Talk:Purge of Dalaran

This is a heated topic, and I feel it best that we have a discussion instead of a edit war.

Anyone else? SKW (talk) 02:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Rommath's quest claims that the Silver Covenant was attacking "innocent Sunreavers" but we can see from Alliance questing that they're hostile and are active combatants. They were harassing some Sunreavers, but the Sunreavers actively fighting in the sewers were not innocent. Fojar38 (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The Alliance quest wants the players to go and exterminate the sunreavers like rats. They're merely defending themselves from being slaughtered. And I'm thinking the term "innocent" being used here represents that fact that these people did nothing wrong to provoke such anger and hostility from the Silver Covenant or Kirin Tor. 07:06, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The exact wording is "Go find those lying rats and exterminate them!" When the Alliance goes down to the sewers, they do not encounter any civilians; they encounter exclusively armed Sunreaver insurrectionists who've even gone so far as to set up ambushes for Kirin Tor agents. They are not "merely defending their homes." They're actively rebelling against Dalaran's duly elected government. I'd say that that in combination to delivering a WMD to a dictator with genocidal ambitions is plenty of cause for hostility and anger from the Silver Covenant and Kirin Tor. Adding things like "and then the Alliance slaughtered a bunch of innocent Sunreavers" is flagrantly biased in favour of the Horde perspective and has no place on a wiki with a neutral PoV policy. Fojar38 (talk) 08:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * From what i saw of the quest on youtube, the Silver Covenant in the sewers seemed to be harrassing rather than attacking.--Ashbear160 (talk) 11:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The SC was brutalizing the civilians (smacking them around with their weapons, stripping them of their possessions, etc.) in the first area the Horde player visits. This isn't some vague statement from our quest giver that we can nitpick (Rommath's opinion of what constitutes "innocent" is ambiguous and should indeed be left out), this is something the bewildered victims profess themselves and we see with our own eyes. I appreciate that this seems to upset some people, but that doesn't make this particular incident any less canon.
 * That aside, as it stands the article looks impartial enough to me. The ambiguous parts are kept ambiguous, and the blunt parts are kept blunt. That's how it should be.
 * And no offense, but rewording whatever you deem as "Horde biased" to the point where it becomes nakedly Alliance favoured isn't a great crash course in neutral writing. Jon Irenicus (talk) 13:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * In the first area of the sewers, I saw threatening(pointing weapons) and possibly stripping. I didn't see any weapon smacking(at least in the video I saw). Rommath also says that the first sewer zone is relatively calm to the rest of Dalaran. After that zone it's signifcantly more violent.--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It's infrequent (I had to wait about five minutes to see them get hit), but it happens. Still... I'm happy to leave it broadly at "physical intimidation" if you are. Jon Irenicus (talk) 14:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * That's okay, I guess.--Ashbear160 (talk) 14:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Check what happens during any arrest even IRL The person is stripped and there are guns pointed at them SKW (talk) 15:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * On another note, Rommath is angry because Jaina allowed alliance forces into dalaran and turned it into alliance territory. It's in the quest speech. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.
 * Returned to Alliance vs. War zone. I think the problem here is that both sides have references. from two different quests. However, only one actually states "it makes my blood boil" rather than implying anger, it outright states it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.

Civility thanks
Hey all. Thank you, all of you, for remaining civil while editing this article and working through the various issues in an effort to make sure it's neutral. Please keep up the good work, but don't just revert with an edit comment to continue the argument. That's what this talk page is for. Nothing's worth getting hit with WP:3RR enforcement, and I'd really rather not have to resort to that. (Please don't read this as an attempt to call anyone out personally. I'm not. No, not even you.)

Everyone is reminded to assume good faith. If in an attempt to achieve "neutrality", not that there is such a thing, the article winds up as a dry, encyclopedic view of the event, I don't have a problem with that. I'd actually call that the ideal, now that I think about it. It's not our place to call actions right or wrong -- that's Blizzard's -- we're just documenting what happened using all lore sources available to us.

If anyone has any questions, feel free to (in order of preference) reply here, comment on my talk page, or even email me if necessary. Wowpedia needs editors like you to make sure we stay up to date with the changing world of Warcraft. Thanks again! -- k_d3 01:47, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree that everyone will be a little biased towards a faction, having played on each side for a long time, I have managed to maintain neutrality in most cases, though because I play Horde more often now I sometimes lean more Horde favored. I think this article is about as neutral as it's going to get at this point... heh, haven't seen an article go through so much edit warring in a while, it nice to see people being passionate for what they love again. 03:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Despite the Edit War, I have to agree.SKW (talk) 13:21, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The Alliance-Horde war article was (is?) under some heavy edit warring, but this seems more neutral at the moment. -- 14:47, 17 March 2013 (UTC)