Talk:Aatrox/Skins/@comment-24038207-20130623054429/@comment-24038207-20130623231331

Well I don't see any Doom Bringer related Aatrox on this wiki, but your answers do seem quite correct.

And I take just trivia of skins and stuff very seriously. Doom Bringer, does not use the WC3 Dreadlord model, as his model is WC3 Doomguard. And as we can see here, people take offence to anything about Dota and strike it off. And I would just love to know, where is the reference to say that, "Justicar Aatrox bears a resemblance to Credo's angel form from ''Devil May Cry 4." ''Is there a reference in those 2 little links in the Reference section that say, Aatrox resembles Credo. If it doesn't and it's based on fan output, then why can't a fan say, "Oh, Aatrox totally has some kind of resemblance to Doom Bringer from Dota."

I even go on to say that his Justicar Skin resembles the Angels from Darksiders, but everybody's all like "No!" So what? Is a wikipedia not something made by people to give information and output on different things. If somebody puts something down, all of a sudden it gets striked out, because one person seems it fit to say, "What? No. That's stupid." Sure, this works in a lot of situations. If it's fact. If it's opinion, hell everyone can do it, but what? Saying that "Justicar Aatrox bears a resemblance to Credo's angel form from Devil May Cry 4." is totally fact, and that Classick totally said something around the words, "Yeah, I got some inspiration from Credo from DMC4." And to me, I can't find that on the references that are given.

So, Luckyvampire, this is my opinion on what is what. I had to vent, if you're even reading this. I respect what you're saying, I really do, but what just irks me, is that  everytime that I want to just edit something in on any kind of wiki, somebody just comes by, and says, "No. Whoever said this is dumb, better take this out." So yes, this is my opinion.