Talk:World of Warcraft/Archive 23

The plural of Pandaren is Pandaren
As provided by in-game and out of game sources, the plural for Pandaren as given by Blizzard is Pandaren. So any uses of 'Pandarens' on the page should be edited to conform with how Blizzard name the race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.86.168.45 (talk) 19:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2020
Meanwhile, there are "PVP-Server" which allow other players to have the "Player-versus-Player"-mod constantly on. But The Players are able since Patch 7.3.5 to turn the "PvP"-Mod on. Player-vs-Player means while new World of Warcraft patches, since 7.3.5, to play in selectablbe PvP and in non-PvP-Mod. AlexSfr (talk) 02:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  JTP (talk • contribs) 02:55, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

"Corrupted Blood plague incident" reference
I want there to be a reference/citation thing at the end of the sentence "The Corrupted Blood plague so closely resembled the outbreak of real-world epidemics that scientists are currently looking at the ways MMORPGs or other massively distributed systems can model human behavior during outbreaks.".

Grant Tavinor in his book The Art of Videogames talks about this extensively on pages 36-37 (wiley-blackwell 2009).

Adding this reference is not absolutely necessary. The section was already referenced in a reasonable manner because it cited BBC News.

But I think adding this particular reference would be a nice touch. It would just be very useful for someone who wants to read up more on this virtual epidemic, and I don't think BBC news really offers that opportunity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlphaAlex115 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Confusing
The article states "Blizzard announced the change following an agreement with Facebook to allow Facebook to connect persons who choose to become friends to share their real identity". I have reread this sequence of words repeatedly but cannot parse it. What does it mean? Does the "face book" website create a blank profile for every Battle.NET user who begins to use the BattleTag feature to establish this new out-of-game connection (rather than the normal /friend Charname we are used to ingame)? For customers who have been using Battle.NET since Diablo was released (1997) and WoW since it was released (2004) and only far later was the login process modified to expect the customer's (publicly known) email address rather than their (private and secret) username - does the "face book" website retroactively extract the customer's email address and construct some kind of profile from it? Is there any way to prevent any information whatsoever from being leaked to the "face book" infrastructure from our unrelated Battle.NET activity? (I didn't even realise this was a problem until I returned to Classic having left WoW in Jan 2007, and heard mention today of an "authenticator" and read this article to find out what that is. So, my apologies if this was already discussed and answered years ago.) If someone knows what the actual interaction is between these two systems, please could they rewrite the sentence I quoted in order to make it clear to readers? Thankyou! 49.180.161.222 (talk) 13:36, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Large rewrite - some content needs to be restored.
I like some of the addition, but I am very dubious of the removal. I am also dubious of the 12 million number, as I thought Blizz last count was 10, with others being speculation.

Adding detail of the years of launch for the expansions seems too much detail in the lead. In fact, I think the list of expansions in the lead would have been a better candidate for the editorial axe.

I believe it would have been more productive to make the edits in chunks, as I am dubious of retyping the cut parts, and reverting and working in the good bits may be best. I'll leave this for others for the moment and look at it tomorrow.

My tentative proposal is to revert, remove the expansion list, add a wikilink into this page to the expansion list section, maybe grab some of the updated text.Shajure (talk) 04:29, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Efficiency edit to navigate to expansions
On the right side, possibly inside the video game infobox, there could be great benefit to include links to all the expansions, somewhat similiar to the Age of Empires page (Release Timeline section) to help people quickly and efficiently navigate to subsequent pages. This solution would be more functional as well as aesthetic, as it can save space and horizontal paragraph listing (and searching) in the opening blurb, as mentioned above. For more detail, there's information in the Expansions section. I tried to adjust the title box, but realized it's standardized with no simple way for me to change it. Thanks! March 23 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snarethedrummer (talk • contribs) 20:51, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * There's a table at World of Warcraft already, which is where it belongs. -- ferret (talk) 12:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Criticism?
There is a section for "Accolades," but should equal space be given to "Criticism"? 2601:601:9581:2630:95FB:3445:3428:4E63 (talk) 06:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes:An entire article. Criticism should always be included in the body of the article.  wp:criticism Shajure (talk) 15:49, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * But see also WP:CSECTION from the same guideline, which advised against dedicated Criticism sections in most cases. Criticisms should be worked into the article proper where appropriate, as part of reception, legacy, development, etc. And, all of it must be back by reliable secondary sourcing. -- ferret (talk) 15:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly... criticism sections are spam magnets. And there are "negative accolades" that can be listed in the accolades section.  "Razzy" awards are an example.Shajure (talk) 16:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Humore: most criticism of MMORPGs goes along the lines of "they are too fun, and people forget to sleep/eat/study/party/work/talk-to-family!"  I remain uncertain how these are criticisms of the games... they are criticisms of players.Shajure (talk) 16:04, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes - There's a lot of criticism online about content moderation and 'toxic' playerbase issues with racism and nazis in the game; here's some articles I was able to find in a span of like 5 minutes that should probably be incorporated: Engadget - Why is Blizzard still OK with gender inequality in World of Warcraft?, Vice - Congressman Shames Blizzard for Letting Nazis Run Wild in 'World of Warcraft' & Talking Feminism With the Creatures of World of Warcraft, PC Gamer - World of Warcraft's community is grappling with allegations of widespread racism in its top-end raiding guilds, GamesIndustry - US congressman calls out Blizzard for allowing racist groups in WoW, The Guardian - It's racist, it's sexist, it's virtual: welcome to Azeroth!, Kotaku - Report: Chat Logs Reveal Pervasive Racism In Top World of Warcraft Raiding Guilds. These are issues common in gaming communities, but definitely still worth noting on the article. There's probably some scholarly sources on the subject as well given that there's significant interest in the psychological profile of people who play MMOs. Waxworker (talk) 17:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Heh. "Earth is home to much racism and a toxic resident-base.  It should be shut down at once.  The moderation varies from none (free speech) to oppressive (only specific speech permitted)."
 * The moderation bit would be a great point of discussion. Perhaps a section called "moderation" with content from the press... balanced.  There should be one or more articles about moderation of online content as it is a big subject but it is *intensely* political and religious.
 * "... of people who play MMOs." - again... that is about players and belongs in the article(s) about it, which indeed should be linked. Last time I checked there were still links for a few player-behavior and player-health articles.Shajure (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Aside from concerns regarding player behavior and Blizzard's response to it, the game has been criticized for racist stereotypes in its fantasy race design and sexism in the form of the game's sexual dimorphism and concerns regarding female characters' lack of agency; NPR - Our Conversation On Race In 'World of Warcraft,' Unabridged & What World Of Warcraft Can Tell Us About Race In Real Life, Vice - Why Doesn't Blizzard's 'Heroes of the Storm' Have Any People of Color?, WoW Insider/Joystiq - The joke is on women in Blizzard's April Fool's gag & Know Your Lore: What exactly is up with women in Warcraft lore? & Sexual dimorphism in Cataclysm, Wired - Sexual Dimorphism in World of Warcraft. I was also able to find a few scholarly sources on the subject of racism and sexism (both in player behavior and the game's design); “At least I’m not Chinese, gay, or female”: Marginalized voices in World of Warcraft, World of Race War: Race & Identity in World of Warcraft, Race-Based Fantasy Realm: Essentialism in the World of Warcraft. In regards to the game taking fifteen years to add more ethnicities to humanoid characters, I wasn't able to find any specific criticism post-announcement other than brief passing sentiments of 'it took them long enough', but the lack of diverse options prior to Shadowlands is criticized in some of the linked sources. There's also been criticism of Blizzard's policies on LGBT guilds; How queer: WoW and their unfortunate LGB policy, World of Warcraft Won't Allow 'Gay Boys' Guild of LGBTQ+ Players, Gay World of WarCraft guild forced to change name after ‘complaints’, Gay rights win in Warcraft world, 13 years later, World of Warcraft is STILL telling queer guilds they're not allowed to advertise their queerness, plus there was an incident at Blizzcon 2011 wherein a member of a WoW-themed band consisting of Blizzard employees used homophobic slurs to describe rival WoW players on stage, resulting in a response from GLAAD (seen here) and an apology from Blizzard. Waxworker (talk) 07:15, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Therealkyle.g, WhiteCheddarPupper.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:08, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2022
Please remove "Engine Unreal Engine 4". The World of Warcraft client does not use Unreal Engine. Akimitsu Hogge (talk) 15:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2022
50.228.186.250 (talk) 12:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC) Change "unnanounced WarCraft Mobile Game" to "WarCraft: Arclight Adventure"
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  13:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2022
Release date of Dragonflight will be November 28, 2022. 2A02:AB04:1BF:EF00:4810:7AD6:A864:CC3A (talk) 18:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  13:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * https://dragonflight.blizzard.com/en-us/ 23.233.17.233 (talk) 18:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2023
The information under the "expansions" section is outdated. This sentence specifically: As of the pre-patch release of Battle for Azeroth in July 2018, all expansions up to Legion are included in the base game.

Change that to "As of the release of the Dragonflight expansion in 2022, all expansions up to Shadowlands are included in the base game." Source is here: https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/15733

You should also write something to clarify the modern precedent that Blizzard has set that when an expansion concludes, then it is included into the base game for subscribers.

ADDITIONALLY

Under "Ongoing Gameplay" the terminology about PvP gameplay is outdated. Players no longer "flag" themselves for PvP as the primary way to engage with in PvP, they instead "toggle War Mode", as mentioned near the beginning of the article. "Depending on the mode of the realm," is confusing wording and is no longer relevant now that servers are only RP or PvE. As an opposite to the "free-for-all" PvP areas that are mentioned, it could be worth mentioning areas flagged as "Sanctuaries" in the game where PvP is not possible and not permitted.

ADDITIONALLY

Under "Animated Series" The "Afterlives" series is not a traditional animated show, and are more like animated trailers for the upcoming story. You can use the world "series", but it's worth noting that "Warbringers" and "Harbingers" are titles of other series made in a similar fashion and should be included. Chickachoy (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Please indicate the changes you want to be made in a "change X to Y" format, as you did for the first change. Snowmanonahoe (talk) 15:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Request to Edit Protected Article
I hereby request that the tag, "merge from|Nostalrius|discuss=Talk:World of Warcraft#Merge Proposal|date=March 2024" be added to the top of this article with the appropriate braces to parse it properly in the system. RandomPageCrusader (talk) 03:42, 27 March 2024 (UTC)