Wowpedia:Lore policy

Official sources of lore

 * All official sources of lore are considered valid.

This includes the games and their manuals, the novels, and the manga.

Comments by authors, artists, and Blizzard Entertainment employees may also be of interest, but should always be clearly cited as such, and not taken as definitive statements of fact.

Note that as per an Ask CDev response, Blizzard does not consider the RPGs in and of themselves to be canonical. Various elements from the RPGs can be made canon by being added to/referenced from other sources, however. An ongoing discussion about the implications of this is currently underway. Please do not simply remove content just because it comes from the RPG in the meantime.

Citation
As verifiability is crucial to the integrity of information in the wiki, statements which are likely to be disputed should provide citations to the above sources. Providing a citation allows other users to verify that information is correct, and helps identify speculation masquerading as official lore. Citation is particularly important when dealing with controversial topics, as well as statements including specific numbers, such as populations.
 * Cite your sources.

If a specific claim lacks a citation, it may be tagged with the Fact template. The Source needed banner can be used if an entire article or section has an unclear foundation in official sources. If no citation is provided within a reasonable time, the impugned material should be removed from the wiki.

Information sources

 * Clarify the context of information.

This wiki serves as a repository for Warcraft universe lore (with a focus, though not priority, on World of Warcraft). It covers the entire Warcraft series of games, RPG reference books, strategy guides, novels, "manga", and other sources. Each source of information should be clearly cited using, ref game or cite (ref and ref game are preferred).

Source header templates may also be used in an article. For example, a discussion of the physical manifestations of Elune’s powers is likely to leave a reader only familiar with World of Warcraft somewhat confused. The RPG template provides one way to clarify the context in which that information is relevant. Use Novel for information related to novels and short stories. Use Warcraft II for information related to Warcraft II and its expansion. Use Warcraft III for information related to Warcraft III and its expansion. Use WoW for any information related, mainly in World of Warcraft and its expansions, etc. Do not stack these templates. For more information and examples of specific source templates see, Wowpedia:Templates.

Conflicts
Two or more sources of lore may conflict on significant points. However, it is not Wowpedia's purpose to simply ignore older lore as if it never existed, but rather show the evolution of the story, and all alternate events. Perceived discrepancies may be retcons, flavor lore, or simply errors, but it is not up to wiki to decide which is the case. All versions should be compared and contrasted with citations, in order to portray the true publishing history.

Please note, attempts to reconcile conflicting versions of lore falls under the category of Speculation, and are governed by the guidelines under that section. Official reconciliation is allowed if properly cited.

Speculation

 * Keep speculation separate.

Speculation consists of anything that is not verifiable in an official source of lore and usually includes attempts to fill in blanks, resolve discrepancies, or predict future events.

It is imperative for the integrity of the information in the wiki that all speculation be kept clearly distinct from objective, verifiable information. Ideally, this means placing the conjecture in a completely separate article, with a title that includes "speculation," "theory," "rumor," or some other word indicating the uncertain and unofficial nature of the content. If included in a regular article (as it often is), conjecture should be placed under a separate subheading clearly labeling it with one of the above words and a  tag. While preferred over a section, a completely separate article is usually only created if the theory is large or complex. Speculation is not the same as fan fiction, and if an author does not want their theories to be altered, their theories should be placed in a completely separate user subpage and labeled as one author's ideas when mentioned. Also, some speculation can be easily avoided by phrasing information as facts. While the line "Athridas Bearmantle might well be the long lost brother of Broll" would be speculation, the line "Athridas shares the name Bearmantle with Broll" would be constitute a fact and therefore be a preferred option.

Speculation should not build on previous speculation or assumptions, and all ideas must have factual backing.

This policy is of particular importance when dealing with the sometimes confusing issue of retcons or lore conflicts or lore gaps. When describing these, the conflicting information from the cited sources should be presented without commentary. Theories as to how the conflict could or should be resolved should be relegated to separate sections or articles.

Different speculations often conflict with one another; it is not the wiki's job to endorse a particular speculatory direction. If an idea is to be added to an existing speculation section or article, do not remove the existing speculation, add to it. The exception to this rule is if the existing speculation contradicts citable lore.

Concise articles and source text
Lore articles on characters, places, and events should be kept reasonably concise by summarizing and cleanly presenting the facts and events directly relevant to the topic. Large sections of copied source text are discouraged as they tend to make articles overly long, create repetition, contain much information that is not directly relevant, and are problematic to update.

Citations to an official source should be included when relevant in the form of a link. Following the policy of preferring internal links, the link would ideally be to an internal page containing a complete transcription of the source, clearly identified as source text. This should also allow for easier verification and citation of sources.

Why don't we use the word "canon"?
Canon is an oft-used term by Warcraft fans regarding official lore, specifically the fictional accounts in the Warcraft universe. This type of lore can be referred to as "canonical" lore.

Wowpedia strives to have a neutral point of view on official lore due to it being rarely discussed by Blizzard, although examples exist: Chris Metzen has stated that the games themselves are considered the benchmarks for information, with the MMO setting the standard. Other sources of lore fall just under the games; "Ya, the novels are pretty much considered canon, um, the funny thing is some things are less canon, we shoot for canon. Typically the characters in novels are canon..."

Because the use of the term is rare, and as calling something "canon" often precludes the possibility of discussion about validity and "truth", we avoid using this term to describe lore in the Wowpedia articles in order to keep a neutral point of view. It is also useful to note that Blizzard does not usually use the term "canon" for similar reasons.

While we cannot stop the use of the term "canon" in talk page discussions, the term is not allowed in articles. The only exception is when verifiable public quotes from actual first-party Blizzard employees (such as Metzen) are allowed in articles, and then only if there are direct links to the sources of the quotes.

es:Wowpedia:Políticas del Lore ru:Вовпедия:Правила для исторических данных