From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Its npc name is Mythrax the Unraveler, not Mythrax, so it has Mythrax the Unraveler in the page name. --Mordecay (talk) 18:43, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Mythrax is not just any random NPC, he has a whole background and flashbacks, is a main character/goal behind the Vol'dun storyline, featuring in multiple cinematics, etc., and with him having an encounter page called [Mythrax the Unraveler], [Mythrax] should be his lore page. Just like Zul, Reborn and Zul. You did the original Split wrong. -- MyMindWontQuiet 18:49, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Moreso where all appearances have him as Mythrax the Unraveler as well.
Just because you just decided he is important enough to be an exception doesn't mean I did the split not correctly :P --Mordecay (talk) 18:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
When majority of his story is revealed in the game as Mythrax the Unraveler, it doesn't make him a lore character that would warrant the exception, unfortunately, like Zul who had lots of lore before making his in-game debut. --Mordecay (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
The split you wanted was between the encounter page and the lore page. We usually keep the full name/encounter name for the boss pages while the character page is stripped down to [name]. See also Argus and Argus the Unmaker for example, who didn't have an amount of lore much superior to Mythrax.-- MyMindWontQuiet 20:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that's correct, that we strip titles when there's an encounter version, the non-encounter version has in-game NPC name as well, and is not normally stripped of titles. There are many examples supporting this actually:
Important & less important characters: God-King Skovald, King Ymiron, Warlord Zaela, Algalon the Observer, Archbishop Benedictus, Gruul the Dragonkiller, Lord Jaraxxus, Gara'jal the Spiritbinder, Marshal Jacob Alerius, Baron Ashbury, Ambrose Boltspark, Jin'rokh the Breaker, Prince Keleseth, Blood-Queen Lana'thel, Exarch Maladaar, Bloodlord Mandokir, Imperator Mar'gok, Lady Naz'jar, Soulbinder Nyami, Lady Vashj.
Some of these have more appearances than Mythrax.
Argus is named Argus because he doesn't appear outside of the encounter which is named Argus the Unmaker, so it is not a valid argument. I think I must insist on the move for consistency with the above listed :-( --Mordecay (talk) 21:28, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Play nice boys. In the end it's not such an important issue Xporc (talk) 21:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Personally, I think them all should go by their name (that doesn't include the title), which would include the lore. Encounters should just stick to the actual name in the dungeon/raid. But from what I understand, important characters only apply to this while less-important ones... well just keep the title even though they are an official character and should have just their name (first and last) redirect at the very least. Mythrax feels like a very important character especially with the backstory that we have learned from in Vol'dun. — Surafbrov T / C / P 21:56, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
I can see a few problems with some of the ones you linked. The ones like Lady Vashj would definitely need a normal name page, the problem is that she doesn't have a first name, so we use the title instead (specially since there are other Vashj). Hell, Lady Ashvane too didn't have a name, so the page was just called Lady Ashvane, until we learned she was called Priscilla, so we moved the page to Priscilla Ashvane.
Same for Archbishop Benedictus, he doesn't have a first name, and the problem is that there are other "Benedictus", so we can't give him the Benedictus page name. Thus, Archbishop Benedictus.
(I'd also argue that a title that is just a profession or "lord/lady" is less of an issue than "Bob the ultra mega death unraveling destroyer", but yeah.)
As for a lot of the rest I would not consider major enough in terms of lore content. Lord Jaraxxus literally only ever has appeared twice, where he said like 1 sentence and then disappeared.
Mythrax does not have these issues highlighted here.
For some others, they should probably be moved to a proper name page like Mythrax, it's just that when the pages were created they were literally only just a quest or dungeon boss and nothing else, and only future lore gave them more content and importance (like Chronicle), so it never happened. With Mythrax we are being consistent, it's just that we have not been consistent with some previous characters, so it's them that need correcting. Not Mythrax. :P -- MyMindWontQuiet 22:01, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
I don't think Priscilla is this case. We learned her name so it was moved from her announcement / datamined name to her current one.
I'm still not entirely convinced, but I know MMWQ would just go revert and it would stay like that, so I submit to the majority :-P --Mordecay (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)