| Revision as of 23:24, 26 July 2009 editBotto (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers12,664 edits →Warcraft movie← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:05, 30 July 2009 edit undoTyciol (talk | contribs)15,625 editsm cleanupNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| {{archives|search=yes}} | {{archives|search=yes}} | ||
| == |
==Races== | ||
| Why interreferencing to wowwiki? yes it's good info, but stay on wikipedia? ] (]) 11:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | Why interreferencing to wowwiki? yes it's good info, but stay on wikipedia? ] (]) 11:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :Links to other wiki websites are common for these types of articles on Misplaced Pages. 'WoWwiki' is currently the best source of WoW lore information on the internet. Considering these points it is completely logical that there are some external links on this page.--] (]) 09:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC) | :Links to other wiki websites are common for these types of articles on Misplaced Pages. 'WoWwiki' is currently the best source of WoW lore information on the internet. Considering these points it is completely logical that there are some external links on this page.--] (]) 09:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Horde races== | ||
| Why are the Naga,the Burning Legion and the Scourge listed as races of the Horde?] (]) 11:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | Why are the Naga,the Burning Legion and the Scourge listed as races of the Horde?] (]) 11:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| :I'm guessing it's because doesn't understand heading levels. It's fixed now. -- ] (]) 23:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | :I'm guessing it's because doesn't understand heading levels. It's fixed now. -- ] (]) 23:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Night Elves== | ||
| Just to say, night elves are described as Children of the Stars. Kaldorei, in their language. Unlike Quel'dorei and Sin'dorei, the other two elves, it does -not- contain an apostrophe. I'll change it, this is just to establish the minute removal of a piece of punctuation. ] (]) 19:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | Just to say, night elves are described as Children of the Stars. Kaldorei, in their language. Unlike Quel'dorei and Sin'dorei, the other two elves, it does -not- contain an apostrophe. I'll change it, this is just to establish the minute removal of a piece of punctuation. ] (]) 19:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Proposed reorganization== | ||
| The races and factions section dwarfs the rest of the article in size. There is also the problem that categorizing races by faction fails for races that were members of the faction in one game but not in subsequent games. It's also vague how significant a race should be to merit mention on this page (Why are Naga included but Murlocs, Furbolgs, and especially the Dragons aren't? "Playable" is not a sound justification) And probably worst of all, there's never any explanation of what the Alliance and Horde actually are -- only which races belong to it. Change to the structure of the article is necessary. | The races and factions section dwarfs the rest of the article in size. There is also the problem that categorizing races by faction fails for races that were members of the faction in one game but not in subsequent games. It's also vague how significant a race should be to merit mention on this page (Why are Naga included but Murlocs, Furbolgs, and especially the Dragons aren't? "Playable" is not a sound justification) And probably worst of all, there's never any explanation of what the Alliance and Horde actually are -- only which races belong to it. Change to the structure of the article is necessary. | ||
| I propose the details about each race be moved to a ] article, and the Universe article only list details on each major faction. Alliance, Horde, Scourge, Burning Legion, and possibly Goblins are the factions I would list. Each faction should have a paragraph or two about which game the faction originated in, what motivated its formation, which races were founding members of it, and major events from subsequent games that had the faction change leadership or caused other races to join/leave the faction. Basically, answering the question "What is this Horde thing?" in a way that is clear to readers completely unfamiliar with Warcraft. | I propose the details about each race be moved to a ] article, and the Universe article only list details on each major faction. Alliance, Horde, Scourge, Burning Legion, and possibly Goblins are the factions I would list. Each faction should have a paragraph or two about which game the faction originated in, what motivated its formation, which races were founding members of it, and major events from subsequent games that had the faction change leadership or caused other races to join/leave the faction. Basically, answering the question "What is this Horde thing?" in a way that is clear to readers completely unfamiliar with Warcraft. ] (]) 05:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ] (]) 05:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I don't see why later members shouldn't be mentioned. The original Horde only included Orcs and Ogres, and the original Scourge only included former Orc Liches and Nathrezim. -- ] (]) 10:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC) | :I don't see why later members shouldn't be mentioned. The original Horde only included Orcs and Ogres, and the original Scourge only included former Orc Liches and Nathrezim. -- ] (]) 10:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::Never mind, I didn't notice the "major events from subsequent games that had the faction change leadership or caused other races to join/leave the faction" part. I support this proposal, and have added a split tag. -- ] (]) 03:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC) | ::Never mind, I didn't notice the "major events from subsequent games that had the faction change leadership or caused other races to join/leave the faction" part. I support this proposal, and have added a split tag. -- ] (]) 03:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Too much Naga== | ||
| ⚫ | How come the WHOLE ARTICLE seems to pay homage only to the Naga? It's too much and the main races are being COMPLETELY IGNORED! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 06:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| ⚫ | How come the WHOLE ARTICLE seems to pay homage only to the Naga |
||
| ==Moons of Draenor== | ==Moons of Draenor== | ||
| Line 41: | Line 35: | ||
| In view of the "pattern of heavy sustained ]" on this article, I recommend that it receive ] as soon as possible. --] (]) 02:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC) | In view of the "pattern of heavy sustained ]" on this article, I recommend that it receive ] as soon as possible. --] (]) 02:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==] reference== | ||
| Maybe I'm wrong, but for some reason I remember the author of the webcomic stating that LFG was not tied to any specific Fantasy/MMO game. ] (]) 15:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC) | Maybe I'm wrong, but for some reason I remember the author of the webcomic stating that LFG was not tied to any specific Fantasy/MMO game. ] (]) 15:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Rebuke to: 32 Playable Races?== | ||
| ⚫ | Basically, the playable races are the basic compounds of the game(s). Yes, it does pertain to World of Warcraft, but are you forgetting that WoW is basically a MMORPG revision of Warcraft itself? This is an online encyclopedia, people! This (that is, deleting the section you are talking about) would be deleting a MAJOR part of the entire database of Warcraft. The reason (in my opinion) that all the races are bundled in the exact same way as World of Warcraft instead of Warcraft is because World of Warcraft (hereby referred to as WoW) is the most ''current'' addition to the Warcraft universe, thus we are referring in the most convenient manner as to not confuse WoW-only players. Perhaps, however, we could sympathize and maybe, for instance, put (under the race's name) their faction. But, in my closing statement, the playable races ''are definitely'' ideals to the Warcraft universe; deleting them would be deleting precious information from the Warcraft universe. ] (]) 04:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | Basically, the playable races are the basic compounds of the game(s). Yes, it does pertain to World of Warcraft, but are you forgetting that WoW is basically a MMORPG revision of Warcraft itself? This is an online encyclopedia, people! This (that is, deleting the section you are talking about) would be deleting a MAJOR part of the entire database of Warcraft. The reason (in my opinion) that all the races are bundled in the exact same way as World of Warcraft instead of Warcraft is because World of Warcraft (hereby referred to as WoW) is the most ''current'' addition to the Warcraft universe, thus we are referring in the most convenient manner as to not confuse WoW-only players. Perhaps, however, we could sympathize and maybe, for instance, put (under the race's name) their faction. But, in my closing statement, the playable races ''are definitely'' ideals to the Warcraft universe; deleting them would be deleting precious information from the Warcraft universe. | ||
| ] (]) 04:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ==Link problems== | ==Link problems== | ||
| ⚫ | Several of the links throughout the article are circular in nature (ie, they lead right back to this article in one way or another). I couldn't find an appropriate tag for this, so I'm noting it on here. ] (]) 03:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | ==Sargeras== | ||
| ⚫ | Several of the links throughout the article are circular in nature (ie, they lead right back to this article in one way or another). I couldn't find an appropriate tag for this, so I'm noting it on here. | ||
| ] (]) 03:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | == |
||
| I remember reading that Sargeras was the creator and He started the burning legion. In this article, however, is says "After being defeated in the War Of The Ancients the main aim of the Burning Legion has been towards destroying Azeroth through mortal pawns such as the orcs and the Scourge. One of them was Sargeras hiding his essence in Aegwynn,...". It makes it sound like Sageras was a pawn of the Burning Legion instead of one of the major players. ] (]) 15:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | I remember reading that Sargeras was the creator and He started the burning legion. In this article, however, is says "After being defeated in the War Of The Ancients the main aim of the Burning Legion has been towards destroying Azeroth through mortal pawns such as the orcs and the Scourge. One of them was Sargeras hiding his essence in Aegwynn,...". It makes it sound like Sageras was a pawn of the Burning Legion instead of one of the major players. ] (]) 15:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :I've rephrased it to correctly refer to Aegwynn as a pawn of the legion and describe her as being possessed by Sargeras. -- ] (]) 04:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC) | :I've rephrased it to correctly refer to Aegwynn as a pawn of the legion and describe her as being possessed by Sargeras. -- ] (]) 04:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| Line 63: | Line 51: | ||
| I don't know if it's been discussed, but although I don't actually care for gamecruft, I think there's sufficient references out there to warrant an individual article for Arthas. You know, the central character of two games? Despite ], we have plenty of similar characters out there with less relevance and coverage such as ], or ], or ]. I don't feel an Arthas article should be subject to deletionism simply because WoWWiki exists and the old stub was full of in-universe detail. I'd take a second shot at it, but any non-biased thoughts out there? ] (]) 14:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC) | I don't know if it's been discussed, but although I don't actually care for gamecruft, I think there's sufficient references out there to warrant an individual article for Arthas. You know, the central character of two games? Despite ], we have plenty of similar characters out there with less relevance and coverage such as ], or ], or ]. I don't feel an Arthas article should be subject to deletionism simply because WoWWiki exists and the old stub was full of in-universe detail. I'd take a second shot at it, but any non-biased thoughts out there? ] (]) 14:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :I think it would be better to make an article on the Lich King, covering the histories of both Arthas Menethil and Ner'zhul. -- ] (]) 06:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC) | :I think it would be better to make an article on the Lich King, covering the histories of both Arthas Menethil and Ner'zhul. -- ] (]) 06:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::Yes, since that's his common name it'd probably be appropriate. ] (]) 11:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC) | ::Yes, since that's his common name it'd probably be appropriate. ] (]) 11:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :::Arthas has potential, but he's only mentioned here and there outside of Warcraft products. If you can find the sources, do it! --] (]) 20:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC) | :::Arthas has potential, but he's only mentioned here and there outside of Warcraft products. If you can find the sources, do it! --] (]) 20:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Massively excessive plot detail== | ||
| The vast majority of this article consists of material which is: | The vast majority of this article consists of material which is: | ||
| ⚫ | #Presented from an in-universe perspective. | ||
| ⚫ | #Of limited general value when assessing its real-world impact (i.e. how much it actually has to do with playing the games). | ||
| ⚫ | #Completely unsourced, and drawn only from primary sources (i.e. the games and sourcebooks) in the first place. | ||
| ⚫ | As such, I'm going to start going through the ''Major races and factions'' section and liberally deleting portions of it which are unsourced, are written from the perspective of the game universe and do not establish why they affect the playing of the game. I expect that this section will end up being less than 50% of the article's total length. The rest of the article is mostly fine. ] - ] 17:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | # |
||
| ⚫ | # |
||
| ⚫ | # |
||
| ⚫ | As such, I'm going to start going through the ''Major races and factions'' section and liberally deleting portions of it which are unsourced, are written from the perspective of the game universe and do not establish why they affect the playing of the game. I expect that this section will end up being less than 50% of the article's total length. | ||
| The rest of the article is mostly fine. | |||
| ] - ] 17:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :I agree with you that the amount of storyline, setting and other cruft, cruft and pure cruft contained in this article is bordering on ridiculous, to the point that it's misnamed and should be labelled as universe and not series. Nonetheless, unless you're already done, I hope you won't eliminate some portions purely because they're unsourced (unsourced + other criteria I have no issue with). It's blatant that they're that way because nobody has bothered to add the source material, not because there's no material out there. I'm planning to help out with reworking the thing into a proper series article, but the pile of retcons, revelations and reshuffling in WoW is so dense that I'd need at least a month to get into the swing of it, time I simply don't have yet. Another small thing - not sure but it seems some subsections are now royally screwed up (i.e. Scourge and Naga). ] (]) 13:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC) | :I agree with you that the amount of storyline, setting and other cruft, cruft and pure cruft contained in this article is bordering on ridiculous, to the point that it's misnamed and should be labelled as universe and not series. Nonetheless, unless you're already done, I hope you won't eliminate some portions purely because they're unsourced (unsourced + other criteria I have no issue with). It's blatant that they're that way because nobody has bothered to add the source material, not because there's no material out there. I'm planning to help out with reworking the thing into a proper series article, but the pile of retcons, revelations and reshuffling in WoW is so dense that I'd need at least a month to get into the swing of it, time I simply don't have yet. Another small thing - not sure but it seems some subsections are now royally screwed up (i.e. Scourge and Naga). ] (]) 13:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::Have you considered tagging the offending material with {{tl|fact}} and {{tl|in-universe/VG}} to make it easier for others to clean it up? -- ] (]) 07:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC) | ::Have you considered tagging the offending material with {{tl|fact}} and {{tl|in-universe/VG}} to make it easier for others to clean it up? -- ] (]) 07:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == |
==Ulduar== | ||
| Ulduar is redirected here, but the word itself doesn't appear in text. I was intrested of what excactly sentence 'And it's embarasing, that every night I have to fight about who gets to go to Ulduar' (speaking about PC and WoW) means. As I have never played WoW myself, the article wasn't really helpful with this. Now I know its about wow, which I knew from the start, but nothing else. --] (]) 13:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | Ulduar is redirected here, but the word itself doesn't appear in text. I was intrested of what excactly sentence 'And it's embarasing, that every night I have to fight about who gets to go to Ulduar' (speaking about PC and WoW) means. As I have never played WoW myself, the article wasn't really helpful with this. Now I know its about wow, which I knew from the start, but nothing else. --] (]) 13:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | :It's one of the endgame dungeons in WoW. It should probably redirect to the WoW article instead, which should really have some actual detail on endgame and the instance system rather than half of it being on criticism. ] - ] 14:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ==Movie== | |||
| ⚫ | : |
||
| == Warcraft movie == | |||
| Given the amount of information here about the movie, and the fact the director has just been announced means we're likely to start getting quite a bit more information soon, maybe the section on the warcraft movie should be given it's own separate article now? ] (]) 15:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | Given the amount of information here about the movie, and the fact the director has just been announced means we're likely to start getting quite a bit more information soon, maybe the section on the warcraft movie should be given it's own separate article now? ] (]) 15:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :We have information, but no title. Without a title, it would be unlikely to survive at ] due to ]. Be patient. --] (]) 15:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | :We have information, but no title. Without a title, it would be unlikely to survive at ] due to ]. Be patient. --] (]) 15:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | ::Indeed, without a title there is very little ground to create an article. In addition, alot of information here on the movie is news regarding its upcoming release, rather than information about the topic itself. I do not believe it is yet suitable to have its own article. --] (]) 21:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | :::The article should be created when either; a) the actors are announced b) the title is announced. ]<sub> ]]</sub> 19:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | :Indeed, without a title there is very little ground to create an article. In addition, alot of information here on the movie is news regarding its upcoming release, rather than information about the topic itself. I do not believe it is yet suitable to have its own article. --] (]) 21:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | ::The article should be created when either; a) the actors are announced b) the title is announced. ]<sub> ]]</sub> 19:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 04:05, 30 July 2009
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Warcraft article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find video game sources: "Warcraft" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||
 | This article was nominated for deletion on November 8, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
 Archives | ||
|
||
Races
Why interreferencing to wowwiki? yes it's good info, but stay on wikipedia? Mallerd (talk) 11:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- Links to other wiki websites are common for these types of articles on Misplaced Pages. 'WoWwiki' is currently the best source of WoW lore information on the internet. Considering these points it is completely logical that there are some external links on this page.--F Notebook (talk) 09:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Horde races
Why are the Naga,the Burning Legion and the Scourge listed as races of the Horde?The Great Duck (talk) 11:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- I'm guessing it's because someone doesn't understand heading levels. It's fixed now. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Night Elves
Just to say, night elves are described as Children of the Stars. Kaldorei, in their language. Unlike Quel'dorei and Sin'dorei, the other two elves, it does -not- contain an apostrophe. I'll change it, this is just to establish the minute removal of a piece of punctuation. TheAdamant (talk) 19:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Proposed reorganization
The races and factions section dwarfs the rest of the article in size. There is also the problem that categorizing races by faction fails for races that were members of the faction in one game but not in subsequent games. It's also vague how significant a race should be to merit mention on this page (Why are Naga included but Murlocs, Furbolgs, and especially the Dragons aren't? "Playable" is not a sound justification) And probably worst of all, there's never any explanation of what the Alliance and Horde actually are -- only which races belong to it. Change to the structure of the article is necessary.
I propose the details about each race be moved to a Races of Warcraft article, and the Universe article only list details on each major faction. Alliance, Horde, Scourge, Burning Legion, and possibly Goblins are the factions I would list. Each faction should have a paragraph or two about which game the faction originated in, what motivated its formation, which races were founding members of it, and major events from subsequent games that had the faction change leadership or caused other races to join/leave the faction. Basically, answering the question "What is this Horde thing?" in a way that is clear to readers completely unfamiliar with Warcraft. DoctorDiablo (talk) 05:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see why later members shouldn't be mentioned. The original Horde only included Orcs and Ogres, and the original Scourge only included former Orc Liches and Nathrezim. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 10:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Never mind, I didn't notice the "major events from subsequent games that had the faction change leadership or caused other races to join/leave the faction" part. I support this proposal, and have added a split tag. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Too much Naga
How come the WHOLE ARTICLE seems to pay homage only to the Naga? It's too much and the main races are being COMPLETELY IGNORED! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.232.170 (talk) 06:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Moons of Draenor
I have corrected the 'Geography' section of this article. The previous revision stated "Draenor, after having been shattered into many pieces, currently has no known moons." Firstly, Dreanor is not current. The remains of that planet are called Outland. Secondly, Outland does have a number of moons which can clearly be seen from most regions in Outland. --F Notebook (talk) 10:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Request for page protection
In view of the "pattern of heavy sustained vandalism" on this article, I recommend that it receive semi-protection as soon as possible. --F Notebook (talk) 02:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
Looking For Group reference
Maybe I'm wrong, but for some reason I remember the author of the webcomic stating that LFG was not tied to any specific Fantasy/MMO game. Karakkan (talk) 15:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Rebuke to: 32 Playable Races?
Basically, the playable races are the basic compounds of the game(s). Yes, it does pertain to World of Warcraft, but are you forgetting that WoW is basically a MMORPG revision of Warcraft itself? This is an online encyclopedia, people! This (that is, deleting the section you are talking about) would be deleting a MAJOR part of the entire database of Warcraft. The reason (in my opinion) that all the races are bundled in the exact same way as World of Warcraft instead of Warcraft is because World of Warcraft (hereby referred to as WoW) is the most current addition to the Warcraft universe, thus we are referring in the most convenient manner as to not confuse WoW-only players. Perhaps, however, we could sympathize and maybe, for instance, put (under the race's name) their faction. But, in my closing statement, the playable races are definitely ideals to the Warcraft universe; deleting them would be deleting precious information from the Warcraft universe. Epithanyseeker (talk) 04:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Link problems
Several of the links throughout the article are circular in nature (ie, they lead right back to this article in one way or another). I couldn't find an appropriate tag for this, so I'm noting it on here. Scify (talk) 03:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Sargeras
I remember reading that Sargeras was the creator and He started the burning legion. In this article, however, is says "After being defeated in the War Of The Ancients the main aim of the Burning Legion has been towards destroying Azeroth through mortal pawns such as the orcs and the Scourge. One of them was Sargeras hiding his essence in Aegwynn,...". It makes it sound like Sageras was a pawn of the Burning Legion instead of one of the major players. Turanis (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- I've rephrased it to correctly refer to Aegwynn as a pawn of the legion and describe her as being possessed by Sargeras. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 04:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Arthas
I don't know if it's been discussed, but although I don't actually care for gamecruft, I think there's sufficient references out there to warrant an individual article for Arthas. You know, the central character of two games? Despite WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, we have plenty of similar characters out there with less relevance and coverage such as Jim Raynor, or Sophitia Alexandra, or Kain (Legacy of Kain). I don't feel an Arthas article should be subject to deletionism simply because WoWWiki exists and the old stub was full of in-universe detail. I'd take a second shot at it, but any non-biased thoughts out there? Monere (talk) 14:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think it would be better to make an article on the Lich King, covering the histories of both Arthas Menethil and Ner'zhul. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 06:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, since that's his common name it'd probably be appropriate. Monere (talk) 11:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
- Arthas has potential, but he's only mentioned here and there outside of Warcraft products. If you can find the sources, do it! --Izno (talk) 20:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, since that's his common name it'd probably be appropriate. Monere (talk) 11:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Massively excessive plot detail
The vast majority of this article consists of material which is:
- Presented from an in-universe perspective.
- Of limited general value when assessing its real-world impact (i.e. how much it actually has to do with playing the games).
- Completely unsourced, and drawn only from primary sources (i.e. the games and sourcebooks) in the first place.
As such, I'm going to start going through the Major races and factions section and liberally deleting portions of it which are unsourced, are written from the perspective of the game universe and do not establish why they affect the playing of the game. I expect that this section will end up being less than 50% of the article's total length. The rest of the article is mostly fine. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 17:33, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with you that the amount of storyline, setting and other cruft, cruft and pure cruft contained in this article is bordering on ridiculous, to the point that it's misnamed and should be labelled as universe and not series. Nonetheless, unless you're already done, I hope you won't eliminate some portions purely because they're unsourced (unsourced + other criteria I have no issue with). It's blatant that they're that way because nobody has bothered to add the source material, not because there's no material out there. I'm planning to help out with reworking the thing into a proper series article, but the pile of retcons, revelations and reshuffling in WoW is so dense that I'd need at least a month to get into the swing of it, time I simply don't have yet. Another small thing - not sure but it seems some subsections are now royally screwed up (i.e. Scourge and Naga). Monere (talk) 13:03, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Have you considered tagging the offending material with {{fact}} and {{in-universe/VG}} to make it easier for others to clean it up? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 07:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Ulduar
Ulduar is redirected here, but the word itself doesn't appear in text. I was intrested of what excactly sentence 'And it's embarasing, that every night I have to fight about who gets to go to Ulduar' (speaking about PC and WoW) means. As I have never played WoW myself, the article wasn't really helpful with this. Now I know its about wow, which I knew from the start, but nothing else. --195.148.29.73 (talk) 13:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's one of the endgame dungeons in WoW. It should probably redirect to the WoW article instead, which should really have some actual detail on endgame and the instance system rather than half of it being on criticism. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Movie
Given the amount of information here about the movie, and the fact the director has just been announced means we're likely to start getting quite a bit more information soon, maybe the section on the warcraft movie should be given it's own separate article now? -OOPSIE- (talk) 15:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
- We have information, but no title. Without a title, it would be unlikely to survive at articles for deletion due to WP:CRYSTAL. Be patient. --Izno (talk) 15:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, without a title there is very little ground to create an article. In addition, alot of information here on the movie is news regarding its upcoming release, rather than information about the topic itself. I do not believe it is yet suitable to have its own article. --Taelus (talk) 21:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
- The article should be created when either; a) the actors are announced b) the title is announced. DarthBotto talkcont 19:24, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, without a title there is very little ground to create an article. In addition, alot of information here on the movie is news regarding its upcoming release, rather than information about the topic itself. I do not believe it is yet suitable to have its own article. --Taelus (talk) 21:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)