SRD Talk:Feint

Links

This should have links. (It's locked or I'd put them in myself. Tell me why all the SRD pages are locked, again?) –Cúthalion (talk) 20:47, 28 April 2007 (MDT)

Same reason you lock any page. To keep it from being edited. And there's a good number of SRD pages that need to be hyperlinked. —Sledged (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2007 (MDT)

Okay, so there are a lot of SRD pages that need to be edited, and they're locked to keep them from being edited. I think I get it now. No ... no, actually, I don't. –Cúthalion (talk) 11:52, 5 May 2007 (MDT)

No, no, no! At this point you're supposed to ask, "If there's a good number of SRD pages that need to be hyperlinked, why keep people from editing them?"

To which I would respond "I don't know for certain, but if I had to wager a guess, it would be because the SRD is the basis for all the user-submitted D&D content (with the possible exception of the variant and supplemental rules), and is considered immutable (barring official changes from WotC). There's a possibility that some would want to add their own interpretation of the rules to the SRD, add content from the core rule books that isn't OGC like the XP info and wealth by level, make 'corrections' based on obsolete, non-OGC, or unofficial third-party sources." —Sledged (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2007 (MDT)

Close enough. --Dmilewski 17:15, 5 May 2007 (MDT)

Isn't that why people police recent changes, so inappropriate changes can be reverted? From Wikipedia:

A defining characteristic of wiki technology is the ease with which pages can be created and updated. ... Critics of open-source wiki systems argue that these systems could be easily tampered with; while proponents argue that the community of users can catch malicious [or inaccurate] content and correct it. ... Wikis are generally designed with the philosophy of making it easy to correct mistakes, rather than making it difficult to make them. ...

Yes, I know, D&D Wiki is not Wikipedia. Still, it seems to me the admins make an awful lot of unnecessary work for themselves, and frustration for the rest of the community, by not allowing general users to correct typos, add hyperlinks, and so on. What's more, a lot of needed changes don't get made at all -- how long have you known that a good number of SRD pages are missing links?

Then there's the PR message of a wiki that doesn't allow users to edit content. It stinks.

It seems to me it would serve your purpose to make SRD pages editable by registered users only. That would eliminate most of the risk, without hamstringing the community. –Cúthalion (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2007 (MDT)

The SRD will not be unlocked, even to registered users. There are a couple or reasons for this. One is that when people come here to look at the SRD as WotC published it, they do not want to see an interpretation of the SRD, they want to see the SRD. Another reason is that I do not see why the SRD needs to be edited that badly. Yes, it can be improved but it works and there is not a major need for it to be edited right away. It will get done as more and more admins come into existance. Finally I think too many people, you included, put admins on a pedistool (40-year old virgin reference :)). Becoming an admin is not that big of deal, more are always needed, and admins really do not get more amazing benefits, its almost the same as being a user. So, what I am trying to get at is, is that if you really want to help link the SRD become an admin, it's not that hard and if you fail, you can always try again later. Overall, I just don't want the SRD to become a liability. --Green Dragon 10:18, 8 May 2007 (MDT)

I personally don't always like the SRD. I know this would be a huge amount of work, but would it be worth making copies of the SRD namespace pages as editable pages? Or would that violate copyright laws? (I am so sick of them from PvXwiki that if we're even bordering on a copyright infringement I say we skip it.) --Armond (talk/contribs) 14:35, 17 May 2007 (MDT)

That sounds like a pretty good compromise. The SRD can be modified so long as you keep it under the OGL. Having a both a "static" version and "sandbox" version, would allow anyone to display or demo any changes they'd like to see to the static version. —Sledged (talk) 14:50, 17 May 2007 (MDT)

Seems like its more work than it's worth. If people really want the SRD unlocked we should start a discussion on the main SRD page and vote on it—voting on the issue should tell where the community really stands. --Green Dragon 00:15, 1 June 2007 (MDT)