Talk:Dragon Soul

Name
How about keeping a redirect to the Demon Soul and have a Dragon Soul (instance) instead?

07:24, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * As one that dislikes always (lately) having to do instance articles as (instance), I'm against that idea. Added a for though. 07:33, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That would mean a lot of clean up as for the many link of Dragon Soul were until now used for Demon Soul
 * 07:36, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I like to avoid parentheticals whenever possible myself, too, but with something as prevalent and important as "Dragon Soul" I don't think it can be avoided. Maybe use "The Dragon Soul" for the raid? -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 07:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yea... you guys are right... oh well. I suppose Dragon Soul (instance) will do, as to keep with the current pattern. And have The Dragon Soul redirect to the instance article. 07:49, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, (intance) and The as redirect is the best solution imo
 * And not The as article since the achievement will most likely be named this way
 * 07:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Deathwing
If he's two separate fights in this raid... should we give him two separate tactic pages? 07:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I believe so, since they are apparently going to be quite huge strats to write down
 * 07:58, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. They're separate encounters with separate tactics and separate loot. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 08:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok then... we'll wait to see what they (or the Dungeon Journal) calls the fight with Deathwing while on his back.... hopefully it won't be called something like the Backside Battle. (playing off of Gunship Battle). 08:04, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Mercer said Blizz
 * Which means that the second encounter could be called Corrupted Deathwing.
 * But this sound awful!
 * 07:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


 * As for his size, he is not quite as big as they seem to say
 * 14:25, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

CoT
is this really a CoT instance? i do believe we are fighting Deathwing in the present time and not in the past. So, i do believe this isnt a CoT Instance and neither are the Non-WoTA 5mans. Kinaria (talk) 18:06, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * According to Blizzard, all the new instances are accessed via the Caverns of Time. -- Dark T Zeratul (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * And likely only be talking to an NPC... since I doubt they're going to make grand entrances for each one of these new places.... though I suppose they only need to make one entrance (like Hyjal) and then have gateways within that one. 18:12, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Name, Part 2
I'm resurrecting this discussion. Is it still necessary to keep this as a disambiguation page? We can bot the links to update them to the correct name. Dragon Soul is just a redirect here. -- 23:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Just as follows.
 * Dragon Soul (instance) --> Dragon Soul
 * Template:Dragon Soul (instance) --> Template:Dragon Soul
 * Update links
 * -- 23:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd rather have a disambig page since two important things in the lore of Warcraft have the same name. I could agree with such a move, at one condition: if all the links currently pointing to Dragon Soul were first updated to link to either Dragon Soul or Dragon Soul. A bot would then be able to change all the Dragon Soul pages to simply to Dragon Soul. Xporc (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case then sure, but no reason to have a disambig page for the two when you can have a For at the top of the page for the other article. 23:39, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Maybe we should have a larger discussion about instances and disambig names. I'm bothered to have Siege of Orgrimmar for the instance and Siege of Orgrimmar (battle) for the lore, when on the other hand we have Gnomeregan for the lore and Gnomeregan (instance) for the instance. Xporc (talk) 13:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Although in my opinion, I think lore should be priotized over the instances (Gnomeregan is a good example for this)... but you must also think about the players and the common Wowpedian. When you come on Wowpedia and looking up Siege of Orgrimmar, what is the main thing you're most likely looking for? The raid in the game. Most likely trying to get more information on boss, loot, etc. It makes more sense for the raid to be at Siege of Orgrimmar instead of Siege of Orgrimmar (instance). But another thing to consider: Wowhead is very useful in that case. 13:32, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, but when we had this discussion for alternate universes, we agreed that Hellfire Citadel (alternate universe) should get the disambiguation namespace while Hellfire Citadel would return to the normal one, in order to keep everything consistent. And you voted for it, too! Xporc (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yup! We are a wiki though so we should do what makes sense! I'd say move Siege of Orgrimmar to instance and the battle to the main article. Only issue, Siege of Orgrimmar has many links like Dragon Soul. 19:57, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

I went ahead and cleaned up all links directly linked to just "Dragon Soul". Every link talking about the raid should now be Dragon Soul while the artifact is Dragon Soul. This will make it easier for the bot to change the Dragon Soul (instance) to just Dragon Soul when we move the article. 23:38, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, as I was cleaning up links, I came across this charm. 23:40, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Alright, good job. Anyone against this move? Xporc (talk) 09:54, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I reverted some edits you did because the co template uses the map with that name. 10:55, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Now this looks good. If I do somehow come across a link that needs to be correct, I'll fix it. 01:38, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I am usually against unnecessary parentheses in main page names. It is a fundamental disagreement between you two and I about how page names should be structured.-- 04:44, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't care either way, (instance) or not. I'm the one who originally requested to move "Dragon Soul (instance)" to "Dragon Soul" in the first place. Xporc, what is your stance on this now since it has been over a year now and who here thinks that it is best where it is at currently? 06:51, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with xporc. We've done this many times before. Lore names should prevail over in-game things. That's why we have a separate pages for the Siege of Ogrimmar/its instance and others. The Dragon Soul/Demon Soul is the name of a lore item so not having them redirect to their respective page isn't right. That's why we should use the parenthesis. It isn't that of a big deal and helps differentiate the instance from the object. --Ryon21 (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I second this. --Mordecay (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * In this case I agree that the raid should be disambiguated, because when people search for "Dragon Soul" I would guess that they're most likely looking for information about the artifact, since that's almost always what is being referred to when the phrase "Dragon Soul" is mentioned by in-universe characters and lore material. (This doesn't necessarily mean I agree with favoring lore over gameplay in every single case; for example, I think the raid should take precedence in the case of the Siege of Orgrimmar, but that one doesn't really bother me much either way.) -- 18:41, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Fel Reaver currently redirects to fel reaver because the people linking it were idiots and it was deemed easier to accommodate them rather than correct them. Both versions have a for template involved, but now there is a redirect and a descriptive parenthetical involved. There are occasionally pushes to add parentheticals when no disambiguation is needed at all, so people have short descriptions in the search bar. Here, we have an opportunity to avoid that, keeping main pages only, but you all who have dedicated your lives to sorting things now revel in complexity.-- 19:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * ackshually the only reason "Fel Reaver" is currently a redirect to "Fel reaver" is because in December I fixed a shitton of links that were previously wrongly linking to it, a situation that lasted for a literal decade. Is that the kind of stuff you'd rather have? Xporc (talk) 07:53, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * More recently was the Core Hound and Core hound situation. 09:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Same thing. I was directly talking about the "shitton of links that were previously wrongly linking to it". That is what the for is for.-- 03:46, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, if that's your stance, we'll not agree on that, then Xporc (talk) 09:04, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Any still hot opinion about this, or should the matter be dropped? Xporc (talk) 12:44, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm still in favor of having "Dragon Soul (instance)". The two are different things. --Ryon21 (talk) 16:18, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Not enough people care about it, so it's time to move on Xporc (talk) 12:24, 5 July 2019 (UTC)