In the span of one movie he went from a farmer, to knowing how to pilot an x wing, learning the force enough that even Darth Vader says its strong with him, and using newly acquired magic to get a shot into a really hard to hit target.
He barely trained in any of this, his powers were just there.
But again. Just because a character fits the criteria of being a mary sue doesn’t mean they’re bad or not entertaining. Luke is still very likable to the audience.
Emm, he didn’t “learn how to pilot” in single movie.
He stated multiple times that he already knew how to pilot because he was attending the academy. When they met Han in Cantina he advised to drop his overpriced offer because he could buy for this money a ship and fly to the destination himself. So he didn’t “immediately learn” how to pilot, he already had this knowledge.
Obi Wan trained with him, but it was still just a basics, all force did was to help him aim so he could make a perfect shot at death Star- a combination of “divine intervention” and his own skill. He didn’t own anyone with the power of the force in the very same movie, he didn’t immediately went on with saber to slash people more powerful than him.
In the end both Obi Wan and Han were there to help him in darkest time. Heck he was even assaulted by Tusken Raiders and needed to be saved.
He is not Mary Sue, mary sues are ridiculously powerful, they are close to flawless, achieve stuff effortlessly, have close to no character arc because they’re so perfect.
And Luke is none of these things. But Rey does fit the criteria, she is ridiculous, he isn’t.
Very well. I only assumed he just had knowledge of driving a car / speeder whatever they’re called.
Still a pretty big boost imo
I can’t comment on the new films however. I haven’t watched them. All I imply is that Luke fits the “I don’t care if he’s OP HES AWESOME” type of mary sue which was pretty common in old media. The past was full of power fantasy which was fine. Not shaming that. Sometimes power fantasies are still fun.
It’s a bit funny to see superman fans complain about mary sues when people have to keep coming up with ways to nerf superman lol.
I consider mary sue heroes and mary sue villains to be a teensy bit different. When the threat is constantly perfect then there’s no point really to combating them. But when a hero suddenly gets op or unbeatable it can have a very cool payoff. Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure is a pretty fun example of that. Well just one I can name off the top of my head.
She dosen’t have the focusing Iris anymore, and she was NEVER stronger than Sargeras, thats just rediculous and you know it.
She almost killed Arthas in WC3.
While he was allready weakened, and by playing to her strengths of ambush, and manipulation, she did NOT over power him.
Mary Sue’s make mistakes they just get no actual punishment for any mistake they make.
Example Ray fighting kylo multiple times and never getting seriously injured… meanwhile kylo is eating blasters to the chest and getting scarred up.
Yeah Arthas also had a shadowlands legendary.
Bolvar had the helm of domination but isn’t isn’t really a powerful 1v1 item at all especially since blizzard stated the Thunderking could 1v1 the lich king, but army vs army the thunder king loses.
This gives a power scaling on how strong a peak lich king was, cause Thunder King was roughly stronger than Xuen.
There is not one, accepted definition for the term.
I’m sure if she did get more hurt people would just throw a fit at a woman getting hurt
/eyeroll
Didn’t stop Ellen Ripley from being a dang near perfect ( in a good way ) character
OP, I’m sorry that your thread got trolled by an incoherent poster, that already had their opinion set prior to coming here, and won’t take any feedback.
The inherent problem with this particular storyline, and game writing in general, is that a cliffhanger lasts so much longer than in other media. You could relate it to a TV series end-of-season plot reveal. To claim that it’s bad writing, or that a character is a Mary Sue, it’s just opinion. While everyone is entitled to their opinion, I encourage people to be patient, and not to jump to any conclusions.
Also, the fact that people do not accept one true definition of something should not preclude the actual definition. If people started propagating that “pizza” was a good word to use for a folder of photographical evidence, it doesn’t mean that the definition of pizza needs to be changed to include it. It means those people are wrong. 
To me, the core of the term is when a character changes the canon physics, belief systems, and overall cohesiveness of a universe; that they force people to behave in ways that don’t fit the narrative, obtain skills or powers that never get explained, and generally do whatever they want without consequence. I do not see that in any of the Warcraft characters.
Yes there is, that’s how definitions work. 
What you’re describing is a neologism, which doesn’t count for much.
Sometimes, but not in this case. There are clearly more than one regularly-used definition, and probably at least three being used in this thread.
Incorrect. Plenty of words have varied, adjacent definitions; for example “culture”.
The term Mary Sue can mean either an author stand-in character, an invincible, unflawed character, or both, and there are yet other meanings.
Language does this all the time. Ask a linguist.
This already has its own term: Author Avatar
Okay, that doesn’t stop people from using Mary Sue to mean this.
OK, that doesn’t mean that they’re correct with its usage.
Just because a lot of people do something, doesn’t change the rules, though it can over time. Hence why it’s a neologism.
Have a nice day Aruk.
Funny thing about language - if enough people use a word a certain way, that becomes the right way to use it.
And it has in this case, as even a cursory google search would make evident.
I don’t know why they would use an incorrect term, when there is a correct term. Maybe that’s just me.
Because it isn’t incorrect; and “author avatar” doesn’t have any stronger of a claim.
Words change, and some people use different words. That’s how language works.
For example: “literally” now means figuratively or what literally used to mean.
I just said that.
So, we aren’t worrying about the topic at hand, we’re now discussing the definition of the word? I’ve already made my points on this several times.
Obviously Sylvanas isn’t a Mary Sue.
Have a nice day Aruk. 
This is me trying to be polite.
It isn’t that obvious. She has many mary sue qualities, by various definitions.
You can set out your working definition and argue that she doesn’t meet that particular definition, but as you are not a linguistic authority others are free to reject your definition. As they have.
This is me being correct.