Forum:WoD mobs/npcs articles

I have created articles that are based on the Europe and Korea beta of WoD for the following creatures (and maybe more others).


 * Bladespire Mauler
 * Porkchop Jr.
 * Bladespire Stonecaster‎
 * Bladespire Brute‎

I'm just pointing this out just so these may not be deleted for being too early. I did follow the guidelines to the template WoD that states This article should only contain officially released content, such as beta and press release content. I have gotten the information from videos on the beta of Europe and Korean for these creatures (and more others that I may not list in the future). The videos can be found posted on MMO-Champion. Thank you. -- 22:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * None of the linked articles contain any actual content (beyond mob names, levels, reactions and mob types -- i.e. boring trivia); as such, all four run afoul of WP:STUB. There's no reason for these articles to exist in this form at this time. — foxlit (talk) 22:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * It's also early in the sense that blizz still hasn't nailed down how far the item squish is going to go... the numbers (not that there are any health numbers...) they currently have will most likely not make it live, let alone to beta. There's a line we need to have with regard to content shown in gameplay vids/press screenshots... Things like actual zones (like the ones listed in the WoD page by virtue of BlizzCon info) are ok... The average mob? Probably not, especially not until we hit beta and can post non-grainy screenshots and the like. -- k_d3 23:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, this is my misunderstood. 23:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * One thing to note is that you should be using Stub/WoD for these random NPCs, mobs and such. WoD for just for the major articles like zones and new races. 08:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. 01:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 * With the new model updates coming around, the NPCs are also getting the updates as well, of course. But with that going around, wouldn't each article page of a mob and NPC have to have the screenshot updated only if that NPC and or mob still exists in-game? Or have both screenshots, one for low res screeny and one screeny for high res since there's an option to disable or enable the high res models. We can discuss how this is going to pan out here. 23:49, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Either or I would say is fine, if people want to update old screenshots with the improved models that is great, but I would say no to having both low res and high res images for each NPC. 00:28, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright. I'd prefer to start using the high res screenshots, as it'll become more widely known in the future. I, of course, will spend sometime doing this whenever. :) 01:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Deletion vote
Looking back at this, I think a large number of articles were created too early to have meaningful content. I'd like to delete them; and, because this is a rather broad decision, would like your input; hence the deletion vote below.

This concerns articles based primarily on datamined content, like Porkchop Jr., Sparring Arena (or pretty much everything on Template:Garrison), or generally any article that begins with "  ..." (sic). We're not Wowhead, and I don't think there's any value in us creating horribly incomplete skeleton pages replicating incomplete and frequently placeholder information datamined from the alpha client/observed on various streams.

If you're in doubt as to whether this includes a specific article, please feel free to ask below.

Votes
Delete

Keep

Comments
I see no point of wasting time to deleting these articles as time moves on, you can simply update the articles, move them, delete them as the alpha runs its course. They all will be updated in the future, especially on the date WoD is released. 22:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The point is to ensure that our articles meet a certain minimum quality threshold. It's incredibly frustrating to click those links expecting that the articles contain meaningful information, and find "INSERT STUFF HERE" placeholders instead. Please, when you create a new article, take the extra time to add the information that you do have, rather than leaving "..." and "add any available information here" placeholders (see WP:STUB) -- and if there's nothing you could add beyond the datamined content pulled straight from wowhead/wowdb/mmo-champion, perhaps it's not yet the time to create that article. — foxlit (talk) 23:00, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd have to agree with this, many mobs and npcs just don't have any info, not even the zone they're located in. I also wasn't expecting everything on Template:Garrison  to be made so quickly either... I was only getting it ready (template wise) for what we did know, and created the mine (garrison) to judge how the articles might look so we have a standard for those. Without more info I wasn't sure what parameters for infobox garrison I was going to use. Once we have more info, we would likely add more to that template. Also, I'd rather avoid using PNG file types throughout them.
 * That said, should the vote pass to delete those articles, I'd rather we just go ahead and keep the Garrison articles, since they will pretty much be unchanged unlike the NPC/mobs which often change several times over before beta is over. 05:52, 26 May 2014 (UTC)