Talk:Valarjar Campaign

Since not all players play all classes I don't really mind the campaigns being detailed at all! People will love to read them. --Mordecay (talk) 16:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah the thing is while they were fine on basically empty pages like Valarjar or Tirisgarde, imagine a section of the same length on the Ebon Blade page? So I thought I'd trim them a bit but since they now have their own pages, there's no reason too. -- MyMindWontQuiet 16:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * DONT U DAREEEE!
 * Also, wouldn't "Warrior Campaign" be better for the page name? Wowhead has the quests categorized into CLASS campaigns (not FACTION campaigns) and it would, in fact, fill the red links here (in quest pages). Valarjar Campaign could remain a redirect.--Mordecay (talk) 17:04, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed, " campaign" sounds better than " " campaign. Anyway, good job to everyone who worked on these pages! Xporc (talk) 17:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Came here to request this. Nice to see you are ahead of me. One question (thinking a head) - should the article name be just campaign or something that references the source/expansion? legion campaign? --Celellach (talk) 18:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The thing is 1) what if next expansion too has class campaigns? or the one after? then we'll need to disambig between campaigns. so might as well be specific now. 2) they are technically the campaigns of these orders, which arefactions/organizations. the entire expansion is centered around the class orders, class order here, class order there, so on the pages of said class orders it makes sense for the section to be after said order campaign's. Not sure if I'm being clear. Random warrior #392 didn't do that, the Valarjar did all that. It's not the campaign of xxIllibomb, it's the Illidari's campaign.-- MyMindWontQuiet 20:48, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, we don't need the same naming as Wowhead, probably, but what do you think about having " Campaign" (which many of the Legion class quests already have) to be a redirect? --Mordecay (talk) 21:41, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah could be useful. -- MyMindWontQuiet 22:07, 12 July 2017 (UTC)


 * The Garrison Campaign page don't use the its expansion name, so I think it's not needed. (Mordecay (talk) 18:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)).
 * The garrison isn't the same example - warrior is a class which has quests in every expansion, while garrison was a feature only available in that one expansion. But I'm good either way, but I believe that the name, while very clear now, won't be as much down the road when its not the current content. --Celellach (talk) 19:14, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm, yes, there are still class quests (Paladin quests) outside of those that Legion introduced but those are not part of the "Campaign" and more importantly, the only (I think) class quests are those of Cataclysm (which also removed majority from pre-Cata content). MoP and WoD didn't have any class quests, so technically, u could say that the Legion class quests are a feature :D --Mordecay (talk) 19:22, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Reverting
Use this talk page if you have any issue with a change i made. --Celellach (talk) 21:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This is getting annoying, I have not reverted your changes. I took the time to go through every single one of your edits, which took forever, and note each lore element you had removed, then added them back. I did not touch all the linking and section stuff and everything else you've done. The least would be for you to do the same. As for them not advancing the plot, it's true but they're still flavor lore elements and give both life to the narrative and give insight into the lives and thinking of those characters, no real reason to remove them. This is the tale of that campaign. -- MyMindWontQuiet 22:04, 12 July 2017 (UTC)