Forum:Issues of age and identity

This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made in new Senate Hall or Consensus Track pages rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. jSarek 09:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi all, a while back I was asked about Wikia's position on COPPA and said I'd get back to you. I've had a chance to talk to the Powers That Be now, and have a clearer idea of what does and doesn't apply. The first important point is that Wikia is not aimed at those under 13. There's a whole lot of complicated stuff that applies to sites that are, so this makes things somewhat simpler.

The next thing is that COPPA applies to Wikia and not to you, our users (including admins). That means that you are not responsible for enforcing any restrictions on those under 13, and don't need to block people who claim to be younger than this. If you are concerned, then you can let us know of the situation at community@wikia.com

We also talked about the general risks of putting personal information on a wiki. It is best if all wikis discourage this. Information like your real name and year of birth should only be given out with careful consideration of the risks to privacy and of things like identity theft. I noticed there is quite a trend of adding character infoboxes to user pages - which have a year of birth to fill in. I would say that's a bad idea - if it's there to fill in, people often will without thinking. Perhaps the templates should have a warning? "if using this on your user page we recommend you do not enter any personal information such as real name or year of birth." Or maybe there should be separate templates for userpages. I'm sure there is a good way to do this... -- Sannse 19:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC) (wikia community team)

• Thanks for the update Sannse. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 19:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Speaking from personal experience, putting personal information on your userpage is probably not the best idea in the world. Vandals have used that info to track me across the Web and harass me (or pretend to be me) on other sites. I know it's my own damn fault for doing it, but I'd hate to see it happen to others. As for the userpage infoboxes, I thought we already had one of those? Maybe regulate the use of the IU boxes for IU articles only? StarNeptune^{Talk to me!} 19:38, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• It's not like we're adding the month and date of birth... -- Riffsyphon1024 04:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Seriously, most only put the year. How many other millions of people share YOUR particular birth year? --School of Thrawn 101 04:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continuing to ban/restrict those under formerly covered by our COPPA policy

Okay, as sannse has asked we fix our policies regarding COPPA (or remove the, rather), we're going to be allowing users to edit regardless of age. Unless, that is, we establish our own age policy for our own purposes, which I think might be a good idea. Suggestions? jSarek 10:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• We should just design a policy that is a verbatim copy of the COPPA wording. Cover all the bases, people. --School of Thrawn 101 11:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I think for general editing, allowing any age to participate is fine. But when it comes to becoming an admin, something that requires a modicum of maturity, I think there should be an age policy. There are of course exceptions, but generally, pre and early teens don't have a level of maturity required. I think setting a minimum age of 17 or 18 to become an admin would be a good thing. - JMAS 19:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Isn't there already a minimum age for an admin? Unit 8311 19:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• How bout we just have a general "don't be a moron" policy so we can ban people who feel like Myspacing on Wookieepedia without a lot of fuss? -- Darth Culator ^(Talk) 19:30, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Maybe. Although permabanning would be a bit harsh. Unit 8311 19:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Someone on IRC seriously (I think) suggested that Wookieepedia should limit editing to those under 20! This seems crazy to me. People vary so wildly, and sometimes a 42 year old can be much more of a problem than a 16 year old. It seems right to me to assess each person on their merits. If they are a good editor and a good community member, who cares if they are a teenager? On a wiki, it's what you do that matters, not who you are. -- sannse (talk) 20:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• i think anyone should be allowed edit, but those under 13 cannot put down any personal information etc. In my opinion (which is somewhat biased since I am under 18) age shouldn't matter to be an admin. If someone is immature or whatever, they won't be voted in as an admin. When nominating someone as an admin, we should be looking at the contributions, how they've helped other users in the past and their level of maturity etc... not when they were born. Only if someone is nominated an admin because they have loads of friends on wookieepeia should their adminship be rejected. TheOne&OnlyAdmirableAckbar ^{(It's A Trap!)} 21:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I hope I'm not out-of-place in saying this, but isn't this whole issue somewhat academic due to the nature of the Internet? Like what Sannse says, it's what you do that counts, not who you are or how old you "claim" to be. The privacy thing is a different issue but, from where this user is standing, also somewhat unenforceable...--Goodwood 22:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
• This line of thinking is making certain assumptions that are all well and good for those of us at home, but not so much for law-makers drafting legislation. The general idea behind COPPA is to design a guideline that provides an effective and legally defensible insurance policy against breaching any other laws regarding the safety of children. Whether or not that child, regardless of their age, is an effective contributor to whatever internet community with which they choose to associate themself matters very little, as they're still young enough to fall under a very strict legal status that leaves only a small amount of flexibility. That's why most community-based websites take the path of least resistance and simply ban anyone that voluntarily identifies themself as under the age of 13 years old. If the site does this, they aren't breaking any laws. If they don't, there's a chance that they might break a few laws. Your average webmaster would probably rather err on the side of not-going-to-jail and piss off a few 12 year olds. That's the difference. --School of Thrawn 101 07:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)