You need to prove to me it both exists and is canon first. Burden of proof is on you, you can’t say something with no evidence exists and with no endorsement from blizzard is canon without evidence. That’s what Burden of Proof means btw, not this bizzaro slang for “You have to prove my preconceived notions wrong” you’ve been calling “Burden of proof”
404’d. Like I said.
You keep linking me stuff that’s deleted.
I’m not even in FAVOR of interpreting Arthas as the fault of the alliance and Ner’zhul the fault of the horde. That’s stupid insane logic that Anduin came up with because he’s a weird reverse apologist. The Alliance has literally nothing to do with Arthas, they were literally the first to be attacked by him.
Honestly? Likewise. I will be perfectly honest, to unironically claim Arthas is the fault of the Alliance and Ner’zhul the fault of the Horde is to word it politely, -questionable- logic. Arthas always did what he did on his own free will, but he stopped being Alliance the second he picked up Frostmourne and the only involvement Ner’zhul has with any of the New Horde’s nations was that one of them (The Forsaken) was enslaved to him who later broke free (thanks Illidan!) and have never sought to rejoin or ally the Scourge since.
It and many other arguments like it ultimately serve no actual purpose other than toxicity-fueled and enhanced faction arguments on the forums, on twitter, on wherever it’s being had because for some people BFA and the Alliance-Horde War in Cata/MoP both never actually ended and was real.
“Humans are bad because [ ]!”
“Night Elves are bad because [ ]!”
“Thrall was bad because [ ]!”
“Trolls are bad because [ ] !”
So on.
1 Like
The information still exists, this does not decanonize them, just the method you use to locate it. Not proof.
Wowpedia is quoting official material, you first have to show me evidence that they’ve officially decanonized it. Not only do I not agree with your interpretation, neither does wowpedia, the most used and reliable source of wow lore.
Even randoms joining the thread are trying to point this out to you, and yet no one has agreed with you yet.
It is, you argued the semantics of the High elf blood elf population wording in the encyclopedia until an alliance player clarified that you were wrong, then you immediately jumped to “its no canon”
Semantics indeed.
No, you literally argued the wording of the encyclopedia. lol
Except everyone in the room can easily discern what you’re trying to say, and the absurdity behind it. You’d rather cling to this idea that we adhere to your baseless interpretation, over a website prized on its accuracy and reliability. No one here has agreed with you, and I imagine no one will because it’s a hill no one with an ounce of intelligence wants to die on.
But here you are, a stinking rotting corpse on top of that hill. Everyone is laughing at you, and you’re so out-of-touch you can’t even see it. Stop embarrassing yourself lol
6 Likes
Show us on the doll where the forums touched you.
3 Likes
I agree wholeheartedly.
I’m just trying to provide factual information as I see it. And if it’s deleted, it’s deleted for a REASON… For example:
Looking into Wowpedia:
" * No longer available quests that were not replaced by new information should be canon.[[4]]https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Lore#cite_note-4
So we’re going to say it’s canon that the “heroes of azeroth” were involved in making sure Alexstrasa was kept as a breeding slave to the orcs??? How about hell no.
Even the SOURCE for this claim that this should be the case is a WAYBACK MACHINE link! Because the tweet suggesting deleted content was still canon WAS DELETED.
https://web.archive.org/web/20210222182836/https://twitter.com/MickyNeilson/status/604159938198274048
Wowpedia’s sources continue to be self justifying. “Oh this deleted content is canon because of this source that was deleted, and we can use deleted sources because of this other source, that is also deleted.”
It’s absurd, and why I will never trust a wiki with telling me what is and isn’t true, they are maintained by fans, and fans have an agenda different from the people writing the story, and they will try ANYTHING to justify what they’ve written as being true.
1 Like
There’s a difference between a quest that never existed in live and say, one that didn’t survive cataclysm.
1 Like
Blizzard does not endorse it.
Yes it does. On Wowpedia, maybe they approve of regarding deleted content as canon, but my character didn’t help Alexstrasa be kept as a slave to Orcs for breeding purposes. So screw Wowpedia and deleted content.
FTFY
They deleted it.
We didn’t help keep Alexstrasa a prisoner to the orcs forcing her to breed. Because they deleted that quest. For a reason. I don’t care if the majority of your echo chamber things dragon sexual assault is cool.
Okay cool but deleted content is not canon by common sense and by Blizzard themselves. Given they literally delete content to ensure it’s not canon. Like player characters SAing dragons.
I always stated it wasn’t canon. Your refusal to read is not my problem. You’re also wrong about what it says because you’re being purposefully dense.
“90% of silvermoon” is not “90% of all high elves ever” and that’s unarguably true.
yes
I can literally do both and still will.
Clearly not despite how crystal clear I am being. You’re inventing reasons to be angy.
The only absurd person here is the one screaming “IT’S REAL” despite having no evidence.
deleted = not canon is neither baseless nor something I am asking you to adhere to. Reality is.
Citation needed.
The Purge article literally contradicts itself, something you didn’t seem to notice this entire conversation.
Reliable as a delorean maybe.
Just because you like something and it’s “Classic” does not mean it’s flawless.
I have likes. I’ll disregard this comment and the logical fallacy fueling it.
Echo chambers =/= facts
Your imagination is so strong it defies the reality in front of you.
You have 1 guy liking your posts. Suddenly that’s the entire lore community and everyone on the forums?
God you’re insane.
Wow, back to the insults because you’re losing the argument.
Do you redirect your insecurities onto others often?
Imagine the mental gymnastics one has to go through to justify to themselves that deleted content that has no reference to it from any official source is still canon and that anyone who disagrees is “A rotting corpse being laughed at by EVERYONE”
You have one like.
I’m not impressed.
The Irony after that insane tirade.
So we’re going to say it’s canon that the “heroes of azeroth” were involved in making sure Alexstrasa was kept as a breeding slave to the orcs??? How about hell no.
-WoWPedia claiming the quest that didn’t even hit live was canon.
Huh. Learn something new every-day. Yeah, at the end of the day it’s always better to actually look at the source material (either in-game or in the books (( before they’re made non-canon) rather than listen to garbage spewed by… well, anyone that’s not Blizzard Entertainment.
1 Like
Nope.
They never added it to the actual game to be deleted.
Also classy way to try to accuse people of being scummy there.
4 Likes
Anything deleted is still canon guys as long as new lore doesn’t come in directly contradicting it -Wowpedia
What a stupid way to interpret canon. It’s obviously a desperate attempt to make all the “cool and classic” lore still relevant despite the fact Blizzard has never done anything with it other than continue to remove it. “The tabletop is still canon guys! The deleted webpages are still canon! PLEASE. PLEASE COME BACK AND THEORIZE WITH US ABOUT WOW LORE.”
I don’t really blame them, if they took the reality check Blizzard is trying to give them and agreed to remove all the deleted crap, Wowpedia would shrink several times overnight and they would lose a ton of interest from people like Runeleaf.
Was it coded into a version of the game yes or no.
Or do you want me to find some other insane example of “Canon lore” according to Wowpedia that’s obviously not canon but everyone has to acknowledge it being canon in order to justify the OTHER deleted content being canon?
Also your excuse for “Deleted content is canon” is STILL a link to a deleted tweet lmao.
Doesn’t matter. If it wasn’t in the game, it wasn’t in the game. PTR isn’t the game.
3 Likes
Actually doesn’t matter, according to Wowpedia:
" Everything released by Blizzard except mods and the table-top RPG is considered canon.[[1]] This includes games, novels, short stories, manga, and comics[[1]]([[2]]( as well as trailers and cinematics. [Warcraft Encyclopedia], [History of Warcraft], game [manuals]( and original Warcraft RTS games are also considered canon but in some cases they are overwritten or modified by novels) retconned in [Rise of the Horde], [War of the Ancients]) and its aftermath slightly altered by the time-travel in the novel, [Dawn of the Aspects]) revealing the true history of the Aspects instead of a legend told in a History chapter, and [Tides of Darkness]) with [Beyond the Dark Portal] setting a canon line of events for the first RTS games which had two versions of the ending)."
PTR is considered canon because it was released by Blizzard.
Removed quests are still considered canon by Wowpedia
- No longer available quests that were not replaced by new information should be canon.[[4]]
That quest was not released. Released has a meaning.
4 Likes
Wowpedia disagrees. PTR is released by Blizzard. It is therefore canon. IT does not have to be the main client to be canon.
Take it up with your “reliable and accurate” saviors.
edit:
Also PTR is by definition “in the game” it’s not the live client but that’s an absurd distinction.
is SoD not canon? Blizzard specified we have a multiverse and that SoD is canon. But it’s not “in the game” and is a different client by your definition.
I’m not going to continue that argument because that’s a whole new dumb can of worms.
Also, you should look up how chronicles retcons her captivity.
1 Like
You wana elaborate on that because google gives me a fat nothing
It was literally content released by blizzard for players to play.
You cannot twist the definition of the standard released to fit your gamer slang sorry not sorry.
It was released in a public test realm.
It doesn’t state test material isn’t canon.
and I’M the one arguing semantics? You all LOVE to make everything semantics while still not addressing the main point.
Where is your source that deleted content is still canon. Wowpedia doesn’t have one.
Honestly the fact that this source you’re even using is sourcing dead links should be the end of this argument in my favor.
You cannot legitimately expect a source to be taken seriously when it’s a FAN PAGE that DOESN’T SOURCE it’s information properly!
1 Like
The chronicles version changes it to the orcs keeping her in captivity to force her flight to follow their commands and she lays eggs while in captivity which is a bonus to them. Probably trying to get away from the issues of the dragons going from more animalistic into fully sentient creatures.
2 Likes
Released when it comes to a product is the finished version that is released to the public. Not the beta, not the testing, the final product. When a patch is released, that means it has gone live, and that goes for the content therein.
You don’t get to make up your own definitions of standard terms.
4 Likes