Currently, we have pages such as Genlock and Genlocks, Deepstalker and Deepstalkers, Dragon and Dragons. Singular noun is used for the creature variation encountered in the game, plural refers to all variations as a whole, i.e. "dragons" includes high dragons, mature dragons, dragons, drakes, dragonlings, etc.
I find this distinction confusing to both experienced and inexperienced users and think that we should use some other convention. For example, "Dragon" for all dragons, "Dragon (variation)" for the common variant. What do you think?
– mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 16:03, September 17, 2013 (UTC)
I think there should be one page with a singular name. Pics from their sisterpages should be transfered along with all infomations.78.8.136.83 (talk) 16:35, September 17, 2013 (UTC)StubbornMageSlayer
- That's not something I would support. The pages will become too long if we combine all variations, especially when they appear in multiple games. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 16:50, September 17, 2013 (UTC)
Agreeing with your proposal Mostlyautumn. I've been cleaning up disambiguated links and run into this quite a lot when making edits. Singular and plural uses of creature names are often used interchangably within the articles themselves because users don't know that there's a distinction between the (using your example) Genlock and Genlocks pages. I still think there needs to be separations between the group as a whole and the individual variotions within that group. Your naming proposal sounds less confusing than what we've got now. Kelcat (talk) 16:36, September 17, 2013 (UTC)
I agree. Moreover, users will sometimes link the plural form instead of the singular one to link to the article when it is about the creature and not the group. "Variation" sounds good. ··· 
d·day! 06:12, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
I agree. FirstDrellSpectre (talk) 18:36, December 6, 2013 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that the main creature page to be in plural form (as it contains several types not just one) while the creature variations to be in singular form.
So we would have "Deepstalkers" or "Golems" as the main page which would list the variations and the lore around the creature. Then the variations would be listed in singular form, ie: Deepstalker leader, Deepstalker (variation).
Opinions? 
13:57, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- It makes sense, but if you look at the Codex entry: Genlock, for example, it has the title as the singular "Genlock", and types in the plural (Alphas, Emissaries). I'd normally say to go with how the game does it, but I think that is a little clunky, in this case. I think it should be the singular form for all the pages, main and sub, as that is very simple, but I wouldn't object to following the game's usage. -Sophia (talk) 15:25, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- I think we should follow English Wikipedia conventions and use singular case. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 16:26, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- In the exceptions of your linked page, it specifically mentions:
- "Articles on groups or classes of specific things."
- In this case, all the creature variations form a group which should apply to this exception.
16:51, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- In this case, all the creature variations form a group which should apply to this exception.
- wikipedia:Bird, wikipedia:Dinosaur, wikipedia:Flea, wikipedia:Whale etc. – mostlyautumn • talk • contribs • 17:41, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, it looks like if we followed that guideline the pages should all be singular, which makes the most sense to me. It seems to be agreed upon to use the same tense for both the main and sub pages, and while Genlocks might make sense, Genlocks (Variation) doesn't indicate to me, at least, that it is referring to a single specific creature similar to a Genlock emissary. Kelcat (talk) 17:54, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Kelly, neither side has proposed "Genlocks (variation)", so I think you've probably misunderstood something. 18:20, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Kelly, neither side has proposed "Genlocks (variation)", so I think you've probably misunderstood something.
- Why not have the pages be singular, then for the name of the actual in-game unit be something like Genlock (enemy) or something of the like? BOLTMAN FOREVER 18:34, December 20, 2013 (UTC)
- Why not have the pages be singular, then for the name of the actual in-game unit be something like Genlock (enemy) or something of the like?
Given all the support for the initial proposal, I have implemented it on the articles I have found that needed it. 
Loleil Talk 03:11, January 4, 2014 (UTC)