Mud and Blood official Wiki talk:Community Portal

From Mud and Blood official Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Ico semiprotected.gif

What does this mean to Urb.Com? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Panzershreck (talkcontribs) 23:17, 11 June 2010.

Urb.com will still exist. This is just for everything mnb related. urb.com will still very much be needed. -Tazaraki 23:22, 11 June 2010
MNB2 is a www riot and it needs its own playground. urb.com is the HQ of all urb's games but that's a different vocation. Actually urb.com will see its own changes in time. This is all natural evolution really. --Urbanprophet 23:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Tightened Restrictions Possibility?

All right, wiki editors, NCO's, officers, and administrators. We can see by now, that even with the new user group right restrictions in place (which happened July 10ish), the wiki has still been vandalized several times. So, my plan to fix this involves new restrictions and standards.

First of all, we must raise the standard for being auto-confirmed. I don't know if it can be changed by Urb or not, but if it can, a person should be active for at least 5 days and make at least 10 contributions that are non-vandalism. If we remember the User:Aqahavaj incident, he was autoconfirmed instantly after making vandalizing edits and it ruins the system of semi-protection.

Second, although we do not want to fully protect every page, we should semi-protect at least the ones that are mostly completed. By this, I mean the unit pages, the weapon pages, most of the categorized pages that seem complete or almost complete.

Third, I think we need to make more "free" pages, to complement the tightened restrictions. Free pages are ones that do not gain any level of protection and can be added at will. Currently, these could be strategy pages and humorous pages, which are not definite in-game objects, but more free to editing.

With these guidelines, the wiki would be ensured not to lose its core information while still being editable.

Thank you for your time, patience, and contributions Wiki Staff, Riderx


I agree with you, ill go and protect the unit and medals pages, could oyu (or any other mod) get the structure and specialty pages, lets divide the work amongst the mods. --Microsoft1122 16:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I kinda want Ber's or Urb's approval before we do this, as well as get input from normal users. --Riderx Talk~contibs Officer 17:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I kinda like this idea, just make sure there's enough stuff for them to help out with before they become autoconfirmed, I went straight for the units and medals sections when I registered. --AvalancheO

Well, yes, but most of those pages are completed or almost complete by now. --Riderx Talk~contibs Officer 22:11, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, so, should I start protecting now? --M4sherman 22:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree to these changes, however, I think that any vandalism could be solved if those who can ban (officers) did so at the first opportunity, and that the ban length varied. With the recent incident, had you banned him for a few days, he might have had time to reconsider, or to get bored. But yes, protect various pages.

I talked to him through PM's and will lift the ban in a few days, he promised he wouldn't misbehave anymore, so I'll take his word on that. I guess we should be less inclined to perma-ban, and rather re-conside our choices, but if all a user does is vandalize, it's a perma-ban. --Riderx Talk~contibs Officer 00:36, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

The autoconfirmed bar needs to be set higher; Urb can change that in the config file, I believe. Anyway, I basically agree with Riderx. I'm only in favor of applying a blanket semi-protection to portals, categories, templates, help pages and other articles directly linked from the Main Page. Most other pages (like units) should be considered individually to determine if they are "finished" (has all important facts and edit history shows no recent important contributions, which indicate the page is not quite solid). We should try to preserve the ability for visitors to quickly correct something they see that is wrong or missing. I don't think that creating 'free' pages will be necessary, as any changes to protected pages can be freely posted in their talk areas. --Bersimon 20:24, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Update needed

The images need to be updated to the new site, and I suppose the links should also be--Joacobanfield 22:46, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Personal tools