Talk:Baron Rivendare

Baron Rivendare off-mounted

Does he off-mount in the fight at some moment? Or atleast, does he always sit on his little Deathcharger? --Oscararon43210 (talk) 15:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

When he dies he is still mounted.   Zurr  T ∙ C 18:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Replacement in WotLK

Since he's being moved to Naxxramas in Wrath of the Lich King, who is going to fill in his place as ruler of Stratholme? Eman91 00:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)Eman91

Still unknown but certainly somebody will be. On completition of   [8-30] Lambs To The Slaughter he says: "You are quite effective with that blade, <name>. Perhaps, Lich King permitting, you would be interested in becoming one of my minions? Stratholme is looking for a new mayor." Maybe a new Death Knight that uses the name of some player that was the first to achieve something in alpha/beta like blizz did with Champion Bachi in TBC. --N'Nanz (talk) 17:53, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Rivendare is still there as of today. My assumption is that this works very similarly to Kael'thas, how he's in Tempest Keep and later appears in Magisters' Terrace. Storyline progression, things of that nature. --Joshmaul (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

The difference, though, is that you don't cut off Kael'thas's head in Tempest Keep. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 07:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhapes the Scourge reatached a new head to Rivendare's body? The Scourge dosn't seem to have any regrets about doing that with their other creatures. --"The Scourge shall prevail!" - Scourge-Lord Morec (talk) 01:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

His real name

As Model Viewer states, his real name is Baron Titus Rivendare shall I edit it to that name? -Llanerian 17 January, 2009 21:05

Well, you can add it as a trivia, or put it in the introduccion but cited correctly. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 02:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I've added it to a Triva section, just need someone to put the site in for me --"I am the Scourge-Lord!" - Scourge-Lord Morec (talk) 22:27, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Even it isn't confirmed, should we change article's name due to the Naming Policy? Pudim17 (talk - contr) 19:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No, because it is not confirmed.--SWM2448 19:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I think changing the name is too far, remember that we aren't supposed to see the file names. Benitoperezgaldos (talk) 19:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Besides, even if it was confirmed, his name would still be "Baron Rivendare" or "Baron Titus Rivendare", since he's only appeared in WoW/WotLK and isn't a very big lore figure. Big, furry, and insane (Have a conversation with the homocidal furry!) (Come and stalk me! ...No, wait, please don't.) 19:46, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

If the WMV ever had Titus in the name it no longer does. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 18:24, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Favorite Character

No idea why, but Rivendare is my favorite character. I hope he somehow comes back, be it in Cataclysm, or later on. Skulkerart (talk) 21:22, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

Baron Aurius Rivendare

Assuming "Baron" is merely a title, shouldn't this page be moved to Aurius Rivendare?--TheUltimate (talk) 17:56, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

fact is that we don't know for sure who is this aurius in Strat Deadgit could even be the paladin who died during the fight (same name)

wait and see

A'noob, 20:17

Do you all remember Aurius... who died in Strat... Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 18:27, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

"hopefully, in world of warcraft, death is not a permanant state" (c) WoW Manual

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 18:45, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the impression I got was that Aurius - evidently a relative of the former Baron Rivendare - succumbed to undeath as he suspected he might and is now Lord of Stratholme himself. He even wields his hammer instead of Baron Rivendare's runeblade. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:25, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Is there an image of the new Rivendare? (And I wonder if the Deathcharger will still drop for those who aren't like me and don't have it, heh.) --Joshmaul (talk) 19:31, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

There is a screenshot: http://img689.imageshack.us/i/wowscrnshot071610013434.jpg/ No idea if he'll continue to drop the Deathcharger or not. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:37, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

undeath, setbacks and family suxx a lot these days...

Loremaster A'noob, Arch Druid of the Noobhoof Clan (^talk/_contribz) 19:41, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

So...does this mean we move Aurius to Aurius Rivendare then?--TheUltimate (talk) 04:43, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Not yet, things often change from beta, for now a new article can be made, then if it goes live they can be merged.... Hmm... wonder who will handle the blood knights mount quest now. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 05:04, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that part would change. We just wouldn't have to kill Aurius. (They might also remove it entirely, too...) --Joshmaul (talk) 05:06, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

World of Raids has a preview of the new Stratholme: http://www.worldofraids.com/topic/17357-cataclysm-beta-stratholme-preview/

It's pretty awesome :P.--Lon-ami (talk) 13:16, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

It's not "Baron" Aurius Rivendare, FYI. His title is Lord Aurius Rivendare. WoWWiki-Suzaku (talk) 07:29, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Titus Rivendare

We now have 3 references to Rivendare's name being "Titus".

• His model name is "barontitusrivendare"
• There's an NPC named "Baron Titus Rivendare", although it is unused
• The recent Hearthstone update added a Battlegrounds card named "Titus Rivendare"

Individually each source is a bit flimsy: Hearthstone is technically non-canon (but we have made exceptions in the past where we considered Hearthstone content canon because it aligned with WoW, and one can argue this is the case here), the NPC was never actually used, and the model name is valid, but it's a model name. When taken together though, as a whole it seems clear that the intent is for Rivendare's first name to be Titus.

So the proposal is: reword the lead section to read "Baron Titus Rivendare is a powerful death knight..." (not changing the page name). Would you be for or against this? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Votes

Yes

1. Yes MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (Nominated)
2. Yes Xporc (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (Technically Hearthstone is not canon, but its clear at this point that Blizz intends him to be called Titus)
3. Yes Dark T Zeratul (talk) 17:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (While no single source is particularly definitive, the totality of the evidence feels sufficient.)
4. Yes Berenal (talk) 18:05, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (Hearthstone, while not canon, is effectively canon-adjacent when it comes to small details like this. We've used elements of Hearthstone, such as artwork for depictions of characters in canon that have not received any visual appearances like Hurkan Skullsplinter, I think names fall into the same bracketing. This is also not the first time we've done this, as Grand Marshal Tremblade does not have her name used in game, only in one interview and in her audio files.)
5. Yes Ryon21 (talk) 23:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (After some thought and seeing the HS content we use for other pages, I have to agree. It's really not that different of a source when comparing it to dev interviews and whatnot. And the name is also not contradicted, so there's no conflict for the time being. I still abide with the case-by-case though.)
6. Yes WardsJames (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC) - (I was initially very annoyed, each side having good arguments, but it is true that with the pages having HS content, it would be strange not to apply the same thing here.)
7. Yes Sandwichman2448 (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC) - (Sure.)

No

1. No PeterWind (talk) 17:36, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (I think it'd be good to note in trivia though.)
2. No — SurafbrovWarcraft Wiki administrator T / C 17:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (Model names are not always a good source, especially when it comes to creature names in the past. Hearthstone is also not canon so shouldn't be used. This is a good trivia note however.)
3. No Eithris (talk) 18:20, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (no comment)
4. No Mordecay (talk) 23:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC) - (Leaning a bit more toward the name being explained in the Notes section instead of including it in the lede.)

Abstain

1. Abstain DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 17:55, 14 January 2023 (UTC) - (Was originally leaning toward the No side, but after remembering that I made a similar exception with Khiragg, I am not strongly for or against.)

Comments

If this won't pass, will something change regarding Grand Marshal Tremblade's intro with "Julianne" there? Any consequence to Daerion the Assassin's page? -- Mordecay (talk) 20:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I would be against that. When WoW and Hearthstone are in conflict, then WoW lore trumps Hearthstone lore. But where Hearthstone aligns with WoW, or completes WoW, I don't really see why it should be dismissed. We used Old God depictions from Hearthstone, even though Hearthstone is supposed to be non-canon, because they aligned with WoW. The intent was clearly for them to be accurate depictions of those characters in Warcraft, even if they originated from Hearthstone. Same here but with a name. And indeed, same situation as Daerion the Assassin, which we accepted. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 20:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Tremblade isn't relevant to this situation IMO, since her name was confirmed via a developer tweet. Daerion had no name at all before Hearthstone named him, so the alternative would be to title his page "Unnamed Stormwind Assassin's Guild member" or something to that effect, unlike this situation which would only be adding an additional name to an already-named character.

That said, I'm now remembering Khiragg and realizing that I'm arguably being a hypocrite here. I'll think some more about it, but I may retract my vote. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 20:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I definitely don't feel this vote should set any sort of precedent. We've been doing these things on a case-by-case basis so far, and regardless of which way this vote goes I think we should continue to do so. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 20:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 20:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, case-by-case is good. PeterWind (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)