Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-25020300-20141230050558/@comment-1738746-20150109085829

Ghost Anubis wrote: I have to be completely honest this isn't a good idea in anyway. The very idea of confirming bugs is to give this wiki credibility. Blindly adding bugs to articles just for the sake of it is really pointless. Even if they aren't posted on the talk page, they should be moved to the talk page by a more experienced editor. Anybody could just as easily add something entirely bogus to a page & "pretend it actually exists"

A Wiki should be both credible and comprehensive in the knowledge and information it presents. The Wiki can't do that if people's edits are constantly being rejected. Let's face it, it's a small minority of people who vandalise and add bogus information- you're willing to remove plenty of good information just on the basis of that small minority? Having an unconfirmed tag allows the Wiki to be comprehensive whilst still maintaining its credibility. As I said before, it gives the chance for the Wiki to present a bug that may or may not occur for a player, and in the case that it does, said player can ask for support or even help to confirm the bug.

You realise also, for example, if one person adds an unconfirmed bug and that gets removed, and then some time down the track, someone else adds the same bug but without knowing that someone else already did, but that gets removed as well because the second person also though their bug was unconfirmed, that bugs will then never be added to the article's page as the bug remains in a constant loop of never being confirmed. As several users pointed out above, no one discusses bugs on the Talk pages anymore. And as I pointed out above as well, many unregistered users new to Wikis don't even know what a Talk page is let alone know where to find it. A Talk page is just not a sufficient solution towards confirming bugs- the bug needs to be clearly visible to all, so that they can confirm it or then seek support on it.