Forum:PROPOSAL: Make Card Rulings pages editable only by Registered Users

We're currently experiencing a lot of vandalism on Rulings pages by anonymous users, and we're thinking about a change to the way they are allowed to be edited.

We'd like to make the Rulings Pages only editable by Registered Users. No other pages are affected by this proposal, they're the only pages that don't need to be edited by Anonymous, and it would clear up a lot of issues with the outside world being skeptical of the Wikia, because Rulings are editable by everyone.

Discuss.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• I agree with locking the rulings pages to registered users only. People add unofficial and incorrect rulings based on their own observation of the card. It's easier to keep track of identified users and know if they're reliable. (not to say anonymous is always incorrect.) A small number of registered users and able to keep track and update the official ones. As far as I know there have been little major contributions from IP edits and masive amounts of incorrect additions. -- Deltaneos (talk) 19:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

---

I'm not sure. People just don't seem to understand that our Rulings pages are only supposed to contain (semi-)official information, or at the absolute least information backed up by an unnecessarily large amount of evidence (in which case, it should be marked as Unofficial). Perhaps we should develop a more thorough/stricter Card Rulings Policy (like we have for Images), and put it down in writing.

I don't know a thing about the software here, but would it be possible to include a note when someone tries to edit a Rulings page? Something like "WARNING: Be sure to read our Rulings Policy before continuing your edits!" ?

Off the top of my head, such a policy may include:

• "TCG Official Rulings" should contain ONLY rulings that appear on the UDE Site. ONLY.
• "TCG Semi-Official Rulings" should contain rulings directly from UDE that appear on other places. Examples include the Judges' List and forum posts by UDE staff. E-mails from UDE can appear, but only if they come from a reliable source and can be reproduced (so that people can't make up things, and then lie that UDE said so). All examples should be referenced.
• "OCG Official Rulings" should contain ONLY rulings that appear on the Konami FAQ. ONLY. All rulings should be referenced, since they are often spread over multiple pages.
• "OCG Semi-Official Rulings" should contain rulings from the Japanese Wiki or JERP, since both are thoroughly researched. Rulings from the Konami OCG Hotline thingie can appear, but only if they're from a reliable source. All examples should be referenced.
• "Unofficial" rulings should contain massive amounts of evidence to back them up. If there is any reasonable doubt, then it doesn't appear. Examples include frequently asked questions, abbreviations of rulings/rules-of-thumb (like my one for Winged Kuriboh LV9, or the one on "Angel O7), or conclusions based on the Card Text (like "Kuraz"). Unofficial rulings should ALWAYS include the logic behind the ruling.
• Possibly a "see also" section, for similar or comparable card rulings ("Tenkabito Shien": See "Wildheart"). Maybe under the "Unofficial" section.

Anything else should NOT appear. Exceptions may be permitted on a case-by-case basis, and only with permission by a higher-up. --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 23:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

---

Interesting. I think we actually do have a policy written somewhere, but on some page nobody ever visits. I think it may be possible to add such a warning message. I don't know how, but if it's possible, we can easily enough find out. However messages like that tend to be ignored. Meh we all do it. (Use merchandise without reading the manual) We had messages displayed at the top of every page twice in the past; once explaining a technical problem wikia was having and once giving instructions to not create talk pages for the rulings, tips etc pages. Massive amounts of users ignored them both times.

Looking at the guidlines, you've suggested... TCG & OCG official & semi-official, I agree with. If someone doesn't abide them, it's simple, it gets reverted and they're given the explaination. The unofficial one's the tricky one. People are going to add rulings they deem needed. Like this, which is actually true, but overexcessive. I still think it's possible to bend around (or at least say that one is going by) the rule for adding unofficial rulings to adding whatever one wants.

Anyway, overall, I like your idea. Locking it from unregistered members does seem a bit extreme. I suppose vandalism, incorrect and poor additions is something all pages must deal with, and locking all pages is certainly too extreme.

So we could go with all your afforementioned guidlines, bar the unofficial one. That's where your last suggestion comes in. Only allow unofficial ones to be added by user, who are recognised to have a proficient understanding of rulings or added with their approval.

But the credibility issues other people have had regarding this site, isn't addressed. I guess there really is no avoiding that on a wiki. No matter how well Wikipedia sources it articles, we're still going to hear people saying it's unreliable, souly because anyone can edit it. I gues locking the pages won't change that too much. Seeing the word wiki, would problably throw those people off anyway. *Sigh*

I'm problably sounding mistrusting of those who edit anonymously. Sorry >_>.

Anyway thanks for your input. You've changed my mind at least. -- Deltaneos (talk) 01:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)