From GodWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rules article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.

Article policies
  • Opinionated research if possible
  • Neutral point of view when appropriate
  • Humour
  • Verifiability
  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • No personal attacks
  • Do not bite the newcomers
  • Respond in a mature manner
  • Be welcoming
  • Maintain civility at all times

Rule suggestions

Strongly suggest adding this rule

8. No inappropriate or foul language may be used, under any circumstances. (only exception would be an article for the artifact shiny metal ass)

i believe that this comes under rule 6 - no spam or vandalism. do you think it should read no spam,vandalism or foul language instead? i think the current rule is fine myself.

the word 'ass' is not foul language. nobody in history has ever shouted at their kids for saying the word 'ass'. do you think that if it were actually foul language that you should worry about, that the admin would allow it to be in the game? really? this is far too pedantic, stop it, really. --Spode 19:52, 4 October 2012 (BST)

That change would be good, as a clarification. If you go back through the history, someone created a one sentence user page with language in it, and I'd appreciate it if you reported them. Thanks!

rule appended, the person who used foul language has been warned, single paragraph guild pages are fine - they just need categorizing, all done!

this may be a no-brainer but there are people out there who might do this

9. No pages not about the game Godville

thats obvious, thats why its called godwiki. also, pages about other things which relate other things to godville are ok if in the backstage category (see the 'farmville' article as an example. --Spode 12:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Minor edits

If almost all edits should be considered minor, is there any way to change the "This is a minor edit" field so it's checked by default? --OhMG 14:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed that personal preferences includes the option "Mark all edits minor by default" Can that be turned on universally? --OhMG 14:43, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The minor edit rule is a bit confusing and goes against the entire purpose of the minor edit option. Wikipedia has a vastly superior use for minor edits and we should be following that. What does "majorly expanded" even mean? How many sentences does one need to add or delete to be considered "majorly expanded?" I say, we redraft the rule #1 as follows: "All changes to guild, god, and hero articles must always be marked as "This is a minor edit". All other changes must follow Wikipedia's guidelines for minor edits. available here." --BlueStapler 03:26, 29 September 2012 (BST)

Good idea, ill change it, adding something in from wikipedia. that minor edit things been getting on my nerves for a while how nobody does it. the point of it was that before you came along the only edits ever made were virtually all guild edits of the type which fulfill wikipedia's definition of minor edit material. they really got in my way when trying to view recent changes so marking them as minor edits was a solution. at the start it was only guild edits but then it got changed because people starting doing small things to other articles too. never mind, will change now. --Spode 20:04, 4 October 2012 (BST)

Well the minor edit thing isn't really ever paid attention to anyway. It is a bit nice though to see if you want to see the changes when lookin at the recent edits page. I have always thought of it as more of a guideline. Thankfully no one who has been adding towards artical quality has been banned for that. fred

New Rule 1: There is no Rule 1? (A proposal)

So, personally, I'd really like to do away with Rule #1, for a number of reasons.

  1. There really isn't enough activity here that it's necessary to filter out minor edits when viewing things like Special:RecentChanges, or that it makes any useful difference if you do filter them out.
  2. These days, Guild article edits make up the majority of edit activity here (by a comfortable plurality!), and those are very infrequently marked as minor edits. The policy isn't being followed anyway.
  3. The Rules page is not nearly visible enough to expect people to follow it, which explains the previous point. How would they know? But regardless, since most people don't know about or follow the rule, there's little point in pretending it is a rule.
  4. Primarily, though, because the proscribed use violates the spirit of the minor edit flag, which has a common definition shared by the majority of MediaWiki-driven wikis. That means the rule disadvantages both:
    1. Users new to MediaWiki editing (who are generally unaware of how to use it, and then get taught practices which are wrong for nearly any other wiki they may edit in the future), and
    2. Experienced MediaWiki editors (who have to unlearn how to use it, and then keep track of whether they should follow our semantics or the normal semantics).
  5. To re-state the above more plainly: I think it's a bad rule. -- FeRDNYC (talk) 20:54, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I remember reading this rule earlier this year and actually laughing out loud. I wholeheartedly agree with your observations, and would add (with respect to the now-absent) that the historical era of somewhat surly moderation of the wiki where this kind of rule was enacted and patchily enforced is rightfully behind us. It needs replacing (though not deletion, because there are enough historical references to the rules by number scattered around that it might confuse people who stumble over them).

In an effort to draw a line and counterdict the grumpiness of the past, I'd suggest something explicitly positive and encouraging good behaviour, in the vein of "Be positive and assume good faith". Or, alternatively, encouraging greater participation, in the vein of "Be bold". --Djonni (talk) 12:03, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Rules re-write draft - Please give feedback

--WardPhoenix (talk) 14:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Recommendations 4 and 5 should possibly be Rules 4 and 5, instead. "Recommendations" are optional, where as those sound like non-optional "Rules." --SourceRunner (talk) 21:17, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. Also moved the one with the "do not temper". Thanks for the corrections by the way!

Should we put those rules live as they are now? --WardPhoenix (talk) 21:31, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Looks great to me. I'd be happy if they went live, now. Still... it's only been a few hours since you put it up... reluctantly, I recommend we leave the draft here for 24 hours, for reasonable comment. --SourceRunner (talk) 21:37, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
Putting this back at the top of the "Recent Changes" page. --SourceRunner (talk) 15:52, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


  • 2: On the GodWiki, any articles created should be categorized.
  • 3: Changes to Guild, Hero or God articles should be flagged as "minor edits" using the check box under the editing interface. Any edits at all that consist solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without major modification of content should also be flagged as 'minor edits'.
  • 4: GodWiki is not an image-hosting platform, and images should never be uploaded "in case they're useful" or "to be used at some point" but only for immediate use in an article. Images which are not used in articles may be deleted without notice.
  • 5: Do your best and ask for help. It doesn't matter to us if you aren't a skilled writer, or your English isn't perfect. We have volunteer editors available at the Help:Requests page who will help anyone with their writing or formatting of their articles.
  • 6: Be Bold but respectful. If you see something that needs doing, go ahead and do it. But the GodWiki is a place of collaboration and support where all should be respectful of the efforts and intentions of everyone here.


  • 1: You may not add content not related to Godville, or deliberately populate it with false information portrayed as true instead of fictitious.
  • 2: You may not edit the Guild article of a guild in which you are not a member or another user's God and Hero pages without express permission by the leader of that guild or by that user.
  • 3: You may not unnecessarily mention specific guilds, gods, or heroes outside of the Guilds/Gods/Heroes and some backstage pages.
  • 4: You may not edit an article labelled with the "do not tamper" sign without first talking about it on the associated talk page.
  • 5: Spam and vandalism are forbidden. No exceptions.
  • 6: No offensive content. The GodWiki has the same terms of use as the rest of Godville. To quote from item 5: "the Player's content will not include any offensive comments that are connected to race, national origin, gender, sexual preference or physical handicap, any profanity or any obscene, indecent, pornographic, sexual or otherwise objectionable content or language." This applies without exception to the GodWiki, and any material deemed inappropriate by Godville Administrators will be removed.