# Talk:StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty

blizzard changed it from starcraft 2 wings of liberty to just starcraft 2. wikipedia should respect that.84.212.111.156 (talk) 00:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Additionally, The article has not fully adapted to Starcraft becoming free  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.139.164.132 (talk) 15:50, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, the correct title of this article should be StarCraft II. Though it may have been true when first released, these days Wings of Liberty is just the first of three campaigns included with the base game.
I've put a move request to this talk page. — Jeremy 13:59, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I've examined the complaints above, and noticed that there's been a lot of confusion here, with people linking the WoL as the SC2 article, which was sometimes correct, sometimes entirely wrong. Now the StarCraft II cover article exists, and I'm going through the list of incoming links to fix the problems. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Please slow down on changes. Concerns are being raised with this split effort. Give the broader project some time to weigh in again. -- ferret (talk) 15:28, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Please explain your actual concerns, and weigh in on the content of the changes you dislike, as opposed to just being generically opposed. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:42, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I've tried, but I've gotten back arguments I don't understand, like suggesting the games are separate franchises. You tagged this stuff to be split out, didn't make a discussion, though you quoted a 2 year old RM that didn't explain on how they should be rearranged, and begin making mass changes less than 24 hours later. I've contested parts of it, with clear reasons why. Masem has contested the entire thing. "StarCraft II" is not a series, which is core to the edits you're making, which will likely need reverted enmass depending on where further discussions go. Please heed WP:BRD. -- ferret (talk) 15:45, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay, so, lets rewind a bit and get back to practical reality. The generic reader of the English Wikipedia may want to know what "StarCraft II" is. Before today, they would be sent to a page explaining primarily the 2010 version of the game, with the 2013 and 2015 versions described as expansion packs. Whereas, in reality, it's a free-to-play game that resembles most the 2015 version of the game. This is a fundamental issue that was noticed in the 2019 discussions - but wasn't properly followed up on, instead we just left the articles hanging in this weird state that conflicts with practical reality.
The encyclopedia should certainly document the past, but it shouldn't make arbitrary decisions about describing it. We can't claim both that a) "StarCraft II" belongs to the same franchise as "StarCraft" because the vendor Blizzard sells stuff under the same moniker, and b) that "StarCraft II" is fundamentally the same thing as Wings of Liberty despite the fact that the vendor Blizzard does not sell stuff under the same moniker.
Likewise, we have a bunch of links in the encyclopedia where the link text is "StarCraft II", but there is a piped link behind it pointing to Wings of Liberty. This is just artificial and wrong, and it looks to be the result of navigation confusion in the past, when there was apparently a disambiguation page at "StarCraft II" and then someone disambiguated a bunch of "ambiguous" links to point to WoL. This just doesn't make sense, because the term "StarCraft II" has a pretty clear primary meaning.
I'm fine with following procedures and trying to achieve consensus, but factual accuracy is not optional.  --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:26, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Let's not split discussion and centralize discussion at Talk:StarCraft where other editors are replying. For one thing, not a single editor has supported your assertation that "StarCraft II" is a separate independent franchise. If we're worried about factual accuracy... -- ferret (talk) 18:51, 18 April 2021 (UTC)