Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-25020300-20141230050558/@comment-1738746-20150109033440

Sorry, I meant to say either have a template for unconfirmed OR for confirmed, not both :P

TombRaiser wrote: So, from what I read from users responses, would something like this be better:


 * 1) Before adding a bug try reloading an old save first.
 * 2) When adding a new bug, include the game-specific template to denote that the bug needs to be verified by another user.
 * 3) Be descriptive when listing the bug and fixes, but avoid having conversations in the description and/or using first-person-anecdotes.
 * 4) [Unchanged]

I also agree with NOTATHALMORSPY that a template would only be necessary for the unconfirmed, as it would by default be confirmed if the unconfirmed template is no longer there.

Anything other suggestions? Looks great, I really like this summary! What would be the new rules regarding others removing unconfirmed bugs? Would they simply remain there until confirmed or can people open disputes about a particular unconfirmed bug as grounds for removing it? I'm just bringing this up now because as SuperSajuuk mentioned above, some people are quite trigger happy with undoing other's edits and I can imagine this type of thing becoming a possible dispute/edit war among people.

Personally, I'd love to see unconfirmed bugs be able to remain indefinitely on the list because it really expands the bug section into being as comprehensible as possible and even including things that might happen to users. Marking them as unconfirmed is great in this sense because you can say "it might happen to a user or it may not, but just in case, we've listed it on the Wiki anyway to be of help to you". That's just me though.