Talk:World of Warcraft: Chronicle Volume 2

It begins

https://us.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/20753516329 Xporc (talk) 15:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

@User:DeludedTroll : "we should wait until the book is officially released" We didn't do that last year though, why now? -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 10:28, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Actually, as far as I can remember we did. All Volume 1 information that was added to the wiki prior to the book's release was from the IGN preview, same as we did this time, and only after the official release was stuff from other parts than the preview added. The only exception I can think of is that someone added Volume 1 information to Sargeras' article like the day before the book was released, apparently based on the Red Shirt Guy's summary on the Scrolls of Lore forums.

Again, I don't see why the person behind this summary would lie or make things up about the book, but we still can't know for sure that what they're saying is genuine before we get our hands on the actual book. Even if we agree to assume that the information they're posting is completely legitimate, the information they're providing is incomplete and there might be important details they're missing, they could accidentally misspell certain names, etc. It really is just easier to wait until the 14th to know for certain that what we're adding is accurate to what is actually written in the book, in my opinion. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 10:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Meh, okay, whatever. So far what articles were impacted by this leak besides the Mereldar one? Xporc (talk) 10:43, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

MyMindWontQuiet added a bit to the Apexis article, Sandwichman448 added a {{fact}}, and then MMWQ commented the part out. That's the only one I know of. EDIT: Also Earth giant and Farahlon, and probably a bunch of others, so those are going to need to be reverted. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 10:46, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

No, let's not revert the Farhalon and earth giant pages. It's too late, the modifications have already been done on 10s of pages Xporc (talk) 13:31, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Could always have a bot do it, but alright, fine. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 13:39, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I apologize, I was too quick to update all the links. but at least "Farhalon" and "Colossal" are names that existed before the leaks and were valid already. Xporc (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 13:43, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah I commented it out waiting for confirmation because at the time she was just "some guy on the story forums", but then she confirmed that she actually possessed the book. If you're afraid of inaccuracies or mispelling I think it's not worth it to wait for the official release, these can easily be corrected.

As for the legitimity of the information, well she has the book, and it represents a ton of work to put it out all there, yesterday she spent several hours doing it, every 10 minutes a new section was out, I don't think there'd be any ill-meaning, and I am inclined to be believe her, but that's me. If you think we should wait, so be it. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 11:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

More than that, there are also maybe legal implications ... i know some days ago some of my screenshots about unreleased content were removed, so I don't know how it works when it's about books. Xporc (talk) 11:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it is mainly the fact that it's an unofficial leak and that there's more than a week left until the book is out that bothers me. I guess I should have made that more clear. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 11:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

If there were legal implications I'm pretty sure the post on the official forum would've been deleted. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Legal implication aside, we don't have the exact words or page numbers. Information shouldn't be added yet. ReignTG (talk) 12:14, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 12:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, the thread on the official forums seems to have been removed. Many other people are receiving their copies early however, screenshots are flowing on the internet. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 21:17, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

We should never be using unofficial leaks of any kind for sources, period. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 21:24, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

It's out! It seems I won't be getting my copy until a few more days tho ... :( Xporc (talk) 09:40, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Downloading my kindle version right noaaaaw! :D --Mordecay (talk) 11:40, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Same. I'll be getting mine in 2-5 days, meaning that all of the fun new major reveals will probably have already been added to the wiki before I get my hands on the book. Grumble mumble. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 13:16, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I was supposed to get mine Friday the 10th and I got it Monday, so I've waited for official release to edit pages, I guess we can start now! -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Scope of the Second War

Some of these revelations are pretty disappointing. No Dalaran/Stromgarde/Gilneas/Stratholme/Tyr's Hand/Kul Tiras/Caer Darrow/Tol Barad battles, contradicting stuff that is even depicted in WoW ... Xporc (talk) 09:19, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

It's not technically contradicting, they're just not mentioned, the Chronicle can't cover everything. But some simple mentions would've been nice indeed. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 09:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

The first Chronicle didn't mention a lot of stuff, like the Scythe of Elune going completely unheard of in the War of the Satyr chapter. Not mentioned=/=didn't happen. ReignTG (talk) 11:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Since we're talking about this, is Mograine mentioned at all, maybe during the battle for blackrock spire? Xporc (talk) 13:12, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

No. --Mordecay (talk) 13:17, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Well this confirms definitively that not everything canon is spoke about in the book ... Xporc (talk) 13:19, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Definitely. --Mordecay (talk) 13:20, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Solar magic and holy magic

Regarding the retcon of Rukhmar and her magic, she is still associated with the sun. So could it be that the solar magic is (a kind / type) of the holy (Light) magic? --Mordecay (talk) 18:57, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Maybe. It was more distinct in Cata Halls of Origination between Anhuur and Rajh. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 19:03, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

There are quite a few connections between sun magic and Holy magic, however no definite answer yet. For example, the UVG says that the "tauren worship An'she (the Light)". This could either mean that the sun is in fact a giant ball of Light, or that the tauren unknowingly worship the Light which they personify as the sun. Either way there's no clear answer right now. Also they are not ready to answer the "other Holy beings" mentioned in Chronicle. -- MyMindWontQuiet (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Chapter images

Is it possible to have the chapter images without the text? --Mordecay (talk) 18:57, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

I did put {{cleanup}} tags on all the chapter images I uploaded since I'm not sure where to find the textless versions. -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 18:58, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Wang has uploaded 2 of them in 2 days so he might do them all https://www.artstation.com/artist/weiwangart —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MyMindWontQuiet (talk · contr) on 2017-03-18.

Jaina = dreadlord icon

Apparently using {{sic}} wasn't enough to indicate that using a dreadlord icon was intentional to what's represented in the book. Things enclosed in <!-- --> don't show up on the actual page and are used as notes for editors making changes. --Aquamonkeyeg (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Except Jaina isn't actually in the book anywhere except the glossary, and while that's certainly noteworthy (though possibly nothing more than an easter egg) I think adding her into the character list with that icon is going to do nothing but generate confusion. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, there's already a general rumor going around that Jaina is a dreadlord, and for the most part it's tongue in cheek. Just straight up adding that icon onto her when she only appears as a name in the glossary is only going to stir up false facts. So I'm gonna change it back. -- Galenthegrey (talk) 9L59, 1 May 2017 (PST)

Meh. When I added it I intended it as a joke, but if it's causing confusion and edit conflicts it's probably not worth having the dreadlord icon there. /shrug -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 17:00, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, a Gamepedia isn't exactly the place for jokes rather than factual accounts. But seeing as the book apparently makes reference to it, I've added an appendage to it. Hopefully this works for all. -- Galenthegrey (talk) 10:02, 1 May 2017 (PST)

We do have silly articles. Anyhow, seems a bit redundant to point out that "dreadlord, see Jaina Proudmoore" is a joke twice in two different sections (the character list and Notes). -- DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 17:08, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Garona confusion

Can someone explain what this is referring to?

There seems to be an inconsistency given the Chronicle's timeline, Garona would be recognized as a skilled fighter and linguist at the age of 3. Either Maraad was lied to, or it is a mistake in the book.

This is mentioned in Leran's article too but I don't understand what two things are clashing. I think it needs more detail. Tycio (talk) 06:17, 8 February 2021 (UTC)