Talk:Old Gods' forces

From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Heeeey, wait

I'm sorry, but making faction page for every Elemental lord doesn't make sense to me. Therazane has it's page because it's playable faction, while other are not. If you really want to create pages like Ragnaros' minions abd so on, you should also do it for Tgerazane, because she doesn't have this page either. Just my opinion ;) Neutralion (talk) 06:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

It's doesn't need to be done too since the Elemenetal plane could be considered their kingdom or faction--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:38, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
In fact should need; the elemental plane is a place. The factions of the elemental lords are, well... Factions! Different things deserve different articles. Problems of ambiguation...Gabrirt (talk) 21:42, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hystory section

I'm having problems with the hystory section i know something but i don't know how to write them in Pre-wow history

  • Before the titans there were the old gods and the elementals
  • they were imprisoned by the titans
  • they influenced the war of the ancients to weaken their prisons
  • C'thun caused the war of the shifting sands

Could Anybody help?--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Nobody?--Ashbear160 (talk) 16:47, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Removed the history section neither the alliance or the horde article have it--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
You can count with me. I am almost a lore-master. Ask as you want.Gabrirt (talk) 05:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
There isn't a need for a hystory section the organization and former member section covers it up--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
It is spelled "history" and I do not think that Gabrirt is a "lore-master". Luckily, Ashbear160 has decided that there isn't a need to add more to the article (at least this time).--SWM2448 18:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Kinda Finished

The article is currently kinda finished the rest i think it's just correct small errors, add some image and i think it's very similiar to the horde and alliance articles, I anybody has any problem tell me, meawhile i'm going to put this uder scrutinity of the guys at sol--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Is the Article name grammatically correct the ' seems to be in the wrong place
Anyway the Hystory section and disorganized text are saved at User:Ashbear160/Old god force's in case someone needs it--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
The name is grammatically correct. An apostrophe is used to denote possession; in this case, the forces belonging to the Old Gods. Your page name is wrong, because you are using an apostrophe to denote pluralization, which is absolutely wrong all the time ever. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Also, someone needs to rewrite the opening two paragraphs, because I can barely make sense of that. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 22:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, it's really a mess. This page is going to have the {{Construction}} tag for a LONG time. --g0urra[T҂C] 22:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for rewritting the first paragraph i rewrote the second paragraph, is this more to your standards--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:17, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
A bit, but it's still one big, long, run-on sentence. And as Gourra pointed out, the rest of the article's not much better. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 23:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Tried Changing it again i think it's better except for my abuse of the words old gods, i'm thinking of trasfering the second paragraph to another section, but what do you think of the first 2 paragraphs now?--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I do not like this page. I have not liked it since this project began, and it has only improved slightly. I would have deleted the page a while ago if not for 1) the concept existing, and 2) the chance that it could improve. Making Ashbear160, Gabrirt, and anyone else who contributed to this page not feel bad was part of my inaction, but in retrospect that is slightly stupid. This page exists, and I fail any fan who reads this at face value and gets the wrong impression.
This is a little personal against Ashbear, but only because I feel that what is on the page now is the best that he can do, but factoring him in or not, this page is still lacking. However, personal attacks are immature on my part, and Ashbear asked for criticism, so I will give it and assume that this will become better. Having something that you put your heart into dashed down (even if the reason may have been debatably justified) is one of the worst things that can happen to a person, so I do feel a bit bad for writing this.
Now, the criticism: The opening paragraph was a bit off, so I rewrote it. I feel that it is better this way. The icon-tastic (a word, so says me) list often takes liberties, trying to classify things in definitive ways, such as "race" name and function, based on circumstantial (or less) evidence. The list also seems to go out of its way to try to list every race of every faction that the Old Gods have somehow influenced. Whoever made the Kevin Bacon game might be proud, but some trimming could be justified. It also seems to make up names for sub-factions that are implied to be going to be filled in at a later date. This list itself loves icons (much like its creator), and is one of the most expansive bullet-pointed lists that I have ever seen. Paragraphs might be better, but I am not sure, or sure how to fit them in.
The paragraphs at the bottom are a welcome, but seemingly out of place, break. However, they are riddled with minor factual, and grammatical errors (like the list is) that just build up over time. The "Notable Leaders" section seems redundant with some sections of the bullet-pointed list (while being another list itself), and just seems like an excuse to attempt to add a table. Also, of course the Old Gods lead them. I notice that the reference section is existent, but blank. The infobox itself seems to make quite a bit of this page more or less redundant, especially the leader section. Finally, you have a template that also seems to make quite a bit of this page more or less redundant. Also, the Old Gods are behind a lot, and their minions are only united really in that fact. That is my criticism.--SWM2448 03:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with most of what you've written. I also feel (and have felt for some time) that many of those same points apply to the Burning Legion page, and the list at the end of every single member of the Burning Legion ever and everyone who's ever allied with them. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 04:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Like i said writing articles isn't my best and i'll continue to try to improve it, but at least i'll try to make some justifications
  • I like icon yes, they make the list overall easier to read, and other people have told me the same, when the icons were removed from the horde article.
  • The race name is more or less decided on the Icon list page so i'm only applying the same rules there as i apply them here.
  • About trying to fill the list with everyone that served the old gods, the same thing that happened to the alliance and the horde articles.
  • I assume that complaint is about the Iron Army or the Loken Force's, i only name them such because i have no idea what to call them officially
  • I plan to add the reference list when i get the rest of article right.
  • I asked for help with the paragraphs at the bottom, for now i seem to have been ignored.
  • Notable leaders is just like the alliance and horde article it's useless because of the membership section, and if you think it's just about listing the leaders, but it's a timeline that show the leadership of those factions.
  • Doesn't the infobox in the alliance and horde page make those pages more or less redundant? the infobox is a list for quick reading.
  • But the Old gods are there and they are forcing their various minion to cooperate
I'll admit it needs a lot of trimming, and i'm trying to make it very similar to the horde and alliance article, and the old gods are behind a lot so it's going to be big work, i already have some ideas where to trim, when i mentioned kinda finished is that i finished adding information(except the references i forgot about those initially), the list is complete(needs a trim a grammatical and factual check), the paragraphs are complete(needs a grammatical and factual check), and the notable leaders section is complete(or am i touching that one in fear of breaking the code).--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Minor grammar note: "Old Gods force's" would mean "Old Gods force is" since the apostrophe is way off. "Old Gods' Forces" is correct. This also goes for "Loken Force's" which would mean "Loken Force is". --g0urra[T҂C] 13:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Those small things escape me a lot, i removed the word Loken forces.--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Many of the names on the icon list are just guesswork (partially by you, Ashbear) so using those names does not 'justify' anything. You are just spreading possibly false information. Making this page like the Alliance and Horde articles keeps coming up, so I want it to be asked if those articles are good enough to be templates for other pages. Just because something got on those pages does not make it alright. Also, this group is not in the same mold as the two playable factions at all. If you have no idea what to call something officially, my advice is that you should not act like you are giving it a name. References would be nice... The paragraphs can be rewritten, but other users are not at your beck and call.--SWM2448 17:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Tell me which names/icons you think are dubious, and i will see if there's a better solution or not.
In my opinion the alliance and the Horde articles are good examples of a faction article, the others i don't know
The problem is that blizzard didn't gave it official names but gave lot of other names (Iron Army or Stormforged or Stormforged Iron Army)
I think all Factions should share the same mold wherever they are playable or not, when it comes to lore articles we should neutral in how we treat them(with a little exceptions like categorising the major(playable) and minor(NPC) races in the playable factions)
I'll start adding references.
I'm asking for help, not demanding, users are free to do whatever they want, i'm asking for help because i'm fallible and i missed some factusal mistakes that i might take for truth that arent.--Ashbear160 (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Ugh it's becoming hard to find viable references, i can't seem to find any viable reference on silithids, anubisaths, horusaths or obsidian destroyers since most of the references used in the article are dead.--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
The paragraphs have become slightly more readable, and citations have been added, but not much has improved beyond that in my opinion.--SWM2448 18:35, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
I know it's a rather extensive list the only part that i've truly completed is Emerald Nightmare section(paragraph rewritten and all references found), i have a to do list in my userpage--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

What, exactly, are you trying to source?--SWM2448 00:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Everything? wasn't that what you asked for?--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:25, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm still a little confused on your overall design philosophy, and what you are trying to prove with each reference.--SWM2448 01:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
The overall design philosophy is much like the alliance and horde articles because this like the alliance and the horde article, it's a article about a union of nations/cult/corruption on a dreamland, that serves the old gods and i'm trying to source everything so i can prove that everything is right, isn't that what sourcing is about?--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Arakkoa, summoned old god and Harbinger Skyriss

Should they be included they are not exactly a force when this article focus on azeroth, they are more of hints that the old gods exit beyond azeroth?--Ashbear160 (talk) 12:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe i should add a small sub-faction on the organization section called Beyond Azeroth? what do you think--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Here are Old Gods beyound azeroth, source: Ask CDev. But they might not necessarily afflicted with "our" Old Gods. After all, the Old Gods love chaos ;-) --LemonBaby (talk) 07:42, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Twilight hammer

The current description of the twilight hammer is really crappy(my fault) could anybody else, make a better description?--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Gladly. IconSmall Goblin Male.gifIconSmall Goblin2 Male.gifIconSmall Gallywix.gifIconSmall Gazlowe.gifIconSmall GoblinDeathKnight Male.gifIconSmall UndeadGoblin.gif IconSmall Gilgoblin Male.gifIconSmall Hobgoblin.gif MoneygruberTheGoblin (talk contribs) 05:36, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I meant the one in the organization section.--Ashbear160 (talk) 13:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
DoneIconSmall Goblin Male.gifIconSmall Goblin2 Male.gifIconSmall Gallywix.gifIconSmall Gazlowe.gifIconSmall GoblinDeathKnight Male.gifIconSmall UndeadGoblin.gif IconSmall Gilgoblin Male.gifIconSmall Hobgoblin.gif MoneygruberTheGoblin (talk contribs) 20:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks.--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:18, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

References

Clean up the references. There's duplicates that shouldn't be there. --g0urra[T҂C] 20:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I was going to ask coobra for help on that when i thought the phrasing of text was complete with all sources, which moneygrubber completed(thanks for that), now i just need to find some sources for what he written and then i'll ask for help on how to stop the references from repeating.--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Anymore problems in the references(i can't fix the dead links).--Ashbear160 (talk) 18:18, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Ula-Tek

Should we list the Troll god Ula-Tek in old gods and say it is speculation? IconSmall Goblin Male.gifIconSmall Goblin2 Male.gifIconSmall Gallywix.gifIconSmall Gazlowe.gifIconSmall GoblinDeathKnight Male.gifIconSmall UndeadGoblin.gifIconSmall Gilgoblin Male.gifIconSmall Hobgoblin.gif MoneygruberTheGoblin (talk contribs) 22:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I should be removing RPG only information soon from here anyway, but i'm gonna wait until the "rpg isn't canon" rule stabilises in wowpedia before getting back at this article, since ula-tek was only from the rpg i say no... unless it's speculation then you can do it--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

RPG removal

I'm removing any information that i find about the RPG, but i will be carefully substituting sources with non-rpg ones.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I think i did it RPG sources fully removed.--Ashbear160 (talk) 20:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Move to sandbox

As this page has been seemingly deemed to be under construction indefinitely, and Ashbear uses it for testing new techniques, should this page be moved over User:Ashbear160/Old Gods' forces, or is its current location fine?--SWM2448 21:20, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what more do you want, i did all i could do adding new information will depend entirely on blizzard part of giving us new(waiting for the 19th day for the TToftA spoilers) the only difficulty is the organization texts in itself, but those need to be examined by someone else than me(Because english is not my mother language, and i might be missing some points in the lore).--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Deceased Leaders

I understand why you would want to make note of the now deceased leaders of this group but it does look rather odd, it is similar to if we put Grommash Hellscream as a Horde secondary leader. To put is simple if they are dead the aren't leading anything anymore. Just my thoughts IconSmall Goblin Male.gif MoneygruberTheGoblin (talk contribs)IconSmall GoblinDeathKnight Male.gif 21:46, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Hmm ok, the problem is that some of these factions might not exist already because of raids, but we have no word if they still exist or not, or that if any of the leaders are truly dead or because sinestra and onyxia were resurrected.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Well let me take a look at the leaders in the list

Main Leaders-
C'thun: Deceased
Yogg-Saron: Deceased
Secondary leaders-
Cho'gall: Confirmed dead, replaced by Twilight Father
Sinestra: Presumed defeated but alive.
Nefarion: Unknown
Rend Blackhand: Confirmed by Thrall
Onyxia: May be raised again but unlikely was a leader after she died the first time
Twin Emperors : Unknown
Loken: Deceased
Assembly of Iron: Unknown

In responce to any of the factions going away, I find that unlikely we will probably never end Ragnaros's fire minions and although Sinestra said "The black brood has fallen!" that doesn't exactly mean they have been wiped out, as for the Twilight's Hammmer we learned Benedictus is taking over in that regard so there must be something left to lead. And The Empire of Nazjatar is likely healthy.

The only factions that are gone are Yogg-Saron's forces and the bulk of the Dark Horde but that took place before the Cataclysm anyway. IconSmall Goblin Male.gif MoneygruberTheGoblin (talk contribs)IconSmall GoblinDeathKnight Male.gif 23:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Well we aren't going to remove the old gods, since they are outside the cycle of life and dead and all that shazz
How do you know yogg-saron's faction is gone?--Ashbear160 (talk) 02:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Im fairly sure with Loken gone we won't be seeing be seeing many of his Iron Army left, as for the rest of Yogg-Saron's army I can't confirm any recent changes. IconSmall Goblin Male.gif MoneygruberTheGoblin (talk contribs)IconSmall GoblinDeathKnight Male.gif 03:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Ultimatex edits

I don't want to devolve this into a edit wars but you will need to explain the following

why are you removing these from the list: Murloc, deep sea murloc, mechagnome, fire giant, polar furbolg, centaur and arakkoa
Why do you keep adding storm dragons and stone dragons to the sapient races list,considering they are not sapient.
Why do you remove the entry for worgs and goblin mercenaries from the member list.

I hope to hear your answer.--Ashbear160 (talk) 19:08, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Also plz explain why you removed the stormforged and and the alliance and horde slaves?--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:48, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
He has a talk page, if he is not answering here.--SWM2448 00:15, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
That was my next attempt if he reverted the changes i was gonna do tomorrow, but probably it's best if i do that right now.
The problem he's that he is removing valid information and adding invalid one, and i wanted to avoid a edit wars.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Annihilated Flights

I feel that after 4.3 we should remove the Twilight Dragonflight because they are extinct now, or at least near-extinct. The Black Dragonflight still has some members left but probably any aligned with the Old Gods' were annihilated. We will have to see how the Chromatic Dragonflight's story ends but with Deathwing out of the picture it is highly unlikely that any more will be created. Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe(talk contribs) 02:20, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I rather let the cataclysm finish before starting to put things in the Former members section.--Ashbear160 (talk) 03:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
I'd say near extinct, because the description for Warmaster Blackhorn says that only a few dozen remain (and it takes place after the Wyrmrest Assault), and only around ten Twilight Dragons (including Goriona) participate in the fight, meaning that there are atleast 24+ Twilight Dragons left. With Deathwing, Ultraxion, Nefarian, Onyxia and Sinestra dead though, they will probably become unaligned or become secluded if they still have a dragon capable of breeding. The Black Dragonflight will probably become unaligned because of the new (may aswell say it) Aspect who is uncorrupted. --Illidarí (talk) 21:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Beasts

Should I remove any non sapient races? For space and consistency. Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 20:49, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Why?--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Space and consistency with other factions Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 21:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Ok remove beasts but don't do what you just did to the infobox, that's was messy and innacurate.--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
How so? Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 21:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
You put all dragonkin as main races(only 2 are)... among other things.--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:30, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Dragonkin are a main race. Twilight and such are just subraces. Per say. Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 21:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
No, Dragonkin is a category that represents a big branch of races. Besides only two dragonflights that matter in this template as main twilight and black, if just used dragonkin we would imply all dragonkin follow them--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
That is why the types that do follow them were listed under dragonkin. All dragon are essentially the same creature but with some small differences per flight. Looking back "Dragons" would be better then "Dragonkin". Besides that dragonkin is already a category in the secondary members Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 21:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Anyway, i'm working around with it a bit more, it will be better this time around. Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 21:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Just don't put other types of dragonkin in the main races besides those 2--Ashbear160 (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Why i changed stuff again.
  • No need for revenants, elementals as a main race already include all types of elementals shared by them(otherwise we would have to list ALL OF THEM)
  • Elemental Ascendants are slightly different that they are ascended from mortal so they aren't "fully" elemental
  • No need for lesser and it's better if we use dragonflights instead of dragons because it already includes all types of them that are sapient.
  • No need to incorporate all dwarves the first tag already includes two of them ("Races of former members from Alliance and Horde") the dark iron are exception because they are far more notable and the fact that they split before they joined the alliance(so technicaly they weren't alliance member to begin with)
  • Obsidian Destroyer is not a sub-race of Neferset Tol'vir
  • There is one sapient firehawk and he's rather important part of ragnaros army
  • Why did you remove fire giant?
  • Merciless ones are Sapient.
There are more but i have to check the rest--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
More
  • Merciless ones entry readded
  • Hydras that the old gods keep as pets are al demigods and since there both in azeroth and outlands it needs to be added that too.
  • While the Stone dragons are non-sapient they maintained their independence yet were enslaved by deathwing and that needs to be noted(means they were a independent force but allied).
  • Drakeadons are non-sapient
  • More icons for freya and mimir but no need to repeat
  • mention that at least one firehawk former dragon serves ragnaros.
ok i think i'm done--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:15, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Any Problems with these changes tell me plz.--Ashbear160 (talk) 23:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Looks good over here Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 23:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
I don't much remember this, are Nerubians still loyal to the Old Gods? Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs)
Don't add ice giants, stuff in the watchers chambers would make the infobox too huge, and they are just minions of the watcher so they aren't relevant enough.
Stormforged works fine because they are a main race(or were the jury is still out on most of this stuff).--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Also nerubians as far as we know no...
"At Blizzcon 2007, the nerubians and the Old Gods were described as B.F.F" Inv helmet 44.pngInv helmet 119.png High Warlord MoneygruberTheGoblinChieftain of the Gentleman Tribe (talk contribs) 22:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
This never virtualised into the game, and now they seem to be going in a complete different direction.--Ashbear160 (talk) 22:23, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Faction Status

Can anyone finish what I've started? I have to eat and do another things. I can perfect it later.Gabrirt (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Normally I find it's good to bring something like this up before a major change to the article just because you think something looks right. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 23:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Stop

Stop just for one moment, Ashbear. I cant make any edits at all with you doing that. I appreciate your being helpful but please wait until I finish the edits I need to do. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 00:26, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop using the BR code instead of the more commonly used * it makes each entry more difficult to distinguish, and it makes the whole article harder to read--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
How.Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 00:31, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
The * makes a easy and clear to see mark to distinguish between each entry while the BR code makes it harder to distinguish between each entry, using a two simple examples:

"Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words <br\> Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words "

  • "Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words
  • Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words Words"
Note that there are two different entries in each, first uses Br code, the second uses *
The second example is easier to distinguish between different entries than the first.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
The * should only be used for sub-notes. It's the same format I used on the Horde article.Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 00:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Should have never mentioned Horde... Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 00:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Note that the Horde article has a lot less subdivisions than this article, and the fact that you made some mistakes in the horde article too that makes it easily confusing.
Im not even sure how to explain this. It's not like it's a lore issue it's just faction design. I'll change it around and if you have any questions or changes you want tell me i'll do them for you. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs)
Ok then but be careful and don't make the same mistakes i just corrected in the horde article.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Alright. I'll get started soon, and thanks. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 01:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Infinites

We can't really join it together with the other dragonflights. While the other 3 dragonflights can be said to be under the banner of Deathwing, the infinite are entirely independent of him with different goals and employ more than just their own dragonflight, which also really distorts the introduction text.

We also have to include the Alternate Blackmoore that works for murozond.--Ashbear160 (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
We aren't listing Blackmoore. It's like listing every member ever.Why is he so special? And it's not deathwings banner I renamed it to dragonkin only. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 00:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Every member ever no, but blackmoore was a very important tool in getting the infinite plot to work
The Reason why the dragonkins can't be joined together is because one part is entirely under deathwing and the other has murozond as a leader and the objectives and methods are completely different.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
They all have the same objective, the hour of twilight. Inv helmet 44.pngIconSmall Vincent.gif The Artist Formerly Known As, MoneygruberTheGoblinMind your manners (talk contribs) 01:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Actually no, to Murozond the hour of twilight is just one method of stopping what comes after if the hour of twilight doesn't happen, he also tries to stop it with the other CoT instances.--Ashbear160 (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Murozond is likely just crazy. As we have no context for the "worse" he talks about, he should be regarded as working for the Old Gods in my opinion.--SWM2448 03:46, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm not arguing against that, i'm stating that you shouldn't mix the infinite with the rest of the dragonkin because they are not part of the same faction--Ashbear160 (talk) 10:50, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Name

I propose the name should be changed to "The Black Empire." metzen called the ancient pre-Titan OG empire that during the lore QnA at the MoP launch event. Reign (talk) 07:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

As far as I understood his concept, The Black Empire was the empire of the Old Gods before the Titans came. They destroyed this empire and it is gone now. I think this page is about all those races and cults that are today worshipping and serving the Old Gods. I think they want their planet back to rebuild their Black Empire. This page is - I might be wrong - more a list of the Old Gods minions. We might knowing more after the "Book of Caine" cames out. In any case however we should create a The Black Empire page.--LemonBaby (talk) 07:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I missed this video, can you give a link please?
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 07:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes: Blizzard's Live Exclusive Mists of Pandaria Event. The Old God part is around 2:51:45. Hope I saved you some time ;-) --LemonBaby (talk) 08:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
A two lines articles would not be usefull I think, Metzen says "I like to call it the Black Empire", that does not mean, it will and up like that
I say wait and see
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 09:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

This name isnt official like the name of Burning Legion, right? If so, then shouldnt be a template that the name is unofficial? --Mordecay (talk) 15:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

This page is just a gathering of the info we got on the factions who serve the old gods, it isn't anything official, but it's actual info. So no, there shouldn't be the template. --CogHammer.gifDoomeЯ TBattlegroup RoundIcon.pngC 15:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
I see... but not even {{bettername|doc=}}? The first sentence there fits perfectly there :D --Mordecay (talk) 15:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
It is not speculation, like Illidan's forces, it is the forces of someone. If there is no official name, it can stay like this without bettername tag
IconSmall Hamuul.gif Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (talk/contribz) 16:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

About the Mantid

It is safe list the Mantid Empire in the article? Y'Shaarj death's leaved the Mantid orphan. How can they be on the Old Gods' forces without an Old God to serve?Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 21:00, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Little request

Shouldn't we have to change the crest from Neutral Neutral to Mob Combat just like the Burning Legion article?Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 23:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Image update

Should we have to upgrade the main picture, as...
A - ...there is a new picture of Queen Azshara as a naga.
B - ...Queen Azshara have never joined the Old Gods as a night elf. The photo was incorrect from the beginning.
C - ...I think the image should show other powerful and notable people amog Old Gods' servants, like Loken, Murozond, Xavius and Al'Akir. Show a mantid to represent their empire is also a good option (Kil'ruk would be a good choice).
What do anyone thinks? Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 20:17, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Probably good enough until new BfA art. Xporc (talk) 21:17, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Have you already take action? Who is on charge of making the new image? Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 13:49, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
As said above, I don't intend to personally do anything about it until BfA and its old gods raid is released Xporc (talk) 14:01, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
So, you was trying to say "good enough after new BfA art" not "until", right? Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 14:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
That's it; BfA was launched but the image still the same. There is something still waiting to be launched? Is there someone who can update the image according the suggestion? Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 21:07, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Black Empire of Azeroth

This page is about the remains of the Black Empire of Azeroth no? So things like the Summoned Old God and else should not be treated as if they were members of it no? --Ryon21 (talk) 13:38, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. ReignTG (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
I don't really mind. Cho'gall and the pale orcs originated from Draenor before coming to Azeroth. The template also have Harbinger Skyriss, and the page has his quote about them spanning the universe Xporc (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, Cho'gall and the pale orcs are for sure part of it even though they originated in Draenor. And maybe we could wait. It seems that in the future the Black Empire will resurge and then we could use this page for all those working for the Void. --Ryon21 (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Deathwing image

As the discuss isn't 100% finished I have to ask: Should we align it to the left side? It's getting unaligned from it was inserted (thanks to the infobox), characterizing situation one. Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 10:53, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

In this case no. Although I would consider cleaning up the infobox, I think there are too many races and deceased secondary leaders in it. That should fix the image problem too. --Ryon21 (talk) 11:58, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

G'huun

G'huun is refered as a Old God on his article. I'm putting him on, but have no sure if he is actually cooperating with others Old Gods. May by having a C'Thrax as a servant implies that he is actually doing so, but I'm not sure. Gabrirt (talk · contributions) 18:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

The question though is whether he's referred to as an "old God" or an "Old God" in the quest. --g0urra[T҂C]
He is now referred to as an "Old God" in all instances I believe.
Regarding the affiliation bit, one of G'huun's lines during his raid encounter says his rot is to spread across Azeroth, make it pop like a balloon and then contaminate other planets, something like that. Both Zul and Grand Mada Ateena say something along the lines of the end goal being the rebirth of the Black Empire / "the empire of the Old Gods", which I imagine is enough to tag them/him with Old Gods' forces. -- MyMindWontQuiet 20:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
This is one of those situations that makes me really hate this page, which gives the impression that everyone even tangentially working for the Old Gods is part of some sort of singular, monolithic army, which couldn't be further from the truth. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 03:10, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, this page is honestly a mess, and I'm wondering if even the original idea of it is really needed. -- MyMindWontQuiet 12:04, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
It sure as hell wasn't back then (see the earlier discussions on this page), and it probably still isn't now, but like the Old Gods themselves its tendrils may be woven too deep to safely remove it without causing catastrophic damage. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 17:09, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Actually I think it's really only ever used/linked to in Infoboxes, under the Affiliation parameter. And possibly one or two templates ? If something were to happen to this page and those were removed, I don't think much redirects would be left.. -- MyMindWontQuiet 17:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Hey, come on now. Just because this page agglomerates several sub-factions into a single one, doesn't mean it have to be nuked. A split, maybe. Xporc (talk) 13:03, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
The "split" would essentially be just un-agglomerating those sub-factions, because there's no reason to agglomerate them save for the desire to try and make a the servants of the Old Gods into a full faction like the Alliance and Horde (as per the explanations back when this started), but they aren't a real faction and never have been. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 18:36, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
They technically already are "split". It's just this page that lumps all the individual pages and organizations together. -- MyMindWontQuiet 11:22, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Redundancy in mentioned races inside the infobox

Why first mention orcs and humans while all races from the Horde and Alliance are said represented within the Old Gods' forces just a few lines below? I can see why using the red-faced night elven icons would be relevant there, but then maybe we should give them a special name, like "druids of the flame" who are different enough from mainstream kaldorei. They have been altered beyond redemption.--KIROCHI) 14:44, 14 August 2019 (UTC)