Talk:List of aristocracy
- Please add
Chiefs (not counting Chief Engineers) and chieftains (not counting band members) High chiefs and high chieftains Overlords and High overlords Sirs (like ) and perhaps named "Knight " NPCs, since we have "Lady " NPCs Thanes (like ) and high thanes
- And possibly also
- Arch druids
- High prophets
I'm not sure if religious hierarchic titles count for aristocracy or nobility.
- I'm pretty sure the last 5 don't count as aristocrats.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:48, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Definitely not. And I'm not sure about some of the ones above either. Chief and High Chief are not aristocratic titles, as I understand it. The others can be. --Richeron (talk) 01:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I'll add an other suggestion. Distinguishing between Baron and Baroness or Count and Countess seems silly to me. The difference between them is exactly the same difference as between Actor and Actress, and there is no substantial reason that I can see to separate the sexes, especially when you don't distinguish Highlord or Doom Lord, which -are- different. --Richeron (talk) 01:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Need criteria for this list
Here is the criteria I propose:
- Has an aristocratic or noble title from either RL world history or clarified in-game that it is a title.
- Has a reason for being on the list (meaning no name should just be in the list it should have something explaining what makes them aristocratic besides just title).
- Must be from some Warcraft source.
- For now should only include secular aristocrats, but could include members of upper religious hierarchies if enough people want it (meaning support overwhelms opposition by at least 2-to1).
A very old post, but I'll comment anyway. On point one, I can understand it's reason to be. On point two, it's more iffy. Certain titles -imply- aristocracy, such as Duke, Count and Baron in humans. Things like Doom Lord not so much since I'm not sure the concept of aristocracy even makes sense for demons. In fact, thinking about it, Lord isn't an aristocratic title either. It's a form of address, that I'm not sure necessarily implies aristocracy... Point three stands to reason. Point four is a definite NO CLERGY. A clerical title in no way grants aristocratic standing. This is a list of aristocrats, not aristocrats and clergymen. Such a change would imply changing the title of the page itself. And I am unanimous on that! :P --Richeron (talk) 01:34, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
I haven´t found the most important king - Arthas. Where did he disappear? Or is he not suitable for this list (I´m not sure, that´s why I haven´t added him yet). And I think, that Anub´Arak should be there, too. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Naze (talk · contr). 07:19, 3 December 2008
- IMO, the same, we already put the High Thane, let's keep Thane grouped.
- Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 19:08, December 23, 2009 (UTC)
Maybe I should have made a new title for this topic, but I figured why not pile the neighbour discussions under the same title? Anyway, the word "thaness" is included in the section, presumably to describe the female version of this title, but are there any examples of females ever holding this position? Isn't it lorewise only a male thing? Even if there are ladies out there being thanes I'm sure they are called something else, for the word "thaness" simply sounds off --Amargaard (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- No. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 01:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I just saw Queen. Is this page getting slit again? I feel it is better for readability that way. It might be better for lore on titles too (Why was so much in the RPG? ).-- 15:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- I saw Princess and thought it was strange that a "Queen" did not exist. Did not know there had been slit in the past, but as you say, would it not offer better readability and improved ease to update it, perhaps with some "include onlyies" TherasTaneel (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- If I recall correctly, several pages were merged into this one, or were redundant with this and became superfluous. I'm not sure of the best way to update this page.-- 16:06, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah i'm pretty sure beasts can't be neither royality or aristrocats... the titles are just purely nicknames given because people have to call them something and aristrocat titles are impressive.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Actually there are a few exceptions to that case in this list:
- Lord Angler is a makrura so it doesn't count as a beast but as a sapient being.
- Lord Skowl is a elemental aristocrat, the hydra model is most likely blizzard being lazy.
- Shadra is a Loa so it's blurry because she's not a normal spider.
A few names that don't belong
Skimming through, this list is both incomplete and inaccurate. I'll be working to revise it, but in the meanwhile, I'm putting up a note and asking for input on the following: -"King" Dond. Not an actual King. It's a nickname and a reference to Don King.
-All non-sentient animals, which excludes Loa and beasts of intelligence like Lord Angler.
-Harold Lane. He's a fur baron - in other words, a fur trader - and not an actual baron.
-Kael'thas. He's repeated twice, and I don't think he needs to be in the Lords category as well as Princes. A note about his multiple titles would be sufficient. He could also be listed under Sun King, or remain Crown Prince.
-Nedar, Lord of Rhinos. Like Lane, he doesn't seem to be an actual aristocrat.
-High King Maulgar. Like Kael'thas, he's duplicated unnecessarily and should only be listed according to his highest title.
-Daelin Proudmoore. He's listed twice as well, once as King, once as Lord-Admiral. Lord-Admiral is the term used for King by Kul Tiras.
-Aiden Perenolde. He's listed as Lord and King as well. Unnecessary.
-Magni Bronzebeard. Again, duplication due to multiple titles.
- The following have now been removed, with the following rationales:
- Duplicate entries. All duplicates have been reduced to their highest rank for housekeeping purposes.
- Non-sentient animals, except for Kings. I'm going to look into each and most likely purge the lot as well. Non-sentient animals do not belong to an organized society and thus are unable to actually have formal authority, likewise, they lack the capacity for that authority. They are not aristocrats, at best, the tigers are aristo-cats. Silithids remain at present.
- Non-Aristocratic 'barons'. A couple of barons and lords have been removed as they do not appear to be actual aristocrats.
- Generic mobs, e.g. cloud prince. This is supposed to be a list of named aristocrats, not every mob with the word 'prince' in their name.
- I'll be revisiting it later to figure out what to do with some borderline examples - some of the 'lords' are religious titles, for instance, and Azshara should be under Empress if there's a non-RPG source for her specific title of Empress of Nazjatar. Additionally, Bolvar Fordragon has been added as a King, due to his current status as Lich King.Everen (talk) 16:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with you, and i already mentioned the beast thing above. but don't forget lord Skowl altrough he as the model of a Hydra he's actually a elemental.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:27, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
The form of address Dame is the counterpart of Sir. Since Sir is present, despite not implying aristocratic rank at all, then so should Dame. Secondly, I'd suggest merging all male and female lists for the same rank. i.e. merge Baron and Baroness, Count and Countess, etc --Richeron (talk) 03:58, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
What about Calpyh, Khan, Sultan, and Vizier?
Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 15:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)