Forum:Partnerships discussion

During recent discussions, there was a lot of interest in potential partnerships with Konami and other Yu-Gi-Oh related companies. Wikia has begun to look into the possibility of this happening, with an initial phone call set up for today, and a meeting in Japan planned for next month. But we don't know yet how quickly things will move, or which possibilities will work out. So in the mean time, I thought it would be good to get some more information from the Yu-Gi-Oh community.

So my question is: what would you like to see most from a relationship with a Yu-Gi-Oh related company? Some brief ideas: competition prizes, early information on new releases, chats with people from the company, <something I haven't thought of>... what are the things that would most interest you? -- sannse (help forum | blog) 18:24, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

The only part I want Konami to officially do in their partnership is put their card rulings on this site (so when a person claims that the rulings on an open-source wikia is not to be trusted, we have this to counter with). There is the problem of "locking" the pages so that people can trust the Rulings pages and not vandalize them, so that's something to think about. Maybe those pages could only be accessed for editing for some/all administrators (and be permanently locked)?

As for other benefits from Konami, I'm not sure of yet, so I'll let other users brainstorm. I do NOT want Konami to enforce their "draconian policies" on the content we have though; I would rather have it so we "accept" content from them. We'll see how it works out. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 18:33, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes, and maybe some access to their episode databanks or something, if Konami has access to that. I would LOVE to have everything down to a tee when it comes to having all the information from each and every episode (including cards that were only used/played in the anime, and never released in real-life). Too many time has a card's text been obscured by a person's hand or viewed at an odd angle, and we have had to guess at their information. I would LOVE to be at the forefront of this, if possible. I understand that it is a bit of a reach though =/. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 18:37, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

In addition to what UltimateKuriboh has posted, I would like the following to happen:

• Safeguards that Wikia will not be hit with DMCA takedown requests with regards to Image content (grey area, I know).
• Assistance with official information on some older cards (Such as the 1999 Asian Tournament Promos, as well as ones without a direct history (such as the alleged UDE version of "The Seal of Orichalcos").
• Exclusives and pre-release information would also be nice.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 18:49, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

It might also be nice for this site just to be recognised by Konami - maybe noted on their website or something. This is one of the biggest databases for everything Yu-Gi-Oh! afterall! :) --Spongebob456 ^(Talk) 20:03, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

So, what will this partnership mean to us? I mean would we have some direct news (like release dates of Booster Packs) or is there something else? Energy X ∞ 20:23, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

That's the point of this forum; what would YOU like out of this relationship with Konami, if it were established? --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 20:26, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

IRT locking down the Rulings namespace (further; anons have been restricted from editing it for some time), perhaps a "rulingseditor" usergroup or similar that admins could pass out to editors who've shown interest in working on rulings, with editing the Rulings namespace restricted to those editors with the usergroup? This solves the problem of, if the namespace were to be further restricted to admins only, how we would handle editors who want to work on rulings but have no interest in adminship (and, needless to say, would let us grant Konami representatives the ability to add official rulings without having to give them the full admin package, which could lead to all sorts of nastiness should worst come to worst). This would also give us something to throw back in the faces of anyone still prattling on about how our rulings aren't to be trusted because "anyone can edit them".
As for what I'd like to see in a partnership with Konami: official recognition would, of course, be the biggest thing (needless to say =D ), but I think just being able to have a dialog with Konami representatives as the need arises would be immensely helpful. There's also the possibility that UltimateKuriboh pointed out, of getting access to straight-on, full-card shots of anime- and manga-only cards that were obscured, partially shown, or never shown in card form, but in addition to that, I (and, I'm sure, many others) would love to get Tag Force-style artworks for cards that were never released in the TF games. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 20:52, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

Another awesome thing to get a parthership with Konami is to people outside the wikia to stop reclaiming that the wikia isn't a good source and it "sucks" and any other comments.... ._. --E.G.G. (My Contributions) 21:03, November 26, 2012 (UTC)

With a partnership with Konami, the page BKSS would become WBKSS (W = Why) to finaly explain some effects conflicts (with a different page name, of course). Most Card Rulings pages says what you can and what you can't do with a card, but don't explain why. Also, I agree with the other suggestions above :) --Missign0 (talk • contribs) 10:45, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

There are definitely a few ways we could restrict editing on the Card Rulings pages. Anything from protecting each page, to protecting the namespace, to making a new usergroup as Dinoguy suggested. Possibly the last is the most flexible, we could set it up so b'crats or admins could add and remove that group. For Konami reps, we have an "Authenticated" usergroup, which is only given to people like official representatives of partners, so there's that option too.

The other suggestions are all great too. If you come up with more, add them here, and I'll add them to the suggestions list I'm making for George. Thanks all -- sannse (help forum | blog) 18:02, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

Another, restricted namespace would be a better idea (such as "Official Card Rulings"), Delta, myself, the sysops, and any official Konami reps can then work in concert with each other on them.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 19:34, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how yet another namespace would really solve anything; we've already got too many custom namespaces as far as I'm concerned. The only real things adding a second Rulings namespace would achieve is a division of labor, making the non-admin editors that work on rulings feel alienated, and giving wiki haters yet another thing to hate on/laugh at us for. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 19:46, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. I don't think having two rulings namespaces makes any sense. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:47, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

I only suggested it to make sure we kept our old ruling pages intact while we worked on new ones. Do you think we should use the old rulings pages?--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 01:48, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how that's necessary. Can't we just modify each page to fit the new style in due time? Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 01:52, November 28, 2012 (UTC)

You could protect each as they were updated, and put a badge or something on the page to show its special status. If you had a new usergroup, we could give them the ability to bypass the protection. On the other hand, that would give them the ability to bypass any protection (same as admins). I'm not sure if that would work for you -- sannse (help forum | blog) 01:10, November 29, 2012 (UTC)

There isn't any (easy) way to add another protection level, is there? It seems like there should be, if Wikia can prevent any editors except those with a given usergroup (and admins) from editing a given namespace; the protection level would basically be a reversal of that. If this is something Wikia can do, I'm thinking we would update each Rulings page and protect it with the custom protection level, and when all the pages had been updated, Wikia could make that level default for the whole namespace, remove the manually-applied protection on each page (or set up an adminbot to do it), and then remove the option to apply that protection level from ?action=protect (since we shouldn't need that for any non-Rulings pages). Simultaneously with the updating, admins here would be handing out the new usergroup to editors we trust to work on rulings and to any Konami reps we get. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 03:02, November 29, 2012 (UTC)

Alternately, we could forgo the new protection level and only protect rulings pages after they've been updated, with a central noticeboard for notifying admins when another rulings page is ready to be protected or when a previously-updated and -protected rulings page needs updated for some reason. The protecting admin would then check the rulings page's history before protecting to make sure the most recent edit was by the protection requester or another trusted rulings editor and reverting non-trusted edits as needed, and after protection could apply the badge. After all the pages had been updated thus, we could follow up with the above sequence: Wikia bumping up the namespace-wide protection level, and removal of the manually-applied protection. And again, application of the usergroup could be happening simultaneously with the other work. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 03:07, November 29, 2012 (UTC)

Something else I wouldn't mind seeing if Konami would provide is information on card illustrators. Pokémon and Magic: the Gathering, for instance, both list the illustrator of a given card's artwork directly on that card, but to the best of my knowledge, there isn't *any* official source that lists the illustrators of card artworks for Yu-Gi-Oh! cards. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 00:24, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

On adding a new type of protection: There isn't any easy way, but there might be a less easy way. I talked to one of our developers, and he says it should be possible. So if and when we get to that point, we may be able to arrange engineering time to make it happen.

On the other hand, he also said that it would be easier to make a namespace editable by specific usergroups. So either a novel namespace (I know that might not be best) or making the whole of the ruling pages' namespace editable only by authorized contributors should be possible.

And on illustrator information... it would be interesting to find out whether even Konami has the information on that. It might not exist (or only exist in scattered employment records) but I think that sort of unpublished data is a great thing to add to the list -- sannse (help forum | blog) 00:44, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

A quick update (which I totally forgot to leave on Friday). George has had his first call with Konami, and he says it went well :) This was just a first introduction of course, but he's arranged to talk to them again soon. Also soon is our CEO's trip to Japan, when he hopes to do more talking about Yu-Gi-Oh. -- sannse (help forum | blog) 02:44, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I'm curious to see how Konami actually regard us.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 02:51, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

January 1st meeting

Hello, I've just catch up the situation and since we're already on january 22, I was willing to know if there's any updates on this first meeting? How did it go? I never had the chance anyway to thank you for the concern you have regarding the community of this wiki. It is well appreciated and this potential idea of partnership is amazing. As far as I'm concerned, here in France, wikia is the first website consulted for rulings and updates of the game and this potential link with Konami is something highly promising here. Thanks again. Wilimut ^Talk_Mail Paris, 22:56, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Best to contact Sannse here; her last response here was wishing us Happy Holidays. I'm refraining from contact, as I'm willing to wait until June/July for an actual update regarding talks with Konami. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 02:35, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Wikia's George was going to talk to some of the wiki's administrators over Skype about this, but to my knowledge that hasn't taken place yet. Cheesedude (talk • contribs) 02:37, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

He has yet to contact me in any way, and I believe it's been some time since Delt's heard anything from him, either. 「ディノ奴千？！」^{? · ☎ Dinoguy1000} 07:01, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I spoke to George a week or two ago, there was no specific information pertaining to this thread. I will, however, speak to him next time I see him online.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 08:06, January 23, 2013 (UTC)