When it comes to Classic, Blizzard's goal is to provide an authentic Vanilla experience, but they also needed to come up with technology to handle many players at launch, which is similar to sharding. While the use of this technology will be limited to the first month following launch, many players are questioning this decision and wouldn't like to see layering in the game at all.

No he's just not paying attention. The wanted quests are built into both the leveling guides and the "Zandalar Forever" achievement guide. They aren't in the rep guide because they are not repeatable and by the time you hit max level they should be done. You'll also notice the rep guide doesn't contain every single possible completable quest that rewards rep. It is designed to focus on repeatable objectives, world quests, large quest lines, and missions.
All of this is keeping with the spirit of vanilla, which I think is more important than that a specific number be 11 instead of 12. And it would help to "resize the swing" by making the game harder to the more experienced community, and forcing people to re-discover the game rather than simply looking up whatever they want to know on a spreadsheet somewhere.
Thanks so much for the replies. I think I am somewhat of a collector/roster builder. I go around doing the dailies but I also like buying pets just for their looks. I watched hazelnutty on youtube last night. I think I will focus on doing the expeditions when I have time to get all the pets that come from that. Then I will go back and do old raids like Eekwibble suggested.
You are right here. The Rematch string is part of the Info box, and as such it should be parsed correctly. (The string that contains the correct and breed/damage-specific min health requirements). This should be enough, but, I think there are also folks that aren’t using Rematch. They also should know of the type-specific min health requirements. Unfortunatly the default forms of the page don’t offer any detailed entries for the min health. They only offer one entry (for all damage types), and I always put the worst-case min health there (for pets that are weak against the expected damage type)
One player said in a comment posted in response to the list, “Yeah people don’t realize the sheer enormity of game system evolution WoW has gone through since release. I’m not the biggest fan of BoA by any stretch, but I’ve played since closed beta vanilla, and I doubt I’ll be going back to classic. Leveling was painful. Experiencing these old systems once was enough.”
It was the experience of the game that brought pleasure and joy, and that's what a lot of us want again. Not the numbers. When I play Classic I want to go through the deadmines with people I like and overcome a challenge together and see myself become stronger as a result. I don't want to play Classic so I can say "booyah! That number is exactly the same as it was 13 years ago!"
To me, certain character limits tend to be problematic not because of the length of actual content, but because of formatting tags and embedding taking up a lot of characters. This is something I experience on most of websites, not just this one, but the most aggravating issue over here is linking to user profiiles and other sources of strategies, which could be alleviated with internalisation of link paths and @mentions.