Talk:Embrace the Shadow

Advanced rules questions
I was wondering how Embrace the Shadow actually works: it seems to be a spell which effect is to create an enchantment (which wears off at the end of turn) attached to the player; this enchantment works like Auchenai Soulpriest's Aura, so I'm wondering if the Embrace the Shadow enchantment has an ongoing effect too? Do enchantments and auras affecting players interact the same way those affecting minions do? Elekim (talk) 09:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah it's pretty likely that Auchenai Soulpriest's ongoing effect and Embrace the Shadow's Enchantment's ongoing effect are the same thing. Haven't looked into it though. --Patashu (talk) 23:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Style in the case of duplicate mechanics
I wonder what the best way is to list notes for a few cards with very similar mechanics such as this and Auchenai Soulpriest. Generally I think avoiding repetition across pages is nice, since it prevents two pages from getting out of sync with each other, and also makes it more natural to highlight differences between similar-seeming effects (if any) rather than having to comb through two nearly-same lists to see which things don't match.

For instance, Stalagg simply has a note to refer to Feugen for notes. Obviously those two are paired even more tightly than this/Soulpriest, but I think it would be a reasonable choice to refer to there instead of copying everything and then trying to keep both pages updated simultaneously. Another option I've seen on Wowpedia is to create a small template which has all the notes in common and transcluded on both pages, maintaining a single consistent set, but that option is harder to edit and I haven't seen it used here.

Thoughts? &#32;- jerodast (talk) 07:04, 21 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree, and for my part this is the style I've generally used. There are considerable risks to duplicating information, not the least of which is simply wasting editors' precious time ;) The work of maintaining multiple copies (especially in more complicated cases) is unnecessary and prone to errors and divergences, and as you say is also less clear in some ways, especially once the text starts to vary. In my opinion, we should wherever possible aim to centralise information, rather than duplicating it. That said, there is a balance; if the information is a single sentence, it makes sense to simply repeat it rather than make readers link to a different page.


 * Templates are a good system and a compromise for when the information is needed but also detailed; I've used them in a few places (the How to get templates are a good example) to make updates exponentially easier, but the downside is they are much harder for editors to actually edit, and can't be edited in situ, so they're not so good for complicated and wordy subjects like this.


 * In this situation I think centralisation on the Auchenai Soulpriest page is probably the best option. I've made a provisional edit; further edits or discussion are welcome. -- Taohinton (talk) 03:55, 28 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Looks good.&#32;- jerodast (talk) 04:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)