Talk:Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne/GA1
Jump to navigation Jump to search
After review, I'm placing the article on hold. The basic structure of the article is fine, but it needs a lot of work.
While keeping the gameplay of the main game, The Frozen Throne adds a number of tweaks to improve player experience. You have to assume readers aren't going to be familiar with either the article subject or the base game, and you shouldn't have info that's only in the lead. What kind of game is The Frozen Throne? Likewise, there's issues with details that I don't think make any sense in this article when they're divorced of context, and this is a huge problem for the gameplay and plot sections. You haven't explained what the food limit is, so The food limit has been increased from 90 to 100, and the upkeep requirements have been relaxed by 10 food units each means nothing (it barely means anything to me and I played the game constantly.) Is it Warcraft III or Warcraft 3? Be consistent. In addition, The Frozen Throne re-introduces naval battles—reintroduces from where? I know it's Warcraft II, but readers won't. Two new auxiliary races, the Naga and Draenei, have also been added. The Naga feature in all four campaigns, and as playable units, allies, and enemies; while the Draenei, which are actually more sophisticated creeps, are found only in the Blood Elf missions. What is an auxiliary race? What are creeps? You haven't mentioned the Blood Elves yet. What is the World Editor, etc. etc.
- Not explained or introduced in the setting: who the Night Elves are, who Illidan Stormrage is, who the Blood Elves are, who the Alliance is, who Arthas is, who the Lich King is, who Sylvanas Windrunner is, who the Demon Legion is, etc. etc. The Setting and characters should have much more of an introduction to the universe and setting up characters rather than just listing them off.
- All the citations that are just to the game itself (such as current ref 4) need a better citation, whether to the game manual or a secondary source. Citing the game itself is really only acceptable for the game's plot where it's clear where the details are coming from, and even then it's not ideal.
- What makes Gamestar.de, Gamer.nl, and Blizzplanet reliable sources?
- The development section is rather thin. I don't think that's a significant issue for GA, but it lacks much insightful detail into the actual creation of the expansion and would probably leave readers wanting. Blizzard didn't release dev diaries, there were no previews, etc?
- I added some comments above and made some changes to the article. I'll look at the rest tomorrow. Thanks for taking the time to review this! Regards SoWhy 20:26, 30 September 2018 (UTC)