Talk:Kalidar
Correction, the references in the rpg didn't say it had "no name", it simply doesn't give its name before the night elves grew the tree on the island. It just confirms that the island now takes the name of the tree.Baggins (talk) 10:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- High elves? --Super Bhaal (talk) 12:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, technically, the rpg didn't say "the island that never had a name". They do not mention any name though until the night elves "moved" there and the tree was grown there. So either it never had a name or it has been forgotten through the ages. Either way, the island is nameless to our knowledge until it was given the name Teldrassil. Baggins meant the night elves. Rolandius
(talk - contr) 13:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, technically, the rpg didn't say "the island that never had a name". They do not mention any name though until the night elves "moved" there and the tree was grown there. So either it never had a name or it has been forgotten through the ages. Either way, the island is nameless to our knowledge until it was given the name Teldrassil. Baggins meant the night elves. Rolandius
Actually it simply doesn't mention its previous name, if it had a name. If the name was forgotten or not is pure speculation. In reality the rpg authors just deem it necessarily to even give/mention its name before hand, or even if it had a name. The above comment was actually just a note to why I edited the article to put the info in line with what was actually said in the rpg without adding any conjecture or misleading interpretations of the rpg's text.Baggins (talk) 06:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- By the way, you cannot retcon something that never existed in the first place. To my knowledge, this was a "preview" and did not make it into the final product i.e. it cannot be retconned. A retcon is something in a final product which then gets changed by later info from a final product. Rolandius (talk - contr) 07:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
- By the way, you cannot retcon something that never existed in the first place. To my knowledge, this was a "preview" and did not make it into the final product i.e. it cannot be retconned. A retcon is something in a final product which then gets changed by later info from a final product. Rolandius
- Actually it was an official Website. Saying it was only a "preview" is like saying that the previews for various major patches are "only previews". But even the previews represent released lore at the given time. If blizzard drops the use of it later on that is "a retcon". You do realize that much of Brann's history is also based on your so called "preview" idea. If we started erasing comments about "previews" we would have to erase quite a few pages that link to older removed Blizzard pages. We simply won't allow that. I.E. "only a preview" is not a valid excuse for "ignoring" something or designating it valid or not valid source of lore. Remember we do have a "neutral point of view" policy that we keep. We do not state our opinions of validity of a source.Baggins (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC)