Forum:Warcraft film = new players

For those of us who frequent social media or the various forums and fansites this topic has already been discussed plenty, so I won't go into too much detail, but for anyone who hasn't considered it yet, the film is hoped to bring some new players to Azeroth. This is partly due to free copies of the game which are being handed to cinema-goers in some territories.

Obviously more players is good for the game, and many in the community have been focusing on making new players feel welcome, through guilds and in-game helpfulness, as well as on forums and the like.

Both the official site and Wowhead have been busy producing new player guides. While Wowpedia possibly isn't the best place for such guides (especially given the rapid rate at which things continue to change), we are still likely to have a larger number of new players checking the site than usual. In addition to this, the official site's new player guides link directly to certain Wowpedia articles. Currently the only ones I could find in the guides themselves were for Rare mob, Elite creature and Spirit Healer, but the new player guide range has only just started, with more articles planned. We also have links from the official site's game guide pages to all our class, race and profession pages. Even without any of these links, new players will find their way here for information, as we all did at one point or another ;)

I think this is a good opportunity for a bit of spring cleaning, and sprucing up the aforementioned pages in particular, and any new player-related pages in general. There are a lot of cobwebs and tags even on some of our most core pages, and this is a great chance to focus on bringing articles up to date and making them accessible for new players. This could help new players find their feet on Azeroth, helping the game to stabilise and stay afloat, as well as bringing more readers and editors to the wiki. Crusty articles are more likely to confuse new players, and certainly won't help boost the wiki's reputation!

There's always a chance this suggestion will fall on deaf ears, but I think it's as good a reason as any to pull together. If anyone wants to coordinate efforts or just share enthusiasm for the project, bring it here! -- Taohinton (talk) 04:09, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey! Thanks for your work. You're probably right that this is needed. I noted that while you are doing spring cleaning, you tend to remove some old anecdotes. Even if they are not relevant anymore, I think it's still good to keep those for historical purposes! Xporc (talk) 13:52, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi :) Yes, it's always a balance between keeping all the footnotes in and making it more focused. As a rule I tend to remove things like "As of Patch 2.3 phenomenon X now occurs on a 20% faster timer" which are likely out of date anyway from the lead section/main body and move them down to trivia or such. I love the historical stuff and agree we don't want to lose it, at least as long as it's relevant to the article, but there's always some pruning/rewriting to do when updating a rusty article, and I do tend to remove really trivial stuff when it's badly out of date - I'm not sure there's a good way to keep it all. I'm always open to feedback though! -- Taohinton (talk) 21:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Well I guess you're right, now that I look about it, you mostly removed stuff that were relevant in 2008 like "If you're an Everquest player, blabla" ... My apologies. Xporc (talk) 21:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)