There does need to be a budget for the number of rules that exist. Since there's no "paper", a wiki can keep growing indefinitely and that includes the rules go

There does need to be a budget for the number of rules that exist. Since there's no "paper", a wiki can keep growing indefinitely and that includes the rules governing the wiki itself. If there was, let's say, a 30 page rulebook, it would prevent arcana from developing. The problem with this is that it places more of an onus on individual admins to figure out the interpretation of the compressed ruleset. It's a bit like a constitution requiring judges to interpret it. I work on Wikipedia articles in niche worldwide arts and history topics. I just see few people caring enough to debate me about Uyghur modernist poetry. I had a slight bit of trouble recently when I wrote a script to generate stub articles for Indonesian films. I got some flak for creating articles without enough extra detail (just the name, year, cast, genre, and awards), but only one was temporarily pulled down into the sandbox area. I recently got someone who I wrote an article on to release their photo to the public domain. I had to have them email Wikimedia Commons a legalese template to do that. But the person on the other side said, "how can you release a photo of yourself"? (It wasn't a selfie.) So he had to get his daughter who took the photo to send them the legalese. It's a bit much, but I see how they have to be careful with legal things. It wasn't the smoothest experience. It's much easier to release the copyright on your own works.