![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 29 December 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Never likely to be more than a dicdef IMO. Listed on AfD. Andrewa 23:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm adding a link to the Wikipedia guideline of assuming good faith ( to it's talk page, actually ), which is what prompted the creation of this article. The word ruleslawyering shows up several times in the text, and until this point I had never heard it, learned it's meaning by context, and felt that if the word is being used, it needs to be explained somewhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DigitalEnthusiast ( talk • contribs) 19:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC).
"Gaming the system" is not at all similar to rules lawyering. Gaming the system is doing something which would not naturally benefit you but which will because of an imperfect rule. Rules lawyering is the separate concept of harping on about a rule or set of rules. Someone who's gaming the system will usually keep quiet lest their abuse be spotted. A rules lawyer usually never shuts up and relies on the sanctity of unchanging rules to prevent their abuse from being effectively responded to. Gronky 14:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone have a DMG2 handy? Are the bullet points in this section just a lift from that book? If so, that section's a copyvio and should be removed. Percy Snoodle 15:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The article says a variant of rules lawyer is sea lawyer, and then goes on to claim it probably derives from the programming term language lawyer.
I'd be very surprised if this was the case. Without researching it, I'd have thought sea lawyer (and barracks lawyer) came first, and language lawyer and rules lawyer to be the newer variants. Is there anyone with actual knowledge who can confirm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.141.101 ( talk) 11:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I second that - this is completely the wrong way round. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
70.58.200.39 (
talk)
16:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Sea-lawyer is probably first. Yarr!
24.160.240.212 (
talk)
02:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't think this kind of content has any place in an article. Wikipedia isn't a 101: How to - guide, it's an encyclopedia. There are plenty of other websites and resources that deal with this subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.200.210 ( talk) 13:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
While reading the article for the History of baseball in the United States, I was struck by how the Merkle incident seemed to fit into this perfectly. This is a good example of rules lawyering from a certainly very different context. Would a section to add to this article discussing the confluence of rules lawyering in different contexts be appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DespicableJay ( talk • contribs) 20:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
"A rules lawyer is a player in a game who for whatever reason attempts to use an often encyclopedic knowledge of the rules of a subject to gain an advantage, to annoy or to ingratiate himself with other players, to amuse themselves in a round of banter with others, or to test a rule's solidity."
Is there necessarily any particular connection between great knowledge of the rules of something, and rules-lawyering? I'd certainly say there can be cases where that's not true.
Aside from that, the sentence is clumsy.
I also think the definition is bad. Rules-lawyering implies (to me, at least) adherence to the letter rather than spirit of the law, and it doesn't only apply to games. Finally, I don't see the merits of listing some minority motives.
I propose:
"A rules lawyer is a participant in a rules-based environment who attempts to use the letter of the law without reference to the intention, often in order to gain an advantage."
92.234.8.173 ( talk) 21:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Josh
This should be merged with gaming the system. Kennercat ( talk) 04:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Keep them separate. 79.97.166.36 ( talk) 22:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
This whole article looks to me like a definition of a (possibly slang) term. It's useful (I got here from Nomic) but is it encyclopedic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.82.23 ( talk) 06:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Maybe create something like wikt:Appendix:Glossary of U.S. Navy slang? Tijfo098 ( talk) 07:29, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree that the Wikipedia article should try to go a little beyond the mere defintion and speculation on the source of the word, which frankly fails WP:SYNT, because those sources don't speak of the context in this article. Tijfo098 ( talk) 07:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
The reference after "without reference to the spirit" from 1983's "Shared Fantasy" article by Gary Fine, is this readable online somewhere? If we can't read it, how do we know whether or not this reference supports the claim made in the introduction? Should we really be presenting Fine's opinion as fact? I think it would be more proper to say "Fine defines it as" rather than imply that his opinion is everyone's opinion of what a rules lawyer is.
Part of the problem with such a definition too is that the "spirit" of the game is an intangible and subjective idea, so should we not note that who is considered a rules lawyer varies upon each player's idea of a game's purpose and how closely others live up to that perception? Ranze ( talk) 00:35, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I have to ask- would the reference to 'wikilawyer' be a form of metagaming?
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 29 December 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Never likely to be more than a dicdef IMO. Listed on AfD. Andrewa 23:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm adding a link to the Wikipedia guideline of assuming good faith ( to it's talk page, actually ), which is what prompted the creation of this article. The word ruleslawyering shows up several times in the text, and until this point I had never heard it, learned it's meaning by context, and felt that if the word is being used, it needs to be explained somewhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DigitalEnthusiast ( talk • contribs) 19:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC).
"Gaming the system" is not at all similar to rules lawyering. Gaming the system is doing something which would not naturally benefit you but which will because of an imperfect rule. Rules lawyering is the separate concept of harping on about a rule or set of rules. Someone who's gaming the system will usually keep quiet lest their abuse be spotted. A rules lawyer usually never shuts up and relies on the sanctity of unchanging rules to prevent their abuse from being effectively responded to. Gronky 14:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone have a DMG2 handy? Are the bullet points in this section just a lift from that book? If so, that section's a copyvio and should be removed. Percy Snoodle 15:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
The article says a variant of rules lawyer is sea lawyer, and then goes on to claim it probably derives from the programming term language lawyer.
I'd be very surprised if this was the case. Without researching it, I'd have thought sea lawyer (and barracks lawyer) came first, and language lawyer and rules lawyer to be the newer variants. Is there anyone with actual knowledge who can confirm? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.141.101 ( talk) 11:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I second that - this is completely the wrong way round. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
70.58.200.39 (
talk)
16:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree. Sea-lawyer is probably first. Yarr!
24.160.240.212 (
talk)
02:11, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't think this kind of content has any place in an article. Wikipedia isn't a 101: How to - guide, it's an encyclopedia. There are plenty of other websites and resources that deal with this subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.200.210 ( talk) 13:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
While reading the article for the History of baseball in the United States, I was struck by how the Merkle incident seemed to fit into this perfectly. This is a good example of rules lawyering from a certainly very different context. Would a section to add to this article discussing the confluence of rules lawyering in different contexts be appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DespicableJay ( talk • contribs) 20:57, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
"A rules lawyer is a player in a game who for whatever reason attempts to use an often encyclopedic knowledge of the rules of a subject to gain an advantage, to annoy or to ingratiate himself with other players, to amuse themselves in a round of banter with others, or to test a rule's solidity."
Is there necessarily any particular connection between great knowledge of the rules of something, and rules-lawyering? I'd certainly say there can be cases where that's not true.
Aside from that, the sentence is clumsy.
I also think the definition is bad. Rules-lawyering implies (to me, at least) adherence to the letter rather than spirit of the law, and it doesn't only apply to games. Finally, I don't see the merits of listing some minority motives.
I propose:
"A rules lawyer is a participant in a rules-based environment who attempts to use the letter of the law without reference to the intention, often in order to gain an advantage."
92.234.8.173 ( talk) 21:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC) Josh
This should be merged with gaming the system. Kennercat ( talk) 04:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Keep them separate. 79.97.166.36 ( talk) 22:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
This whole article looks to me like a definition of a (possibly slang) term. It's useful (I got here from Nomic) but is it encyclopedic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.82.23 ( talk) 06:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Maybe create something like wikt:Appendix:Glossary of U.S. Navy slang? Tijfo098 ( talk) 07:29, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I agree that the Wikipedia article should try to go a little beyond the mere defintion and speculation on the source of the word, which frankly fails WP:SYNT, because those sources don't speak of the context in this article. Tijfo098 ( talk) 07:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
The reference after "without reference to the spirit" from 1983's "Shared Fantasy" article by Gary Fine, is this readable online somewhere? If we can't read it, how do we know whether or not this reference supports the claim made in the introduction? Should we really be presenting Fine's opinion as fact? I think it would be more proper to say "Fine defines it as" rather than imply that his opinion is everyone's opinion of what a rules lawyer is.
Part of the problem with such a definition too is that the "spirit" of the game is an intangible and subjective idea, so should we not note that who is considered a rules lawyer varies upon each player's idea of a game's purpose and how closely others live up to that perception? Ranze ( talk) 00:35, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I have to ask- would the reference to 'wikilawyer' be a form of metagaming?