Talk:World of Warcraft/Archive 3

message: I just got the game yesterday and I used 5 CD's to install the game, and the article says it uses 4, am I missing something here? Eenu 20:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The articles mentions 4 CDs under the Collector's Edition section.  If I'm not mistaken the Collectors Edition is no longer sold by Blizzard.  Also, the need for an additional CD was probably created due to the many patches and updates since the original release. --Hetar 23:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CD's

message: Is the entry on realms needed? I mean, it has some useful information, but it looks incredibly out of place. Could someone reposition, or better merge it into the rest of the article? 24.91.212.80 03:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the realm section and added a little bit more info.  Hopefully this is an improvement. --Hetar 22:51, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Realms

message: I couldn't find this in the article, but, when did WoW get announced (and/or how long has it been under development)? --Shadowcode 23:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: World of Warcraft was officially announced Sept. 2, 2001.  Production work likely began sometime before this date, however I doubt the original start date is available. --Hetar 23:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Development data

message: I know that Dave Chappelle and Robin Williams are among the famous people that play WoW. But I do not know if it is enough to  warrant a list on this article but if anyone knows any more and thinks it is enough, maybe there should be a section on it? This would also provide as evidence that WoW could be considered mainstream and/or popular.
::Vin Diesel also play WoW, apparently as a shaman. --Akaroo 02:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really "famous celeberties", but a number of technology entrepreneurs like Joi Ito and Ross Mayfield play WoW, and even formed their own special guilds (see "Is World of Warcraft the New Golf?" and "Where the Hell Have You Been?") Ltc 20:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: John Romero (One of the guys that made Doom)plays frequently. He's a nightelf, I think. I goruped with him once or twice. 08:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous Celebrities that play WoW

message: What is the sorce for this line:
The other race that is coming out is the Naga which will be on horde.
The Blood Elves are the new race for the horde and blizzad did not say what the other one would be.
::That line is blatantly inaccurate, so I removed it. --Arabani 05:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: lol that comment you are lol'ing at is six months old. —Stormie 10:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion pack Info 

message: Warden is also in other Blizzard games.  In fact, it was in Warcraft III 1.18 first.  The hacker "ZoiD" was the first to discover it when working on Warcraft III.  The string "WardenClient.cpp" can be found in these files:
* World of Warcraft 1.6.1 and above: WoW.exe
* Diablo II 1.11a and above: D2Client.dll
* Starcraft 1.13a and above: Battle.snp
* Warcraft III 1.18 and above: Game.dll
Warden is named after Maiev Shadowsong.  The string "Maiev.mod" is present in these 4 games.  However, in all but Warcraft III it's weakly encrypted.
: perhaps interesting, but more so for a seperate warden article, something that would help in any case with trimming down the size of this article. Boneyard 09:36, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on Warden 

message: is it really wise to already put the few things we are told by blizzard about the expansion in this article, it will mean adding everywhere stuff about how limit information is known and that it will be a long time for it actually is in game. next to that people keep slipping in fake info on the expansion now. 
wouldn't it be wise to make one section saying that an expansion is announced and that all info on it can be found on the world of warcraft burning legion expansion article? that way there is one place for all the expansion info and once it is released we could put the information stuff in the main article. Boneyard 09:49, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  seperating expansion information 

message: What the story to this game, if there is one?
Pece Kocovski 02:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/story/ for heaps of info about the storyline! --Stormie 10:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like there really should be some summary of the situation presented.  The game is all about fighting and many details of that are presented except for the motivation.  The Alliance and Horde are loose federations that had been allied in struggle against the Scourge but now fight.  -- M0llusk 01:24, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story 

message: I heard a rumor that Dryads were going to be the new alliance race, any (dis)confirmation on this? 209.69.41.129 22:02, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, there is no official information from Blizzard regarding what the new Alliance race will be. Anything you might hear/read about what the new Alliance race, regardless of your source, should be treated with extreme skepticism. Essentially, stuff you might hear between now and Blizzard's announcement is wishful thinking. --Arabani 07:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Atm the best guesses are either the Draeni or the Pandaren since the Worgen don't have much available backstory. And Drayds? They are part of the Night Elf faction. Perhaps I have delved too deeply into the lore though, Derktar 01:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Alliance Race

message: I removed the section
: See talk As of November 2005, World of Warcraft is the most popular MMORPG in the world, with more than 4.5 million active subscriptions.
since Westward Journey have over 56 million registered accounts. // Liftarn
::According to Westward Journey's official website they have 467,269 peak concurrent users. And that's out of 56 million registered accounts. That comes out to about .8% of the registered accounts they claim to have. That is, quite frankly, a very low number and makes me doubt the validity of their claim of 56 million registered accounts. Unfortunately, it's pretty hard to find independent statistics on MMORPG user populations and statistics. The statement that WoW is the most popular MMORPG in the world came from a Blizzard press release, which, admittedly, is probably a bit biased. However, I do think that you're nitpicking. I'm going to revert your edit, but qualify it with "one of the most popular" rather than "the most popular" for the time being. --Arabani 18:24, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with Arabani.  Blizz cites the "upwards of 500k users online at one time", and if I had a number of total servers I could estimate how accurate that was. --Syrthiss 18:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe Blizzard has at least 100 servers in the US alone, with another 100 or so worldwide. I could give more specific numbers if I can find one of Caydiem's posts about why World Events similar to the end of beta events are no longer feasible ... she mentioned a rough server count. Update: Hopefully this thread won't get deleted by Blizzard's forums any time soon. Anyway, she mentions that there are over 100 servers in North America alone; nothing on international servers, but I'm going to guess around the same amount since I'm pretty sure at least half the players play on the international servers. --Arabani 18:46, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: and I estimate between 3k and 5k per server, which gives 600k - 1M online at one time.  I'm wishing I could find where I read the 3-5k number though. :/ --Syrthiss 18:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Just wondering, where did that information come from? I've never seen it before, which is why I'm asking. :D Anyway, I'm pretty sure Blizzard does in fact own the servers - they just stick them in some unknown company's colocation centre. --Arabani 04:13, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most popular? 

message: The link to this talent calculator was added to the "Useful Resources" section a couple of times. Junjk removed it, as did I, since the official website has a talent calculator, and there is no need to link to a different one. User:Skosiris has put it to me that it should be linked since it has been so well received by WoW players, many of whom agree that it is far superior to the official one. And I agree - I actually checked it out a few days back when a saw a link to it on a WoW forum, and I since have it bookmarked as an excellent tool. But I'm really not sure that its the sort of site that Wikipedia:External links would have us linking to..? Anyway, I throw the discussion to the floor - what does anyone else think here? --Stormie 05:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why link to an unofficial one. I'm using the official one, and it works, and right now I'm on a mac mini using Safari 1.2.4 and it's both fast and works perfectly, with no errors. It's also officially updated as changes are made, plus - shit - it's official.  Havok (T/C) 12:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Talent calculator link

message: While playing 'WoW', I often find myself running into strange vocublary used by other players.
Might it be a good idea to posit a seperate 'WoW' jargon page, in the manner like that done on, say, poker? 30/10/05 User_talk:Jayteecork
::Ask and you shall receive. World of Warcraft terminology --Arabani 06:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Jargon

message: does any one know the exact location of where blizzard entertainment is?
:Blizzard is located in Irvine, California.  NBS525 22:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  blizzard entertainment 

message: I want to suggest adding Leetster. It's a social networking site for WoW. People come to the wikipedia entry on WoW to find links to the definitive sites related to WoW. Leetster is the only SNS devoted to WoW, and is an important and unique social gathering point. Philosophistry 00:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First, I'd like to mention that leetster has been included in the external links before, and it was agreed that it didn't belong there. Having said that, Leetster is hardly the only social networking site for WoW. Facesofwow readily comes to mind. --Arabani 01:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Addendum: I just checked your talk page and it seems that you were the one that first added Leetster way back in the day. In that case, I'm pretty sure you're familiar with the situation that I referred to in my reply. :) --Arabani 01:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't have any problem with http://www.dotwarcraft.com/, the only question one might ask is, do we really need another external link of this type.  I strongly object to adding wowinsider.com to the list as it has an objectional amount of advertising, and does not meet WP:EL. Remember, the Wikipedia guidelines state, "Note: fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included." --Hetar 03:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is wowinsider.com considered a fanlisting? I understand an objection based on advertising level, but it's not really a fanlisting-type site like Facesofwow. Also, what external link of "this type" are on the page the first place? None of the links I see really offer news and such -- except the official Blizzard WoW site, which is limited at best. 70.185.180.243 04:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  external links 

message: I've been Googleing for awhile, and it seems like the only confirmed classes for BE's are Mage, Priest, Warlock, and Warrior. Most sources say any others are up in the air for now. I'm not nitpicking, but I'd like to know where Blood Elf Hunters were confirmed. Arcanum7
::Blood Elf hunters were never confirmed. At Blizzcon, Blizzard stated that Blood Elves would either get Rogues or Hunters, but the developers had not decided yet which class it would be. --Arabani (Talk ∞ Contribs) 06:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started playing for the past few weeks, but I swear the questgiver for Ol' Sooty is a High Elf Hunter (as well as Sylvana being a High Elf before becoming a Banshee). Wouldn't the Blood Elves, being so highly integrated with them, follow same classes as the High Elves? --YoungFreud 07:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That seems pretty far-fetched to me. Simply because one NPC, which may or may not be a High Elf/Blood Elf, appears to have a specific class doesnt signify enough to go on. Unfortunatly, we can speculate all we want, but Blizzard will have the final say in what it is. captbananas 10:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Blood Elves are High Elves that are the survivors of the Scourge's destruction of Quel'thalas.  They renamed themselves after they broke away from the Alliance becoming free agents as well as to respect those who have fallen to the scourge.  A few of the survivors left Azeroth into the Outlands.  Retroactively, the High Elves are a breed of Night Elves, a part of Night Elf society exiled to Northern half of the Eastern Continent.  The last known breed of Night Elves are the Naga, who abused the arcane magic of the moonwells and were corrupted by it by their Queen Azshara.  They were exiled because they refused to relinquish their command of Arcane magic drawn from the moonwell's because of its addictive and impure nature. It was the indiscriminate usage of these magics which led to the first great war between the Burning Legion 10 thousand years ago.  Whereas the Night Elves draw their magic from the moon through moonwells, The High/Blood Elves draw their magic from the Sunwell at Quel'Thalas, which has been defiled by Arthas in WarCraft III.  Human priests are empowered by Holy Light, the Night Elf priests are powered by their Goddess Elune, but it is not known what will power the Blood/High Elf priests at the current moment. If I had to guess, I'd say Warrior, Warlock, Priest, and Hunter's would be the Blood Elf classes. Because from previous WarCraft games, Rangers, Soldiers, Priests and Sorcerors where the High Elf norm.  Uberpesh 03:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blood Elf Confirmation of Classes? 

message: I'm not sure that warrior should be listed as a definite yes. It seems, so far, that all races can be warriors, but Blizzard might make an exception for this new one. They made an exception with Taurens for rogues. If there is some confirmation out there that I'm unaware of, I apologize, but for now I'm changing it to unknown. Tyharvey313 03:03, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont know if I agree with this. Your reasoning that Taurens cant be rogues doesnt fit. All races can be warriors. Thinking solely in terms of the way the game works, it would be silly for them to dis-include warriors for any race. Warriors, in the team schematic, are essential. They are the main tank, they take the damage, dish out the damage, and pull aggro off other members. To only allow the new race the play as casters and hybrid classes seems to me something that would never happen. I wont change it because I dont beleive there is any confirmation for anything regarding the new Alliance Race. But I just want you to know that I disagree. captbananas 08:22, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your explanation doesn't quite make sense, either, though. Healing classes are equally integral to the group, and yet gnomes cannot play a single one. Taurens can only marginally heal as shamans(or druids). Would it be so unusual to find the new Alliance race in a position to be healing-focused, or hybrid-focused, in the same way that gnomes are damage-focused (with their only options being mages, warlocks, rogues and warriors)? Tyharvey313 05:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Alliance Race Classes 

message: The class descriptions didn't at all seem neutral, there were lines that stated "Rogues are the scum of the Earth" as well as something that is more or less objective "Shamans are masters of PvP." I changed the lines to "Rogues are assassins that prefer to fight quickly and discretely, often employing underhanded tactics." and "A well played Shaman can be extremely adept at PVP," respectively. Everyone ok with this? 154.20.135.89 02:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality on Classes 

message: Maybe we should include formulas or a linking to WoWWiki?
Just an idea, don't flame me I'm a newbie.
--xSpaceyx 09:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formulas 

message: Armour is a giant part of the game, it is what the majority of players work towards when they reach level 60. And such should be considered one of the games main mechanics.
"This is not thottbott"
No ofcourse it is not thottbot, but armour sets is a major game incentive, without it i doubt many would play when they reach 60. And such should be included in a world of warcraft thread.
: what exactly do you propose here? and why are you talking to yourself? :) Boneyard 13:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  ah i get it now, you don't agree with the removal of the warrior armor information right? well i feel it doesn't belong here either, sure you can say armor is important and several nice suits can be gotten ingame, but to put every piece of armor with it stats in such a set on this general world of warcraft page is simply not how it should be. therefor im taking it out again. Boneyard 13:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First armor guy(195.194.74.227) please sign your comments. Second i removed your Armor info for a reason. I will repeat my self THIS IS NOT THOTTBOT. This is an article that gives a general overveiw of the game. Your reasoning that a lvl 60 wants to know about this armor is invalid. I don't see someone who has made it to lvl 60 comeing to wikipedia to find out about the game. There are much better resources to be found if you need help. Also in my talk page you don't need to call me "NEW". I have not been here very long but i do not edit lightly. I do it for a reason, and only when i see it needs to be done. More often then not i go to the talk page first. I will remove the armor again if i see it, it has no place in the main articleBrokenscope 01:55, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armour 

message: Removed an entry in the "classes" section describing the "rodeo clown."  Motorneuron 17:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classes vandalism 

message: "Lastly, there are quests that are not very well known that can be done by each faction to gain a unique mount. These special raptor and tiger-type mounts are very rare and take hours of game time to earn."
:I've been playing this game for 9 months, and would call myself very knowledgable on the game. I have never heard of these. I'm getting the idea that whoever wrote mistook the Zul'Gurrub Tiger and Raptor mounts for quest mounts. I'm new to editing wikipedia, so not going to delete it until a second opinion, but i suspect this entry is false. SanderJK 14:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a special tiger-type mount, Reins of the Winterspring Frostsaber, which you can get by grinding repeatable quests with the Frostsaber Trainers in Winterspring. As for the special raptor mount - pretty sure that does not exist. There are raptor trainers in Un'goro Crater but they don't do anything (yet?). Frankly the whole paragraph should be removed imho, this is way way too much trivial detail for an encyclopedia article. Please, people who are interested in writing this stuff, go and look at http://www.wowwiki.com - a World of Warcraft wiki which would welcome as much detail as you can possibly give it. --Stormie 21:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last comment on mounts 

message: it will prolly get added again but i felt it wasn't needed because there are pretty large articles on all classes already, so why add them to the main article too. sure a very small summary might be useful, but people will want to add more and more information anyway. Boneyard 15:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Boneyard. --Stormie 22:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree too, I removed the "classes" section sice the section above it was names "races and classes". Seemed double to me. It also looked weird to me to have a section that just had the text "see above". Felsir 07:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  yeah, wasn't sure about it, seemed like a nice temporary solution, but im fine with it being removed. Boneyard 09:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah besides the Wintersaber trainers, the only other special mounts are the Alterac Valley Exalted ones (not that special), the Skeletal Horse mount form the Baron, and the Zul'Gurub Tiger and Raptor. Derktar 21:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  class information removal 

message: Someone may want to add this news to the article (here). --Thorpe | talk 17:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: do we really have to add every small thing to the article, seems way to small to me. and if it gets added don't add the word terrorist to it even hostage is taken things way too far. Boneyard 19:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with Boneyard, we don't need to add every single iota of WOW news to the article.  Should this develop into a major controversy that affected a significant number of realms it might be worthwhile, but until then... --Hetar 23:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  it seems it all was a joke, exactly the reason why we shouldn't instantly add all these silly things. Boneyard 12:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist holds server hostage 

message: Wouldn't the genre be Fantasy instead of MMORPG witch isnt even a genre? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by St. Eddies (talk • contribs) .
: Actually if you look at Computer and Video Game Genres you will see MMORPG listed there.  I think the best solution would be to list both genres, MMORPG and Fantasy. --Hetar 01:52, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think fantasy is a genre, it's a setting.  The game is an MMORPG set in a fantasy universe.  For example, if someone asked what genre Halo was in you wouldn't say sci-fi, you'd say FPS.  So for describing the genre I think it should be listed as "Fantasy MMORPG."  --TheKoG 13:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I've been writing for a number of years, and fantasy has always been clearly identified using both terms.  A 'genre' is more specifically related to a 'type' of game or book (fantasy, sci-fi, etc), while 'setting' is used in terms of location and time period (a fantasy novel can be set in modern New York City, for example). DarkMasterBob 23:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre change 

message: After looking this word up, I believe it is being used incorrectly. An eponym is a person whose name is the source of the name of some other thing. eponym. Its pretty clear throughout the various definitions that it means 'from a person' and nothing else but a person. 
"The Warcraft games are set in the eponymous Warcraft Universe...". 'Warcraft' is not derived from any persons name that i know of. The writer probably meant to say something like "The Warcraft games are set in the appropriately named Warcraft Universe..." indicating the reuse of the word 'Warcraft' in naming the universe, and failing at using a fancy word to sound smart.
Sahuagin 20:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: changed the wording since (i think) its incorrect. Sahuagin 17:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eponymous? 

message: The following image was recently removed.  I actually liked the image and thought it fit well with the article, anyone else have any thoughts/opinions on the matter? --Hetar 03:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: just readd it, it does look like a screenshot and to say it glorifies the game sounds a little like trolling. the other changes of that user seem fine though. the part about saying the advantage of the large world in wow is just plain wrong, it is a pretty small world actually compared to other mmorpgs. the balance thing remained doubtful also, as that is something you will never see everyone agree on, rightfully or not. Boneyard 09:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

text: more screenshots is always fine, upto a limit of course. but this one was nicely placed at the community section, some people at a campire are pretty appropriate for such a section. Boneyard 12:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think that it doesn't look like a real screenshot. Look, for example, at the dwarf's arms, and the human and night elf's faces. It looked to me like a photoshopped or otherwise unrealistic screenshot that created a feel that wasn't present in the game. I mean, I like the game, but in my opinion, the ideal that this picture represents is one of the few lacking parts of the game. I think a screenshot of some good PvP or raid action might more accurately show the game's strengths. I might be biased, though. If you guys all agree that the screenshot wasn't altered, then go ahead and put it back in.Tyharvey313 23:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

text: It looks like a screen shot form Alpha or Beta.  (I think this atricle could use some more screens personaly.--Legendary Frog 14:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Removal 

message: I noticed that there were no in-game screenshots in the World of Warcraft article, even though in-game screenshots are found in other MMORPGs' articles. Any idea why? --Shultz III 10:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, there was one, but it was removed (see discussion above) and is awaiting consensus on whether it will be put back in or not.  I suppose we could consider a class/race picture like the Guildwars article has, although I'm not sure that we want to make the WOW article any bigger than it already is. --Hetar 21:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No In-Game Screenshots in the article??? 

message: Shouldn't there atleast be some mention of private servers and perhaps some of the controversy surrounding their usage? Suppafly 20:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you could actually find some verifiable sources on this subject, (that don't consist of original research) then a section could probably be created in the criticisms article. --Hetar 20:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's going to be tricky since most of the sites that have info about them get shutdown by blizzard.  http://www.wowstatus.net/ is one of the main sites that has links to private servers, but it doesn't really have any encyclopedic knowledge about them.  I don't feel that we really need a verifiable source to mention that people play on private servers. Suppafly 21:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources." That doesn't leave any wiggle room. --Hetar 21:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are reading too much into the no original research policy.  I'm not trying to introduce some unverifiable theory here, I'm just saying that we should make some mention of the very real fact that a lot of people play on private servers.Suppafly 23:48, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's more of an issue of whether or not it would add anything to the article ... it's already somewhat lengthy, and I'm just not convinced that mentioning private servers adds anything substantive to the article. --Arabani (Talk ∞ Contribs) 00:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  private servers 

message: Ah, there's a WoW hater running around graffiting the article <"RFPCs" "Assgrabbers" etc.>
I changed the stuff back, but I'm not sure what the sentence after the introduction about playing characters was, so I just put a slight filler there, please change it if necessary.
Oh, Hetar, I didn't do it. You got the wrong guy :P Nerion 23:36, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This edit:  by you was clearly vandalism.  --Hetar 23:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Simply put, the article is a mess currently. The organization is all over the place, and it looks like it hasn't ever seen a thorough copyedit. This is the kind of article which needs to be at featured, or at least a good article. Therefore, I suggest we compile a todo list of tasks that need to be completed. I suggest: a history of game section, reorganize article, and a copyedit. I've only seen the article for a few minutes, so I'm sure everyone else has ideas for what needs to be done. Let's get this article up to snuff. TDS  (talk • contribs)  01:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The state of the article 

message: Just thought I'd give you WoW folks a heads up  - World of Warcraft terminology is up for AFD - noticed it because I work on the MMORPG terms and acronyms pages. --Naha|(talk) 06:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD 

message: Is the in depth analysis of the eranikus questline in Geography really needed? It just seems unnecesary especially considering that Eranikus is dealt with as part of the opening Aq gates questline.
Ultron87 02:26, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Section on Emerald Dream

message: Seems that, according to New York Times, that Draenei are, in fact, the new Alliance race:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/09/technology/10warcraft.web.html
- 80.212.91.190 18:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The note was just to prevent the constant vandalism that was going on. At first it was just rampant speculation, and then there was the whole wisp thing which went on for over a month. As the new announcement comes from a reliable source and that source is even linked to from the World of Warcraft homepage, it is probably ok to incorporate the new information (with the NYT article as a reference). --Hetar 19:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Way ahead of you guys. NBS525 21:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The New Race

message: We don't need all the links that are under this section. It's repitative.
*Two map sites
*Four UI sites
*Two talent calculators (which is on the official site aswell)
*Five database sites
There is no need for it, Wikipedia isn't a link repository.
And the links to all the Official WoW sites is not necessary, the US and english europe site is enough. Havok (T/C/c) 10:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useful resources 

message: I removed the comment about the new world tree being off the northwest coast of Kalimdor. That tree is not the world tree, the original world tree is still on Mount Hyjal where it has always been. Not to mention the reference to the starting Night Elf zone has no relevance in the context of the paragraph.--Paddyffrench 13:04, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The World - Geography - Reference to the 'new' World Tree? 

message: There was some talk about this earlier, but the attributes section should be rewritten. Currently it includes lots of personal, arguable opinions ("Stamina is especially important for Warriors, Warlocks, Rogues and Paladins"). These should be removed in my opinion. Pasi 04:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Wikipedia is not a game guide. -- bcasterline • talk 04:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I simplified the section a lot. Basically I removed all the related maths (which definitely are game guide material) and wrote a short paragraph about the starting attributes. Perhaps we can add little more detail what each attribute does, but in my opinion we shouldn't go to the detail the section went before. Pasi 23:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Works for me. --Stormie 00:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attributes 

message: I am a little concerned about the recent changes to the lead section (ie chopping everything but one sentence out and moving it down to another section).  Many featured article candidates are opposed because they had lead sections that were too small. Also, Wikipedia:Lead section says that the appropriate length for a lead section  for an article as big as this one is three or four paraprahps. I don't see why the change is necessary, and it seems to impinge on the quality of the article. --Hetar 17:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Looks like Sdornan has restored the intro text, thank you! --Hetar 19:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Read this after I made the change just now. Although I think my edit makes more sense, considering the section general information would look strange without the info which is there now. Comments? Havok (T/C/c) 09:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Lead Section 

message: This article has been added to the AfD, please go to Articles for deletion/Corrupted Blood and give your vote on the subject. Thank you. Havok (T/C/c) 22:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Corrupted Blood]]

message: I've moved some sections around a little. It makes more sense to start with general information then going straight for the character and classes. Also made the intro text smaler as it is only there to get the reader to read the rest. Short and sweet. Havok (T/C/c) 09:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout 

message: this was in the article
but sometimes i find false infos on there,and i dunno how to edit it,cuz the main page edit doesn't edit this one
so where do i go to edit that?
DivineBaboon 04:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:World_of_Warcraft_classes Pasi 05:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where did the class/race chart come from?