User talk:Coobra

From WoWWiki

This is a talk page for User:Coobra Sorry, Coobra isn't here right now, please leave a message after the beep and I'll respond on your talk page. BEEEEEEP

User talk:Coobra/Archive01

New messages to the bottom please.

Magnataur Image

Noticed you marked the image I uploaded as a Alpha image. Just wanted to point out it isn't a Alpha image and is from the bestiary page. http://www.wow-europe.com/wrath/features/bestiary/index.xml Leviathon (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

question

What's your rationalization for keeping an object and an item page separate in some places and together in others? --Sky (t · c · w) 04:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

That's what I thought... Maybe it would be a good idea to combine them in all cases...
What do I know though? --Sky (t · c · w) 05:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Some would disagree with that opinion...
Anyway, have fun with your further editing this evening. --Sky (t · c · w) 05:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yarzill and etc

Even though my original shot goes in the ashcan, the wiki is improved. How, may I ask, did you manage to come up with a screenie for that quest so fast? Have one in your attic somewhere?

And on other fronts, I appreciate your addition to Can't Hold Your Brew, too. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Enslavable Demons vs Warlock Minions

I look at these two categories, with their big warnings at the top. I am assuming that a warlock uses Enslave Demon to enslave a demon, but I had to go through several pages to discover this. Would it be appropriate to put that information into the category description?

And what drew me here in the first place: Imp is on both categories, as is Felhunter; Felguard, Voidwalker have different page names in the different categories; Succubus is in minions but not enslavable? I do not know enough about higher level warlocks to see what - if anything - is wrong here. But the fact I'm confused might indicate a problem. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 20:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The category description for Enslavable demons now links to Enslave Demon.

Those articles that are in the enslavable demon category are those containing lore and other information than that about the summoned versions. The pages for the summoned version were separated because it was thought there existed enough information to justify an entire article. Personally, I thought they should all be separated, but there wasn't enough agreement on that.

Now, the real problem here is that someone <.< >.> thought having this category would be a great idea, but didn't bother to populate it properly. Really, what should be in there, are articles that are only about specific instances of mobs. If there is a mob named "Imp" in game (which I'm fairly sure there is), and it is enslavable (which I'm not sure they are) then an article named "Imp" is appropriately placed in the category. The same goes for the others.

So, what I think about this is that there should be "(Warlock pet)" and a "(WoW creature)," if there exists a wow creature with that exact name, versions of each of those articles you mention, lore being in the non-disambiguated article.

What needs to be done is the category needs populating. Someone needs to go do some investigation on which demons are enslavable, create an article for that creature if one does not exist, and add the category to those articles.

Does that answer your questions? --DuTempete (talk) 14:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

To a great extent, it does. To sum up, though: "It's a work in progress, there's not consensus on all points, and I haven't gotten there yet". I hope, though, that my questions have been more helpful than burdensome. As I said, I'm not an avid warlock player (yet, anyway), so I'm not a lot of help to ya. Some of these things are like "unfunded mandates"... "this is a nice idea, the rest of you complete it, would ya?" --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 16:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Galaen's Journal

So... my addition was prompting, but not necessarily new material. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I had created many object pages, but later decided just to merge them with their item counterparts. Just so happens I might have missed a few so when I saw that pop up on my watchlist I merged them. And no sense to have the same book text on the same page. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 20:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It's an argument in favor of just what you're doing... I didn't see the Item page, and so didn't see the text. I think, though, that the item is NOT readable (qv Thottbot). It's the Object that I drew my text from, and as 'a discussion with an NPC', not as 'reading text of an item'. Might want to do a little sprucing on that. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh well I was using WoWhead, and it showed text on the item but not the object... and I can't remember if the item was readable... I do however know the object is least after you take the quest... I think. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 23:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Quote for Warlock

Why can there not be the quote there? What defines a "lore" character from a "not-so-lore" character? Are you saying warlocks aren't anywhere to be mentioned in the History's 5 chapters of WoW? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WarCrime (talk · contr).

Runecloth Boots

I did not flag Pattern:Runecloth Boots as 'removed from game' myself because - as near as I can tell - the pattern object can still exist. That is, while it is no longer sold, and is no longer needed, anyone who had it in inventory would not have seen it disappear. I can verify that some of the dropped pattern items (that became trained) still stuck around ... I had several such patterns. I do not know if that is enough to qualify for the "RFG" tag, or not. --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"Removed from game" does not always equal "this item does not exist anymore" - it is simply a guideline that it can no longer be obtained. Same reason why the rare level 70 PvP items has been tagged as removed from game. gOurra[T҂C] 18:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for tidying up some of the stuff I added yesterday, it was my first day heh ^,^;;;—The preceding unsigned comment was added by LeNoir679 (talk · contr).

Thank you!

Thank you for the welcome message! It was nice. Captain panda 04:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Another thank you!

Thanks for tidying up all the stuff that I add. This makes it far more easyer for other people to understand :P.
-Thisunsigned comment was added by Bahumut5 (talk · contr).

Abandond Images

There seems to be too many 'abandonded' images on Wowwiki. Could really need cleaning up by a bot. RealmS (talk) 06:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes there is, it's always good when one finds them. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 06:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

So it's fine to tag them for speedy delete then? Will have to start doing that when I'm just hanging around, lol :) RealmS (talk) 06:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 06:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Bloodmoon Isle Page

You reverted my edits without any explanation. I believe the screenshot I provided was better than what was there. You also removed my map graphic. Can you please give me a rationale for your edit? Rascilon (talk)

I do think the new picture was better. For the map graphics, I'm unsure. I like the idea of highlighting where locations are, as the articles don't really do it otherwise. Kirkburn  talk  contr 23:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'd understand having highlighted areas on a map for places that are not labeled... but when the place is clearly marked, I saw no point to it. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 00:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Page names

I don't understand, the article you referred me to says "There is an important exception to this rule: "the", "a" or "an" is included when it would be capitalized if it appeared in text." The subzone is literally titled "The Dead Scar" in the zone name in the upper-right corner, and the prompt when you enter the subzone itself. Doesn't this fall under the rule's exception, as it not only appears as part of the name, but also appears capitalized, in the text? Mantecon (talk) 01:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

It's just how it's done, see The Barrens, The Hinterlands, The North Sea, The Apothecarium, etc. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 01:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Well that doesn't make any sense, it appears to fall short of the rules the wiki itself outlines. I'm new to WoWWiki, but I'm no stranger to them; I'm admin to two. Though each are understandably not as large as this one, I still think it's important to be as specific as possible to what's canon. It's like, going by the naming policy and using Undercity as an example, it is always referred to by characters as "the Undercity," but appears solely as "Undercity" in the zone name, so it's reasonable that the article be titled simply "Undercity." But in the case of zones that are referred to both in lore and by zone name prompt with "The" or such, not that it's inaccurate, but then again it's not necessarily accurate either. Mantecon (talk) 02:07, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Peasant images

I think I might have confused you or you confused me. The images should go as follows: Peasant.png, Peasant2.png, and Peasant3.png since png is the preferred kind right? Now I know Peasant.png and Peasant2.png look the same, but they are from two different manuals. The first one is Warcraft I and the guy is walking in one direction. The second one is from Warcraft II and the guy is walking the other direction and it has a signature on the bottom. I don't know why they did that. Hope that helps.  Rolandius  (talk - contr) 03:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about, I didn't make any comments about anything you were doing. Only thing I did was mark Peasant2.png cause its a duplicate of Peasant.jpg.

Though I will say, watch what you do upload, Peasant.jpg, Peasant2.png, and Peasant2.jpg are all the same. And if you check the logs, gourra is the one that originally fixed and removed the dups. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 04:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I know I was just saying in case you see the uploads I just made within the hour and wonder why there are so many peasant images.  Rolandius  (talk - contr) 04:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

various images

Thanks for helping me with the images I uploaded, I should be able to do it myself in a short while, but I dont know how to yet, tech never were me. You wouldnt happen to know, several locations have npcs which displays an error; "This npc either has no tooltip or was not intended to have one. A correctly formatted { { npcbox} } must be added to the target npc page." but the npc's page seems fine, know how to correct this? - TherasTaneel (talk · contr). 18:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Then have a look at the Thrallmar page; Martik Tor'seldori have a red link, but his page exists Martik Tor'seldori . TherasTaneel (talk · contr). 03:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Any easier way to have a convo back and forth than this? :) oki, guess that will be helpfull at times. TherasTaneel (talk · contr)

WW:IRC. Ose ^tlak/₃₅₁₁ 02:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Gilneas Page Revision

That "source" says nothing more than "At Blizzcon, Metzen allegedly admitted that they had kind of forgotten about Gilneas and don't have any immediate plans for it." Which is some random guy on the internet allegedly quoting something that may or may not have been said. I don't see how that justifies a citation. Furthermore - it was up for 2 weeks as [citation needed] and was decided on the talk page that (especially considering most resources linked back to this websites Gilneas page) it should be removed if no link could be found.

I guess I'm fine with it being there, but its nothing more than speculation, and I fail to see how that qualifies as a real source.

Cougrrr ^{talk cont} 10:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the People in your Raid reference, I forgot at the very end about it. ^_^ TheAdamant (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Blood elves in Northrend

You seem to have access to Northrend, have you seen any blood elves there? TherasTaneel (talk · contr) 19 august, 2008.

From screenshots, they seem to have a small camp in Crystalsong Forest. They also have a Sunreaver's Sanctuary in Dalaran. If they have anything left over from Kael's attack is unknown.--SWM2448 23:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I wish I had access to northrend... no most of my info is second hand. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 23:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

TherasTaneel, you may want to look at WoWWiki:WotLK beta contacts.--SWM2448 23:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I was confused by your character Ophiophagus, it didnt state at the time, that he didn't exist yet. TherasTaneel (talk · contr) 19 august, 2008.

To be created has been next to it for months. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 00:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I see that, but not at the page I were looking at, it looked different too, the blood elf icon wasnt there yet, and the 'to be created' neither and it were written further down the page too. Anyways, you dont have it yet :) you are just good at getting your infomation you add elsewhere. TherasTaneel (talk · contr) 20 august, 2008.

Concept art template

Not a bad template. However we'll have to be careful how its used. As we know some concept art has become art used to represent "lore" depictions in certain published sources. In those instances then the regular artwork templates should take precedence, and should be used. Like usual we need to avoid stacking templates.Baggins (talk) 07:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I actually tried finding an art template, but couldn't find anything... unless you mean the RPG template... As for the concept art template, yea the wording may be wrong, perhaps instead of "it should not" change it to "it may not". Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! ^{{TDon't hiss at me.•CIf you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.)} 19:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

RPG template has an artwork switch built into it if its used on an art page. Ya, may not may be better choice.Baggins (talk) 03:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Profession Ideas

Please explain on the talk page why you removed those or I'll re-add them, since they seem like perfectly legitimate arguments. <Omni> ( Speak Please, no shouting || Stuff Meet the Maker ) 21:34, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

non relevent pages

This is a headsup to let you know to be more careful when making generic pages like woodworker, or lumberjack. PCJ has recently gotten onto User:Rolandius for similar actions (although I also tried to explain to Rolandius where he was wrong), and he felt the need to indirectly turn you in, see User talk: Rolandius.

Only two points I can say is try to avoid using real world definitions to pad the article, and if there isn't any actual warcraft citations, or way to make it more than a sentence stub, make it a {{disambig}}.

This is not a formality I wanted to follow through with, since you are one of the most respected and upstanding editors that we have. However, there are accusations that the administrators are biased and are hypocrites. :p

Feel free to contact me personally.Baggins (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)