Talk:Mechagon mechagnome

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

"Mechagnomes" vs. "junker gnomes"

So it seems Blizzard is insisting on calling these things "mechagnomes" instead of "junker gnomes". While this makes sense from an in-universe standpoint, it does make things more annoying for us to handle. I can think of a few ways to approach this:

1. Keep this page as-is and simply call it "junker gnome" to distinguish it from the mechagnome page.
While "junker gnome" apparently isn't used in-game at all (correct me if I'm wrong on this), it was used in an official dev video as recently as June 18, suggesting that the name is still somewhat valid. The obvious downside is that it would be confusing for readers if a race is exclusively called one thing in-game but our page calls them something completely different, especially if there ends up being a "mechagnome" allied race. Granted, it wouldn't be the first time that we have a playable race page with a different name from the corresponding lore page (troll/jungle troll and undead/Forsaken).
2. Disambiguate this page as something like "Mechagnome (Mechagon)".
Should probably be avoided.
3. Merge this page with either gnome or mechagnome. Possibly in a similar way to kraken and riverbeast.
Might be the best solution. I will say that while the kraken approach (having the page essentially be split into separate sections for different types of creatures) works when it's just talking about animals that have limited amounts of lore and mostly just appear in-game as disposable mobs, I'm not sure if it would work quite as well when it comes to two sentient races who both have extensive amounts of history and culture.
4. Don't have a specific race page about these guys at all; instead, keep all the information about them on Arcforged and Rustbolt Resistance (+ "Mechagnome (playable)" if they end up being an allied race) while simply listing junker gnome characters' race as "gnome". Similar to how we have Kul Tiran (playable) for the allied race, but Kul Tiran just redirects to Kul Tiras (kingdom).

Thoughts? To be honest, personally I'm not sure if I really care what ends up being done about this. I just find the whole thing exhausting, since all this could've been made a lot simpler if Blizzard just stuck to the "junker gnome" name, but I guess there's nothing to do about that at this point. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 22:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

My standpoint is keep it as it is. At least for now. Although if we really need to change it, maybe my vote would go into merging it with the Gnome page since they are just mechanized gnomes. But if people really wants to stick with its name, then "Mechagnome (Mechagon)" is fine.--Ryon21 (talk) 22:20, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

I think keep the page at Junker gnome but change the intro text as such (also in this edit added some images, and noted Jeremy Feasel in the infobox caption as it's not clear that BlizzCon description of the image is accurate.[1]--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mrforesttroll (talk · contr).

Since "Junker Gnome" doesn't appear anywhere in-game and is only used in one recent video, I think continuing to use it as the primary page name is probably the worst of our options; if the game consistently calls them mechagnomes, the page should be there as well. It does not make the page easy to find if the page is located at an unofficial name. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 00:51, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I'd personally follow the same global idea as the eredar page: have a global mechagnome page for all types of mechagnomes, with an History section explaining that they were previously created by the titans, that some gnomes were affected by the curse of flesh, and that the Mechagon gnomes started mechanizing themselves in order to revert back to their mechagnome state, with a "junker gnome" or "mechagon mechagnome" section specially focusing on the Battle for Azeroth gnomes. Have Junker gnome redirect to that section, just like Man'ari eredar is a redirect to the "Demonic eredar" section. As for categories, I guess we'd have to suck it up and mix both Ulduar and Mechagon mechagnomes in the same category, like Nuuri is categorized as an eredar even thought she ain't demonic. Xporc (talk) 07:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't know about that. Eredar and their demon counterparts and draenei are the same race with no difference apart from one being demonic and all that. This "mechagnomes" are not real mechagnomes, just gnomes who replaced their body parts with mechanical parts. This "reversing" of the curse is simply a lie. But either way, if we cannot find a solution maybe voting for it? I agree with DarkTZeratul that if the Junker gnome is not in-game it may be wise to change it. --Ryon21 (talk) 11:07, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
We could always do it the other way, have a "Mechagnome" section on the global gnome page. But I really think playable mechagnomes are coming, and that they will be called simply mechagnomes, so we might as well start updating the mechagnome page accordingly Xporc (talk) 11:24, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Bumping this. Since a mechagnome allied race is now confirmed, I feel it would be good if we settled on a solution for this sooner rather than later. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 18:56, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I think the "Mechagnome (Mechagon)" solution would be best for the lore page on them. And maybe the Mechagnome page should be moved to someting as well such as "Mechagnome (Mechanical)", "Mechagnome (Clockwork)" or "Mechagnome (Titan-forged)". Mrforesttroll (talk) 19:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I stand by my "like eredar and man'ari eredar" proposal Xporc (talk) 19:10, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I would still go for Mechagnome (Mechagon) since they are all from there and since Hazzikostas referred to them as the "Mechagnomes of Mechagon". --Ryon21 (talk) 19:11, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
So on an NPC page you'd have "Mechagnome (Mechagon)" as the racial link? That sounds unwieldy Xporc (talk) 19:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
Since no clear consensus is happening, should we put this to a vote? Xporc (talk) 10:03, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
That might be best, yes. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 11:19, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, a vote is for the best. And what about "Mechagon mechagnome"? --Ryon21 (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Merging with the main mechagnome page

I think we should merge the mechagnome and junker gnome pages together, with a "Junker gnome" or "Mechagon mechagnome" section which would be used for redirects, like Eredar and Man'ari eredar. Xporc (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2019 (UTC)


  1. Yes Xporc (talk) 13:07, 9 October 2019 (UTC) - (Nominated)
  2. Yes Berenal (talk) 09:43, 26 October 2019 (UTC) - (Junker gnome is literally an unused term and a solution should be reached before the allied race hits. "Mechagnome (playable)" is the domain used for the race's playable information, not using the Mechagnome page would make it the only playable race where we don't maintain syntax. I get there's page seniority but at some point we need to just get over it and accept Blizzard has slated this group going forward as 'Mechagnome'.)
  1. No Mrforesttroll (talk) 17:33, 9 October 2019 (UTC) - (I think they should have their own page rather then a section, and the name "Mechagon mechagnome" for the page sounds good to me)
  2. No -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 18:52, 9 October 2019 (UTC) - (Not sure if "Mechagon mechagnome" is the best name we can come up with, but I agree that the two mechagnome types should have separate pages.)
  3. No Ryon21 (talk) 19:46, 9 October 2019 (UTC) - (The two are different things so they should have separate pages but I don't mind whatever choice is taken.)
  4. No PeterWind (talk) 10:39, 10 October 2019 (UTC) - (The two things seemingly use the same name, but they are not the same thing.)
  5. NoSurafbrov T / P / C 09:26, 26 October 2019 (UTC) - (no comment)
  6. No Alayea (talk / contrib) 18:24, 26 October 2019 (UTC) - (I agree with PeterWind on this.)


Gotta admit I'm surprised by the current results, considering wowpedia's old trends of always sticking as close as possible to the original names for its pages Xporc (talk) 10:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Bump Xporc (talk) 09:24, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Regarding Berenal's comment about "not using the Mechagnome page would make it the only playable race where we don't maintain syntax": this isn't really accurate, since (as I pointed out above) there are already cases where a playable race's name doesn't line up with its corresponding lore page (undead vs Forsaken, troll vs jungle troll, and Kul Tiran vs human/Kul Tiras). -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 10:36, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Yep. Also, it seems we'll be keeping the two pages separated so we should probably choose a name. Although not the best solution for some, maybe we could have a "Mechagon mechagnome" and, let's say, "Titan-forged mechagnome", then use the main "Mechagnome" as a disambiguation. Or keep it as it is and simply change the "Junker gnome". Either way, links will have to be changed, though since all are correct (I guess) we can use the bot. Now, which names would be okay for all here?
Another option, since the new Mechagnomes are confirmed normal gnomes but mechanized, we could always create a section in the Gnome page. --Ryon21 (talk) 11:54, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I would be fine with "Mechagon mechagnome" as a name, and I wouldn't mind merging the gnome and junker gnome pages either. After all, we already have two playable human races with different cultures (Stormwind humans and Kul Tirans) who share one lore page (human).
I'm still not a fan of having to move the current mechagnome page to another name since none of the names that have been suggested so far sound like particularly good options, IMO: names like "clockwork gnome" and "mechanognome" are only used in one or two places in-game, and names like "titan-forged mechagnome" can also be used to refer to the Mechagon type since they're also descended from titan-forged. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 16:26, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
The merging of Mechagon mechagnomes into the gnome race page sounds like a good idea. Should there be a vote on this suggestion? Mrforesttroll (talk) 18:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
So the proposal is just to merge "junker gnome" into the gnome page rather than the mechagnome one? Xporc (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

If merging is shot down

Should we then instead disambig the main Mechagnome page? Maybe Mechagnome (titanic) and Mechagnome (Mechagon). That prevents one from getting priority over the other. Edit: Alternatively we use Clockwork Gnome for Mechagnomes, since that's been used a few times as well. --Berenal (talk) 16:14, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

One of the reasons "Mechagnome (Mechagon)" is not wanted is due to the parenthesis so this problem still persists if we do the disambiguation page. --Ryon21 (talk) 18:25, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
I took action because I was tired of this situation going nowhere. Feel free to improve stuff. Xporc (talk) 10:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Mechagon mechagnome or gnome merge

Should we keep the Mechagon mechagnome information merged with the gnomes or should we put them as a separate page? Xporc (talk) 09:46, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

The latter, IMO. -- IconSmall TrollDeathKnight Male.gif DeludedTroll (talkcontribs) 12:29, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I have no strong opinion. Either are fine with me, so whichever you prefer. --Ryon21 (talk) 13:53, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
How about now? Xporc (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2020 (UTC)