Warcraft Wiki talk:Classic WoW project
Cool! Silviu200530 (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Disambig
should it be "(classic)" or "(Classic)"? Asking after the Blackfathom Deeps (classic) move. I think "(Classic)" would probably be more accurate Xporc (talk) 11:57, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- No one caring about this? Xporc (talk) 15:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- (Maybe share it on Discord). "Classic" seems like the correct form to use over "classic". Consider other articles with disambigs, e.g. Stormwind City: a name of a TCG set, Stormwind Footman (Broken Shore): a zone name, Stormwind (kingdom): and a generic name. Classic refers to World of Warcraft: Classic. So I guess it'd make sense to capitalize it. — Surafbrov T / C 15:44, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- Since it is name, "(Classic)" --Mordecay (talk) 15:49, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with Surafbrov (especially since a lot of the traffic on those pages will probably come from WoW: Classic players). --
DeludedTroll (talk • contribs) 15:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with Surafbrov (especially since a lot of the traffic on those pages will probably come from WoW: Classic players). --
- Since it is name, "(Classic)" --Mordecay (talk) 15:49, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- Awright I'll start writing in bot requests Xporc (talk) 15:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- It's very similar to an expansion name, so capital C. -- — MyMindWontQuiet 16:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- Awright I'll start writing in bot requests Xporc (talk) 15:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Classic category
See Template talk:Patch#"Classic" category Xporc (talk) 12:22, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
(original) but not (Classic)
What about pages like Charlga Razorflank (original)? Just moving her to the "(Classic)" name would be wrong considering the page is about her Cataclysm-era stats. Xporc (talk) 12:53, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Cleanest would be to split the page or at least show the separate versions. --Pcj (T•C) 12:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair. At least with (original) it implied that it was about everything but the newest version ... Xporc (talk) 13:17, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, though I don't think lumping all the versions together is necessarily better especially since we now have Classic mode as an option. --Pcj (T•C) 13:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm not saying the "Classic" name is bad, I'm saying the amount of work to keep everything properly named, split and linked seems hopeless unless drastic measures are taken. That's not even counting when Reforged will hit, and the new WoW expansion pack in like a year Xporc (talk) 13:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, though I don't think lumping all the versions together is necessarily better especially since we now have Classic mode as an option. --Pcj (T•C) 13:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair. At least with (original) it implied that it was about everything but the newest version ... Xporc (talk) 13:17, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Quests
Should Classic quests that are disambigued with "(old)" & "(original)" like A Helping Hand (original) & A Hero's Welcome (old) be changed to "(Classic)" as well? --Mordecay (talk) 18:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, if they are from Classic. Essentially (old) and (original) disambiguations should be completely gone. --Pcj (T•C) 18:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Pages
For what it's worth, a lot of "(original)" / "(Classic)" pages are inconsistently handled and I'm not sure how many of them can easily be reached through wiki interlinks rather than through name search. Maybe someone could take a look at all such pages and clean them up a bit and enforce some linkage/template consistency. It wouldn't be hard, just a bit time-consuming. Xporc (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Lists
Would it be possible to extract somewhere a list of all pages ending with "(original)", "(old)", "(removed)" and "(Classic)"? Xporc (talk) 12:50, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
Lack of activity
FYI I don't find this project very amusing or fulfilling, since I didn't even sign up for it, so if it's gonna be only me working on this, I'll just abandon it and work on something else more to my taste, like it seems everyone else would rather do Xporc (talk) 09:04, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Rest in peace. Silviu200530 (talk) 18:29, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Quest pages or sections?
From the project: "They may or may not conflict with the current state on live BfA realms. Any differences should be noted, with an entirely separate article if the differences are major."
To what extent are "differences major"? Stumbled across 
[5-30] Samophlange whose difference is the completion text and rewards. Would that warrant a new page or is the current state with the newly Classic section enough? What about a situation when quest texts have "only" several words different? I'd prefer new quest pages entirely for Classic because it would be tiny bit easier to do that but I'm not sure if that's the way to go. --
Mordecay (talk) 17:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
- That's an unusual one. Normally I'd say to split it into Classic and Retail pages, but it follows three quests that are still identical, so... Hrm. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
- If I'm looking at wowhead right that specific questline was neutral, doable by both faction, so I gueeeeeeess it wouldn't be really that hurtful to have the questline split for retail and Classic. Moreover, the quests provided rep for Ratchet / Steamwheedle so that would be another difference.
Mordecay (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
- If I'm looking at wowhead right that specific questline was neutral, doable by both faction, so I gueeeeeeess it wouldn't be really that hurtful to have the questline split for retail and Classic. Moreover, the quests provided rep for Ratchet / Steamwheedle so that would be another difference.
Tense
Although the current status of the project is somewhat lacking, Classic pages are still slowly getting updated. Looking at the project description, "tense" has no result, so would it be okay to add a sentence about it? It mostly concerns lead paragraphs and sections about Classic content.
I'm thinking that the tense used should be present tense. For months now, I've seen people changing the present tense in Classic pages to past one which, IMO, doesn't make sense. The content IS present in Classic it's not removed from Classic servers. To denote that it's been removed from retail is covered by the {{Classic only}} and {{Classic only-section}} templates. -- Mordecay (talk) 10:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I prefer to look at Classic content from a "current content" perspective, by which I mean, same as other removed stuff. If I'm the only one with that preference, I don't mind switching to present. PeterWind (talk) 10:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- i’m in favor of using present tense, since the content is available, just in a different version of the game Eithris (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm broadly with PeterWind, but I don't feel strongly enough to argue if there's a consensus for present tense. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I see. I could see past tense used for lead sections that contain links to post-Cataclysm zones, but since all Classic zone pages have been recreated, so using past tense with such links doesn't seem correct because it would mean that content was removed from the Classic!Darkshore zone, for example. -- Mordecay (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)