Proposal talk:Wikipedia rating system for registered users

From Strategic Planning

This proposal is under the dilution that there is equivalence of the categories proposed in many languages. Both the US and US use the same categories for movies and, the results are not always alike. With a reach that is so much bigger for Wikipedia, it is even less adequate. There are educational systems, standardised systems that are more relevant because they address something that is more important"what kids of a given age understand. Thanks, GerardM 13:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had a bit of sympathy with this proposal until it specifically mentioned "war" and "crime". I don't think children need to be protected from these things. Today's children are going to be of soldiering age in not many years. I think it would be for the greater good that they grew up realising what war means. Besides, they will be learning about war at school and may wish to look it up here for homework. And, finally, this will create yet another subject for people to edit war over: editors will be changing the certification all the time. If we slap an 'adult' certificate on "penis" you can be sure every vandal who comes along will change the certificate to "child friendly". --Bodnotbod 12:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe that robots will someday fight our battle for us with non-lethal weapons. Children today not need know about the military so they worry about becoming househusbands as opposed to soldiers when they grow up. GVnayR 02:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This suggestion

Has been proposed many times on Wikipedia, however it is Wikipedia's mission to give human knowledge. Futhermore, as mentioned on the above link, it is impossible to create a standard for "age labeling" that conforms to all cultural, religious, and political norms. 17:51, 1 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is quite possible to have a sufficient consensus to act upon. The movie and gaming industries have working systems in both US and EU; it can be done. It will simply require motivated participants. As for other cultures, other systems can be devised; a user will apply the system most suited to his own culture.
Japan also has a rating system for video games but it tends to be on the liberal side compared to North America standards. Since English Wikipedia is based in North America, that encyclopedia should be judged on North American standards. GVnayR 03:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Some proposals will have massive impact on end-users, including non-editors. Some will have minimal impact. What will be the impact of this proposal on our end-users? -- Philippe 00:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It will protect the end-user from undesirable articles inappropriate for their age. The user will only be permitted to look at age-appropriate articles once this modify the rating filter in their options screen. GVnayR 03:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It will allow software filters to rely on the ratings to screen out inappropriate content. Now that Wikipedia is Google's first search result for almost any word, schools, parents and others are more and more inclined to simply cutoff Wikipedia access. Software developers who would like to give live access to Wikipedia content are afraid to do so because of the total absence of age differentiation. A proper rating system, however imperfect, will allay those concerns and allow Wikipedia's vast resources to be used for our young. It is also important to note that this rating will not affect the content itself, or the ability to modify it; it will simply provide a mechanism for various filtering systems which no adult will be forced to use.
If the parents and schools simply block off Wikipedia access because their articles appear first in Google results, that would take researching for projects back 10 years or so. The ratings system will help differentiate between what's appropriate in elementary school, junior high, college, and the other stuff that shouldn't be read in schools or by minor children. GVnayR 03:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There should be only warnings, no restrictions.

I dislike the restrictive censorship. A child is not enemy to him/herself. Wiki should not prohibit anyone from viewing the content. You may put the strong warning indicating that the content may harm the underage user. You can make the "LEAVE" bottom big and beautiful and the "ENTER" button small anf ugly. You may suggest the links that you believe may be more interesting to the child. But the prohibition and locks only boil the iterest and wishes to bypass them. Domitori 12:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If that's what you want, that could be fine as long as a parent was there to push the "LEAVE" button when the child wants to look at the latest violent video game or read about the newest Goth musician. But when kids surf the Internet alone, they could find information about something they like (and their parents dislike) and might sneak their cursors over to the "ENTER" button behind their parent's back. GVnayR 23:40, 22 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]