Talk:World of Warcraft

Talk archive as of August 12

Unstubbifying

This page was tagged with {{Stub/Needed}} but, at least imho, a 2-page piece is not a stub, so I yanked it.   Something as central as this page (at least, central to newcomers) might deserve to look a bit better though and perhaps deserve a {{Cleanup}} tag. Come to think of it, I'll go add that right away. --Mikk 16:04, 7 June 2006 (EDT)

About that cleanup: done. There shouldn't be any real NPoV / coherency issues left; however, the article lacks... content. What I've basically done is removed the Highlights / Lowlights headers and rewrote the content under a Features header while trying to remain objective. Overall, it shrunk the article down a bit, and steered it in the direction of answering What World of Warcraft does rather than What World of Warcraft is. Some sort of history / lore / game detail / critical reception section would be very welcomed.

The article at the moment serves a bit like linkfarm to various more fleshed out areas of WoWWiki. I'm not sure if I like the amount of links inside the text, that might need some tweaking. The "Offsite links" section didn't belong here -- replaced it by adding See Also-style links to the official site, wikipedia and Fansites -- should cover the subject, but save the page from having to list fansites. Still needs work. :/ Starlightblunder 17:11, 12 August 2006 (EDT)

Colored Qualities

I de-colored the qualities because the words themselves aren't items. That and it looked ugly. --Hobinheim (talk · contr) 19:14, 15 January 2007 (EST)

FAQ

Does World of Warcraft have a Castle Siege systems? I mean by Castles that are obtainable by Guilds and wars between Guilds. --Ramu50 (talk) 00:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Nope. Not even sure they plan to do something like this towards the future, but they haven't said anything of wanting to either. Guild housing is still on the to do list though... whenever they decide to get around to it. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 06:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Weird....than what is the siege weapon for? Just randomly destroing building －．－．．．．

--Ramu50 (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Siege weapons are for pvp between factions in either the Strand of the Ancients (Battleground), Wintergrasp (combat zone), or for some pve quests/instances. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 20:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Evidence of Citations

Partial Scandinavian Mythology (-based)

• Freya (Freya) - Norse God
• Nordrassil (Yggdrasil) - Norse World View (aka The World Tree)
• Thorim Thorin (Norse Dwarf)
• Valkyrion Valkyrie
• Giants

Note: Generally speaking, nowadays if a game utilize only utilize Mythical Beasts and very little map, then it isn't considered based on Mythology. Because mythological-based games are considered a design trend / style and a genre itself. Similarity to filmography does create it film genre like Thriller without a clear definition, this is due to the movement of technology modernizations. However, if characters and theme-based (referring to the general geography of the game is similarity e.g. Filled with Old Growth forest, and having a self-continent island that of similar to Greenland), then usually it is considered as Scandinavian.

Unsure details

If I remember correctly, Norse Mythology differentiate Drakes, Dragons, Worms, Wyrms in different aspects and WoW does utilize this categorizing system. Also WoW also uses some locations suffix -heim (if I am not wrong, in Norse English it probably means Realm of "") since a lot of setting in the mythology end with -heim. Muspelheim and Niflheim.

Partial Greek

but not based

• Greek
• Centaurs (Magnataur), Gryphon, Harpy, Manticore, Nymph, Satyr, Succubus
  • (See Template:Speculative fiction all for details).

I think warcraft also differentiate Gryphon and Hippogriff. --Ramu50 (talk) 14:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Vanilla?

Hey guyz, i am wondering why it is also called vanilla? --Mordecay (talk) 19:40, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Cause it sounds better than calling it the first, or the original.... actually I think it's just been common practice for something that came first to be known as that, after future versions (releases) come out. See also Vanilla software. Sssssssssssssssssssssssss For Pony! (^Sssss/_Slithered) 20:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

"Vanilla" is a general term for something that is "plain", basic, conventional or unornamented. It can refer to a person, their style or tastes, meaning plain, boring, or uninteresting; or a basic form of something, such as WoW. The term "vanilla" derives from the use of vanilla extract as the basic flavoring for ice cream, and by extension, meaning "plain" or "conventional". -- Taohinton (talk) 22:21, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the explanation, guyz. --Mordecay (talk) 09:51, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Gallery

Why was the gallery removed? — SurafbrovWarcraft Wiki administrator T / C 17:03, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Because the only image in it, File:WoW wallpaper.jpg, had very little to do with the rest of the article: it's a random wallpaper (one of some 250+ published on WoW's community site) that doesn't really say much about the game. It's not a bad idea to have pictures here, but I'd much prefer it if they were somehow related to the subject of the article, rather than just some random art -- gameplay shots illustrating a wide range of typical situations in WoW would be far more appropriate. — foxlit (talk) 20:03, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Sub numbers

I'm not sure we need a comprehensive review of all quarterly subscription numbers since May 2013. Simply stating the current number of subs would suffice, and is all that's found on the game's wikipedia page, for example. If we want to give a substantial overview of the game's subs perhaps a new section detailing the changes over the course of its history would be a good idea. Sections like "A call about the shares purchase will take place on July 26 at 8:30 AM ET, so check back then for any more comments on subscriber numbers." and repeated comparisons with last quarter's numbers are definitely not needed. -- Taohinton (talk) 22:35, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree, especially in the slapdash format it's listed. If someone wants to add in a chart or something showing what the numbers were when, that's fine, but we really only need the most recent numbers at the top. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 00:25, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

The suggestion is made, and, as if by magic: *poof*. -- Taohinton (talk) 01:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I do agreed that this had been changed from the previous changes I had for this. Glad to see this now in one complete section but it does seem to be a bit too long in size with all the extra room to the right. — SurafbrovWarcraft Wiki administrator T / C 03:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

It's nice to have the numbers listed; however, graphical representation is several times clearer and more accessible. Ideally we'd have one of our own (is there a graph function/plug-in (eg. Javascript) that we could run, and just add new data as we get it?), but unless/until someone makes one, I've added a link to the MMO-Champ chart. -- Taohinton (talk) 21:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)