkmar and ruhkran and the blazing firehawk as firehawks. PeterWind (talk) 04:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
What a messy situation!Xporc (talk) 16:49, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Generally is when Blizzard creates new models for creatures without any lore to back them up. We've run into this issue many of times. Which is why naming can get confusing a lot with only a space making all the difference. =/ Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 18:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Sometimes their classification helps too. Like Fire hawks are elementals and Firehawks are beasts, but since  [Blazing Firehawk] is tagged as "flying", that doesn't really help. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 18:10, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah also doesn't help that some of the birds now under the phoenix category were beasts, while others were elementals. PeterWind (talk) 21:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism and other loss of information

Hi Coobra, just wanted to ask a question. Wowpedia is the first wiki where I am an active contributor but now that I've been working steadily here for a few weeks, I am getting paranoid about vandals or people editing articles with too much haste and removing worthy informations forever.

Have you ever felt the same thing? Or are you relaxed because the Wowpedia team is already good enough at spotting troublesome vandals and editors? Now I find myself adding many articles to my watchlist even though I didn't edited them and I don't know if I am being too cautious. Xporc (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The information is never truly lost, even if a vandal edits in a disruptive way. Older versions can be restored through the history tab. Ofcourse you could say that if no one notices unfavourable edits being made, information is lost that way. I personally like to look through the recent changes tab every time I'm on here to see what people are up to. PeterWind (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your input Peter. Maybe I should start doing that... Xporc (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The only way information could be irretrievably lost would be by deleting a page and then moving another page to the deleted page's space, but you'd need admin privileges to do that. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 00:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Well, the thing is that even if information can't be "lost" forever, it someones quietly removes an information and people notice only a year later, it'll still be hard to retrieve the information among all the numerous edits that were done since. And that's only if someone notices that the information was quietly removed in the first place. Xporc (talk) 09:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I used to follow every article I personally created just to make sure it wasn't tampered with (in a bad way), but most people that vandalize articles will either blank the page or replace random words with profanity and usually only on major or popular articles. So generally I only keep the major stuff on a watchlist. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 17:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Movie characters

Hi, now that Durotan is coming next week, I was thinking of what was previously said about the characters of the movieverse. You agreed to have Name (movie) for their articles but I was thinking that with the expanded literature it could be Name (movie universe) (since some don't appear only in the movie). Thoughts? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mordecay (talk · contr).


Will you make the changes I requested on the Alliance and Horde infoboxes? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 19:36, 29 April 2016 (UTC) Well? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 18:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Deadeyes and Riflemen

Why the hell would you remove every single work I did without at least even giving a reason? Xporc (talk) 00:39, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The term deadeye has been used long before the True/Iron Horde ( [Deadeye's Piece],  [Deadeye Badge of the Shieldwall],  [Dominator's Deadeye Badge]) and is just another word for hunters or more specifically marksmen hunters. The amount of terms Blizzard comes up every expansion to use on NPCs is large and to make an article for every similar term with just one line description is silly. "Deadeye" is even used in legion on demons. Articles like this may start as a "npc title" but often just turn into a disambiguation page where Deadeye is used in. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 01:50, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Look man, you've been working on this wiki waaay longer than me and I have a huge respect for what you do, but I think you're too trigger-happy when it comes to deleting one's work. When I joined wowpedia several weeks ago I read the various policies and guidelines and some of them are quite clear: be bold when updating, never delete content without a poll, one person's improvement is another's desecration and nobody likes to see their work destroyed without warning. So you had your reasons to remove the Deadeye page I created, that's alright, but then you could have tried different things instead of simply undoing every changes I did in the span of yesterday: you could have talked to me so we could work together or you could have tried to change the articles to add the information you just answered me. What you call "silly" is something I find interesting. The Iron Horde Deadeyes were trained by the former Kor'kron Deadeyes and I believe that is something worth being written somewhere on this wiki. I like working on "NPC titles" very much, this is why I overhauled the Brigand, Bandit, Conjurer, Cleric, Necrolyte and Necrolord articles, and Riflemen/Sharpshooters/Deadeyes were meant to be the next step of my work. Why did you also deleted the "Riflemen" category I created? Too few articles? I was just about to tag way more NPCs with it, I just have so much free time in a day, like everyone...
I personally think it's great to have pages for the various well established NPC titles. Sure, if only one or two NPCs use a specific title, a whole page may not be needed. I didn't see the deadeye page before it was deleted, but I don't see any arguements here as to why Deadeyes shouldn't have a page. Granted there aren't many differetly named deadeyes, outside the family name that is, but the Grom'kar Deadeye appears in several zones in WoD. With all the different classes in the warcraft universe, I don't think we can really just say, oh well he uses a sniper rifle, he's a definitely a marskman hunter. As of right now, all the deadeyes are orcs as far as I can see. I don't think it's fair to debunk this as an NPC class, because of a datamined satyr from Legion just yet. PeterWind (talk) 18:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Agreed with Peter. The classes need to be well established tho and need more than one or two sentences. Then I see no problem. --Mordecay (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Deadeye article

I uploaded an image of said Deadeye article. Something like this should (if anything) just be placed in main articles like the rifleman one. And you're right, I likely jumped the gun in deleting it. As for the Riflemen category, seems to me it would just contain every NPC in it that uses a gun... correct me if I'm wrong. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 20:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

It seems, to me, making these articles would lead to making every type of article. Lets take murlocs for example.. would we need an article describing Coastrunners, Tidehunters, Foragers, Flesheaters, Tidecallers, Nightcrawlers, Streamrunners, Shorestrikers, Lurkers, Netters, Mudskippers, Puddlejumpers, Inkspewers, Muckdwellers, Coldbringers, Harpooners, Lakestalkers, Shorecreepers, Shredders, Gatherers... you see where I'm going with this? Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 20:41, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Certainly. While I wouldn't nescesarily mind having a list of the typical "purposes" or titles on the murloc page I don't think that's really needed as all the murlocs are in the murloc category, which isn't too large to get an overview over. But yeah I agree it can easily be a slippery slope. The way I understand a page for riflemen, it would have to be just the very specific ones with that name or a close variation thereof.PeterWind (talk) 21:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Alright so first things first, sorry for being so blunt about this topic earlier. I'm passionate about WoW and I can get carried away ... so anyway, there's already a page about Riflemen and I honestly think it looks pretty good. I'm okay with adding the "Deadeye" information right into this main Rifleman article rather than giving them their own page. I agree that an article tsunami is not needed for articles that are just too generic, but in case of Deadeyes, I think the progression from Kor'kron to Iron Horde is important enough to be written about somewhere. Another example I'd like to give are the various Blood Drinkers you can find in most troll dungeons. Those guys are mostly always wearing plate armor and two-handed weapons and they all have the same "Blood Leech" ability so Blood Drinkers are clearly meant to be their own special troll-only NPC class, and I think that information is interesting enough to be written about somewhere - but maybe not right into their own page because it which would be too short. Xporc (talk) 01:05, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


Can you do something about this user who keeps linking his youtube channel everywhere? --ShadowShade81413 (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

He is replacing youtube videos that no longer exist from what I see. Is that not the case? Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 20:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Most of his edits don't seem to be replacing videos? In any case he just seems to be advertising his channel. I can understand why we let Nobbel post his videos because he's a huge channel (even though he mostly just reads off Wowpedia) but this guy seems to have hardly any views. If videos can be removed that often without notice than why have them? What criteria would we use for the videos? Can you have a bot clean them up and tell him not to advertise again? ShadowShade81413 (talk) 05:24, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
I can see that in many cases he has replaced broken videos or added where there were no previous videos. So far so good in my opinion. In many cases he adds his video at the top of the page instead of under the ==Video(s)== tab, and in some cases when replacing videos, removes the video tab and places them at the top, where I would prefer the videos being under the video tab. I don't really like the "click here" annotations, but those can be switched off when viewing the videos. PeterWind (talk) 14:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't mind him adding his playthrough on the wiki, but he do need to keep the video under the proper tab yes Xporc (talk) 15:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
But the problem is why this channel, which has few viewers, out of all the playthroughs on YouTube? I think I have a solution. Lets use WTii's playthrough. He seems to be the biggest Warcraft channel on YouTube. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 18:29, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Recently I edited all the warcraft I pages to link to the same channel. There's not much viewers, but at least it was 480p Xporc (talk) 19:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but why exactly is the view count important here? PeterWind (talk) 04:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Well that was my point, number of viewers shouldn't be the priority, the best channel should be chosen regardless of popularity. But then again, how to select the best channels? It seems pretty subjective. Xporc (talk) 07:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. Number of views isn't a priority, but it brings up the question of "why him instead of anyone else?" If channel has a small following, that means the videos are more likely to be taken down, and we'll have this problem again. I agree the only possible solution if we're going to keep a sample video is to choose the best channel, that's why I proposed the most prominent Warcraft 3 YouTuber. ShadowShade81413 (talk) 18:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Well it seems the poor guy got his account terminated by Youtube... Xporc (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2016 (UTC)


Hey Coobra. Could you add the new currency [Nethershard] to the cost template? I'm guessing "cost|ns=" makes the most sense? PeterWind (talk) 17:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Done, also added the others. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 17:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Ah great! PeterWind (talk) 17:43, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Elite Tauren Chieftain

Hi, I was wondering if you thought should be added under an external link-section or not, it's not much to look at atm nor updated though. TherasTaneel (talk) 12:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Eh, sure why not. Snake.gifSssssssssssssssssssssssss Coobra sig3.gifFor Pony! (Sssss/Slithered) 13:57, 14 May 2016 (UTC)