Talk:World of Warcraft: Shadowlands

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the World of Warcraft: Shadowlands article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "World of Warcraft: Shadowlands" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Award nomination

32nd GLAAD Media Awards

---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Development section?

Every other World of Warcraft expansion article has a section focused on the expansion's development in some form. Adding one for Shadowlands will increase the quality and maintain uniformity across the expansion articles, yes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatchesSalv (talk • contribs) 04:25, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should have one. Just no one has had interest to find the sources and write it thus far. -- ferret (talk) 14:43, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The original Shadowlands

I removed the citation because it doesn't seem like a reliable source. It's a guy on YouTube speculating based on a series of Twitter posts by... some guy claiming to be a WoW developer and writing really far-fetched claims, providing way too much information that's impossible to verify, with lots of misspellings of names, and without any proof. - Linneris (talk) 22:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Patch 9.2

Under player reception, it says players felt 9.2 was "reparative" and "disrespected their time." There is no citation for this and it seems to just be a personal opinion.

My recollection is that 9.2 was widely seen as moving in the right direction and was considered a good patch. Covenants were opened up and not punishing to switch between -- which was a major complaint previously. Also the use of older raids as "fated" raids, and the timewalking M+ were both pretty universally seen as great features. If you just google "wow 9.2" you will find almost entirely positive reddit threads, articles, and videos... But I'm not saying my recollection should be switched in for someone else's, I just think the opinion should be taken out, so I am removing that sentence. 2601:19C:5080:18E0:209B:22C1:88BB:74EE (talk) 21:33, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair points and I've removed it. — Czello ^(music) 21:35, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]