|This is an archive of WoWWiki talk:Lore policy.
Vote on current incarnation
- See WoWWiki:Lore policy.
|This policy has been adopted.|
- Yes User:TopDread 01:58, 14 May 2006 (EDT) - ()
- Yes Dispressa 17:02, 18 May 2006 (EDT) - (Accessibility and retention of all canonical lore, no matter how outdated or later contradicted, is desired. If the mechanism requires resorting to technical a/o real-world terms, then so be it.)
- Yes Ralthor 16:03, 24 May 2006 (EDT) - (Tried to read all the discussions, there were a lot, but this seems to be a good comprimise.)
- Yes Mikk 06:47, 13 June 2006 (EDT) - (Wow, contentious subject. While I'm not a lore nutter, I have to say that I really like the policy as currently written from an objectivity and legibility standpoint. So I'll call it a Yes unless someone calls me on it :-))
- Yes Schmidt 07:59, 13 June 2006 (EDT) - (Good ideas here.)
- Vote closed. I'm moving this straight to Adopted since I don't see any implementation notes that need to be taken care of. --Mikk 11:58, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
The Need for a Lore Policy
There has been some recent discussion regarding how to deal with conflicts between different sources of lore, what should be considered canon, and what should be given precedence. If we concentrate the discussion here, hopefully we will be able to develop a consensus and write a formal policy in this area.
Discussion on the issue is currently occurring in several different places, including:
- Talk:Centaur (Eastern Kingdoms)
- User talk:Aeleas#RPG, Novels, Comics, vs. WOW
- User talk:Baggins
- User talk:Ragestorm#Contradictions
Outline for discussion
A few questions that could perhaps be resolved is:
- Which of the following are considered canon?
- Should material not reflected in WoW that comes exclusively from the novels, earlier games, and/or RPG be included in this site?
- If so, should it be distinguished by a banner or similar method?
- How should conflicts or changes in lore be handled?
- Should any sources of lore be given absolute precedence, so that any contradictions from other sources are simply disregarded?
- On the flip side, are there any sources from which any contradictory lore can be disregarded?
- Should some conflicts be explained, with both versions presented?
- If so, should this always be done in clear real-world terms, or lore-based terms where possible?
- e.g., the difference between discussing Warcraft II manual as a real-world thing and discussing it as a sort of historical document within the Warcraft universe.
- What qualifies as a retcon, and how should they be handled?
--Aeleas 15:40, 13 April 2006 (EDT)
"Should material not reflected in WoW that comes exclusively from the novels, earlier games, and/or RPG be included in this site?
- "If so, should it be distinguished by a banner or similar method?" --Aeleas
- I think it should be okay to post any Warcraft lore here, since it provides context for World of Warcraft. WoW has some its own lore problems due to the need for specific game mechanics (see Talk:Gutterspeak for some interesting discussions). We should provide categories and banners for non-WoW lore, but maybe especially for Warcraft RPG, since it seems to range farthest afield from most lore from games and the official website. --Fandyllic 6:59 PM PDT 13 Apr 2006
It looks like there might be enough consensus and demand for a WoWWiki:Lore policy page as a sub-policy of WoWWiki:Writing policy similar to WoWWiki:DNP policy and WoWWiki:NPOV. Perhaps Aeleas could start filling in a WoWWiki:Lore page? If I see it gets created, I'll give it a quick editing sweep and put it up for a vote. --Fandyllic 6:40 PM PDT 24 Apr 2006
I've been thinking more about what would work best, and perhaps what we would most benefit from in terms of dealing with conflicting information, and ensuring the quality and verifiability of information in the wiki as a whole, is some sort of citation system to easily refer to the games, the manuals, the books, and the RPG sourcebooks. Wikipedia has