User:Philcha/Sandbox/Warcraft 2 - last GA review

Merger proposal
To merge into Warcraft II (new title):
 * Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness (this article)
 * Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal

Section "Statement by Philcha (proposer)" explains why the proposer believers the merger would be beneficial. Contributors may add statements after this.

"Supports" and "Opponents" to be are numbered list for each of counting. "Comments" to be an unnumber list. All of these to be after "Proposal". --Philcha (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) Support --Philcha (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Support, no reason not to, really. :) Tustin2121 talk 01:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose - See comments. UncannyGarlic (talk) 19:53, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments
Reasons for merger - mainly avoided what would be large duplication: there should be a separate article for Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition, as Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal is a compilation of the content but with a Windows environment, additional UI elements (first developed in Warcraft II: The Dark Saga) and addition of Battle.net. --Philcha (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal used the same UI and the only different in game play in Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal is more powerful heroes.
 * If Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal remain separate, the compilation Warcraft II: Battle (1996; the PC version is DOS) would have to be a separate article, as it has the UI and most of the game play was established in Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness, but the more powerful heroes was established Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal and the story would be a combination of the stories from Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal.
 * If Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal remain separate, there should be a separate article for Warcraft II: The Dark Saga, although this is a Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal compilation with addition UI elements (selecting units by click and shift, etc.).
 * If Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal remain separate,


 * I disagree with the assertion that the several versions would need separate articles, as the several versions don't have much reception for themselves (as you've duly noted). However, I'm hesitant to comment for the other side, because I have a special place in my heart for Warcraft (and would like to see the expansion if nothing else remain separate).
 * The default, I think, though, should be a merge, and see if you can dig up more reception in favor of keeping the expansion separate. It seems to me though that, we could split some of the coverage up from the other releases between these two, as it doesn't seem to me like the coverage isn't always about both games at the same time. Of course, you're working with the sourcing moreso, so that's your call. Go with what you wanna' do; I think this is a case where silence is tacit approval. --Izno (talk) 22:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't see why they can't be merged. Lots of game articles have sequals in the same article. Not to mention that the sequal article is rather short as it is. If there were more information, then merging would be more of a question.
 * I would also like to point out to whomever setup the merger that we use templates here at Wikipedia to allow the database to keep track of mergers and other stuff that templates handle. I have replaced the shoddy custom message at the top of the two pages with templates, as they should have. So, other than that, I have nothing more to contribute to the discussion. Place me under supporters. Tustin2121 talk 01:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd say that the current issue is quality. Most decently written game articles give expansions a seperate page (if you really want, I could easily dig up numerous examples) as it allows for better organization and separation of information.  The argument appears to be that the games are not sufficiently different in gameplay to require seperate articles and if that's the case, are there other articles for similar games and expansions which are the merged for that reason?  In fact, I'd point to StarCraft and Brood War as an example of minimal changes in the expansion the products have seperate pages.  I agree that the quality of the Beyond the Dark Portal article is low but I'd say that a merger of the articles would be against common form. UncannyGarlic (talk) 19:51, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Suggested merge of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal
See Talk:Warcraft_II:_Tides_of_Darkness. The combined article would be Warcraft II] (new title). I've asked at Help_talk:Merging on how to a merge from A and B into C, and will add merge templates when this question is resolved. --Philcha (talk) 22:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * All done. --Philcha (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Removed sections, etc. that lack citations
If you find WP:RS citations, please add the supported pages, with the citations: --Philcha (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC) Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness was an unusual game for the time because a large number of third-party utilities were written for it. Among the first things, Daniel Lemberg reverse-engineered the Warcraft II map file (*.pud) format and created the first third-party map editor, War2xEd, which could do numerous things the bundled map editor could not do, such as editing unit attributes. Although Lemberg did not make the source code for War2xEd public, he did publish the complete Warcraft II map file format, which led to a wealth of new tools, including a Macintosh version of the tool called PudMaster. More importantly, Blizzard began to use War2xEd internally, and it influenced them to bundle a feature-rich editor with their immensely popular game StarCraft, which was released later, in 1998.
 * Section "Utilities, modifications, and conversions"

The next important breakthrough came when Alexander Cech and Lemberg broke the encryption used in the base game data files. Cech went on to create a program called Wardraft, which allowed users to browse and modify the contents of the game data files, allowing comprehensive modifications. The spawn of extensive alterations became known as "Total Conversions", and a great many projects were in motion for a good long while.

Another important revolution was the introduction of a completely new engine called Stratagus. Instead of using the engine and modifying the images/animations/sounds that the engine uses, Stratagus is a completely re-written version of the Warcraft II gaming engine. (Wargus uses the original War2 units/sounds but it uses Stratagus instead of the Warcraft 2 engine.) Thus, writing a completely different game became possible and that game lives on today as Bos Wars (Battle of Survival). Stratagus and Wargus are no longer developed (although Wargus is essentially complete.) The developers have instead put their efforts into completing BOS.

Tides of Darkness and Beyond the Dark Portal were released together for Sega Saturn and PlayStation under the title Warcraft II: The Dark Saga in 1997 by Electronic Arts.
 * Section "Utilities". Also may be irrelevant.

There was also a reverse engineered free software game engine called Freecraft, which allowed users to import the actual game data from Warcraft II and play the game on different platforms and with additional features like queuing unit production, finding idle workers, an improved AI and network connectivity for up to 16 players. In addition to being compatible with Warcraft II, it could also be used with a set of artwork and scenarios made by the Freecraft Media Project (FcMP). Although the actual Freecraft program and FcMP used no art or code from Warcraft II, the project received a threatening cease-and-desist letter from Blizzard, apparently due to similarity to the Warcraft trademarks. Not willing to fight Blizzard, the maintainers canceled the whole project, later rekindling it under the name of Stratagus. By using this game engine through Wargus, the game is also playable on BSD, Linux, Mac OS X, AmigaOS 4 and MorphOS. * Humorous unit quotations are a feature of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness, following the tradition of the original Warcraft: Orcs & Humans. If a single unit is clicked on several times in a row, his or her voice samples change from regular to longer, emotional ones. He or she may start getting angry at the player, or quote lines in reference to movies or games. For example, a footman would say, "don't you have a kingdom to run?" or "are you still touching me?" These phrases differed in the game's demo for the Footman and Grunt units, and were mostly indignations to purchase the full version. In a pre-release version sent to magazines for reviews, these quotations included samples like "I love your publication!" or "Remember: A good review... for Warcraft 2."
 * Section "Special features". Some also covered above.


 * Clicking on a non-playable critter such as a sheep enough times causes it to blow up.


 * If the disk for Beyond the Dark Portal or the original demo is inserted into a CD player, the orchestrated music from the game can be played. In addition, there is a bonus 13th track called "I'm a Medieval Man" which features remixed sound bites from the first game. The track is also available in-game by typing "disco" as a cheat. (This however gives you the status 'Cheater' when you finish that mission.) "Medieval Man" is also a cheat code in Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness to play the song as background music or in StarCraft to obtain all unit upgrades for free. Also, in StarCraft, if one clicks on an observer while playing as the Protoss, a clip of the song will be played.


 * The script that was used in the book positioned in the background screen while the player was informed about mission objectives is the Cyrillic alphabet, but the language in which it is written is English. The text contains a small section of a game story text, mentioning how the Orcish hordes entered the forests of Lordaeron.


 * The soundtrack by Glenn Stafford has been released in MP3 format by Blizzard.

Notes for GA review
Re interaction (?) btw C&C and WC2:
 * Chronology:
 * Command & Conquer (1st version) development began in earnest early in 1993
 * WC2 development started Feb 1995
 * C&C released August 31, 1995.
 * WC2 released Dec 1995
 * Google got nothing about announcements, preview, news or press releases re WC2.
 * Google got nothing about announcements, preview, news, press releases or demos re C&C --Philcha (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

a combination that surpassed Starcraft's success.
This sentence is causing some contention in the article. It was first removed by an IP editor, then restored by a registered user. I agreed with the IP, so removed it again. There has now been a flip-flop between the two states, and no attempt at discussion - so here we go:

As requested, I've read through the entire Warcraft II text, and cannot find any claim that WC3 has surpassed the popularity & sales of Starcraft. In the edit summary, I ask where this claim is, and get no helpful response. I've also checked the MOS, and the Citing sources help pages - none of which say that you shouldn't cite a lead paragraph.

So where is the claim - what source and reference back it up? a_man_alone (talk) 15:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Most browsers have a "find" facility. If yours has, you can find the content in the main text, with citation(s). --Philcha (talk) 16:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Warcraft II sold over two million copies. . Starcraft sold 11 million copies.   D r e a m Focus  02:56, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

There is no way WC2 surpassed SC's success. SC survived over 10 years and WC2 died out when WC3 came out. There are people that still play SC competitively on Iccup.com Jwjkim (talk) 05:39, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

second expansion
there was a second expansion that was released in a package containing the original and beyond the dark portal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.103.135 (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I have both the originial and expansion in 1 package (a good deal!) That's one reason for Warcraft II, and the other is the 2 consoles, which combined the originial and expansion. If you think there are objections, I suggest you can raise them when the community GAR is under way. --Philcha (talk) 17:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Merges from Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness
This notes that the following discussion were moved from Tides of Darkness.

!! to do Talk for: Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal, Battle.Station, consoles. --Philcha (talk) 07:27, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal
To merge into Warcraft II (new title):
 * Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness (this article)
 * Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal

Section "Statement by Philcha (proposer)" explains why the proposer believers the merger would be beneficial. Contributors may add statements after this.

"Supports" and "Opponents" to be are numbered list for each of counting. "Comments" to be an unnumber list. All of these to be after "Proposal". --Philcha (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) Support --Philcha (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 2) Support, no reason not to, really. :) Tustin2121 talk 01:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments
Reasons for merger - mainly avoided what would be large duplication: there should be a separate article for Warcraft II: Battle.net Edition, as Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal is a compilation of the content but with a Windows environment, additional UI elements (first developed in Warcraft II: The Dark Saga) and addition of Battle.net. --Philcha (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal used the same UI and the only different in game play in Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal is more powerful heroes.
 * If Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal remain separate, the compilation Warcraft II: Battle (1996; the PC version is DOS) would have to be a separate article, as it has the UI and most of the game play was established in Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness, but the more powerful heroes was established Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal and the story would be a combination of the stories from Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal.
 * If Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal remain separate, there should be a separate article for Warcraft II: The Dark Saga, although this is a Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal compilation with addition UI elements (selecting units by click and shift, etc.).
 * If Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal remain separate,


 * I disagree with the assertion that the several versions would need separate articles, as the several versions don't have much reception for themselves (as you've duly noted). However, I'm hesitant to comment for the other side, because I have a special place in my heart for Warcraft (and would like to see the expansion if nothing else remain separate).
 * The default, I think, though, should be a merge, and see if you can dig up more reception in favor of keeping the expansion separate. It seems to me though that, we could split some of the coverage up from the other releases between these two, as it doesn't seem to me like the coverage isn't always about both games at the same time. Of course, you're working with the sourcing moreso, so that's your call. Go with what you wanna' do; I think this is a case where silence is tacit approval. --Izno (talk) 22:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't see why they can't be merged. Lots of game articles have sequals in the same article. Not to mention that the sequal article is rather short as it is. If there were more information, then merging would be more of a question.
 * I would also like to point out to whomever setup the merger that we use templates here at Wikipedia to allow the database to keep track of mergers and other stuff that templates handle. I have replaced the shoddy custom message at the top of the two pages with templates, as they should have. So, other than that, I have nothing more to contribute to the discussion. Place me under supporters. Tustin2121 talk 01:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Suggested merge of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal
See Talk:Warcraft_II:_Tides_of_Darkness. The combined article would be Warcraft II] (new title). I've asked at Help_talk:Merging on how to a merge from A and B into C, and will add merge templates when this question is resolved. --Philcha (talk) 22:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Article history

 * This article was titled Warcraft II when it was sent to Talk:Warcraft II/GA1, and the reviewer accepted that title right through the review, 17:25, 7 May 2010 to 00:43, 11 July 2010. --04:48, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * At the very first change, at 13:23, 7 October 2010User:Niwi3 changed the title with no notice nor discussion, and on 13:31, 17 November 2011 I reverted it to as at Talk:Warcraft II/GA1 --Philcha (talk) 04:48, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Why did you do a cut-and-paste move instead of moving over the redirect? I think the best way forward is to speedy G6 the Warcraft II page – like a histmerge, but the reverts can stay deleted. Flatscan (talk) 05:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Flatscan. Please no not evert Warcraft II - see down (when I get time to it!) --Philcha (talk) 07:12, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want the article at Warcraft II, that's fine. But you're splitting the history between two pages, and that absolutely must be resolved. I am currently awaiting a merge of the talk page. Once that is fixed, we can discuss the correct title. Or don't discuss it and just move it. I don't care at all which title this article has. But either way, the technical process of moving the page must be done correctly to preserve revision history. Reach Out to the Truth 07:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Reasons for title
--Philcha (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Warcraft II has been sold as: --Philcha (talk) 09:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness for MS-DOS and Mac
 * Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal for MS-DOS and Mac
 * Warcraft II: Battle Chest for MS-DOS and Mac
 * Warcraft II: The Dark Saga for Sony PlayStation, which combined the campaigns of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal under the one title
 * Warcraft II: The Dark Saga for Sega Saturn, which also combined the campaigns of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal under the one title
 * Advantages of combining the accounts of versions:
 * Many hands to maintain all these verions
 * Keeping and enhancing WP's name for reliability and useful info. A fragmented set of info will be become inconsistent, and some cases will have no or poor citations.
 * We don't have articles for different versions of the same game. And anyone getting confused and searching for the wrong thing will hit a redirect to the proper article.   D r e a m Focus  19:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Games are called by the full name that they were released by. This includes the many games which have expansion packs, as most games made in the past 15 years or so have.  The expansion pack Warcraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal even has its own article right now.  Most games are later sold as collections, and those collections are called by a different name.  Sometimes they are released in various collections with totally different names.  And when they release the games on a different system, they might change the name a bit, but that doesn't matter either.  The long accepted standard throughout the English language Wikipedia has been to call the game by the name it was released by in English.   D r e a m Focus  12:20, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

What a crazy mess
I realise this article is going through a review process, but the current sandboxed version is absolutely pathetic, and unfair to those who surf in for a read. Would anyone object if I WP:BOLDLY reverted this back to (the last clean) revision 474815697 by Khanassassin? -- WikHead (talk) 07:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)