User:The person who loves reading/Pages in a nutshell/Sandbox

1st importance
Ignore all rules: If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it.

What Wikipedia is not:


 * 1) The amount of information on Wikipedia is practically unlimited, but Wikipedia is a digital encyclopedia and therefore does not aim to contain all data or expression found elsewhere.
 * 2) Although anyone can be an editor, Wikipedia's community processes and standards make it neither an anarchy, democracy, nor bureaucracy.
 * 3) Wikipedia is not a place to promote things or publish your thoughts, and is not a website for personal communication, a freely licensed media repository, or a censored publication.

1st importance
Neutral point of view: Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without editorial bias. This applies to both what you say and how you say it.

Verifiability: Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations.

No original research: Wikipedia does not publish original thought. All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles must not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to reach or imply a conclusion not clearly stated by the sources themselves.

2nd importance
Biographies of living persons: Material about living persons added to any Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research.

Image use policy: Be very careful when uploading copyrighted images, fully describe images' origins and copyright details on their description pages, and try to make images as useful and reusable as possible.

Wikipedia is not a dictionary: On Wikipedia, things are grouped into articles based on what they are, not what they are called by. In dictionaries, things are grouped by what they are called by, not what they are.

1st importance
Citing sources: Cite reliable sources. You can add a citation by selecting from the drop-down menu at the top of the editing box. In markup, you can add a citation manually using ref tags. More elaborate and useful ways to cite sources are detailed below.

Do not create hoaxes:


 * Do not deliberately add hoaxes, incorrect information, or unverifiable content to articles.
 * Articles about notable hoaxes are acceptable, if the hoax is recognized as such.

Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources: Do not add full text works to Wikipedia if they are uncomfortably long or if it is copyrighted.

Reliable sources: Wikipedia requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations. If you are new to editing and instead just need a general overview of how sources work, please visit the referencing for beginners help page.

Plagiarism: Do not make the work of others look like your own. Give credit where it is due.

Patent nonsense: No summary provided

2nd importance
Autobiography: Avoid writing or editing an article about yourself (or paying someone else to do so), other than to correct unambiguous errors of fact.

Accuracy dispute: No summary provided

Content forking: Articles should not be split into multiple articles just so each can advocate a different stance on the subject.

External links: External links in an article can be helpful to the reader, but they should be kept minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article. With rare exceptions, external links should not be used in the body of an article.

No disclaimers: Disclaimers should not be used in articles. All articles are already covered by a general disclaimer.

Non-free content: Non-free content can be used in articles only if:


 * 1) Its usage would be considered fair use in United States copyright law and also complies with the Non-free content criteria;
 * 2) It is used for a purpose that cannot be fulfilled by free material (text or images, existing or to be created); and
 * 3) It has a valid rationale indicating why its usage would be considered fair use within Wikipedia policy and U.S. law.

Non-free use rationale guideline: No summary provided

Non-US copyrights: Copyright status of a work in its home country is often important in evaluating its copyright status in the United States. Nevertheless, a work that is in the public domain in its home country can sometimes be under copyright in the United States and so can not be used on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia allows works to be hosted here which are public domain in the United States, but not their source country.

Offensive material: Wikipedia articles may contain offensive words and images, but only for a good reason. Do not use disclaimers.

Public domain: No summary provided

Spam: Spam is the inappropriate addition of content to Wikipedia with the intention of promoting or publicizing an outside organization, individual or idea, and is considered harmful to the encyclopedia. Do not disrupt Wikipedia with spam. If you find spam, please remove or rewrite the content.

Spoiler: Spoilers are no different from any other content and should not be deleted solely because they are spoilers.

3rd importance
Days of the year:


 * Accomplishments in the arts and sciences as well as social milestones are particularly important.
 * The rise and fall of societies, and events relevant to that, matter.
 * Notable social movements, holidays, major disasters, and the births and deaths of persons who mattered to society are also listed.

Fringe theories: To maintain a neutral point of view, an idea that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article about a mainstream idea. More extensive treatment should be reserved for an article about the idea, which must meet the test of notability. Additionally, in an article about the minority viewpoint itself, the proper contextual relationship between minority and majority viewpoints must be made clear.

Identifying reliable sources (medicine): Ideal sources for biomedical material include literature reviews or systematic reviews in reliable, third-party, published secondary sources (such as reputable medical journals), recognised standard textbooks by experts in a field, or medical guidelines and position statements from national or international expert bodies.

Cite review articles, don't write them.

Indic transliteration: No summary provided

Logos: When using images of logos, care must be taken about copyright, trademark and editorial concerns.

No 3D illustrations: Don't use pictures which can only be correctly viewed with special 3D equipment.

Record charts: No summary provided

Scientific citation guidelines: No summary provided

Wikipedia is not for things made up one day: Resist the temptation to write about the new, great thing you, your friends, or some website just thought up.

1st importance
Article size: Articles should be neither too big nor too small.

Be bold: Please feel free to make improvements to Wikipedia in a fair and accurate manner.

Categorization: No summary provided

Disambiguation: It is necessary to provide links and disambiguation pages so that readers typing in a reasonably likely topic name for more than one Wikipedia topic can quickly navigate to the article they seek.

Make technical articles understandable: Strive to make each part of every article as understandable as possible to the widest audience of readers who are likely to be interested in that material.

Stub: An article too short and incomplete to provide more than rudimentary information about a subject should be marked as a stub by adding a stub template from the list here to the end of the article. Anyone can edit a stub article, or remove a stub template from an article which is no longer a stub.

Summary style:


 * Sections of long articles should be spun off into their own articles, leaving summaries in their place.
 * Summary sections are linked to the detailed article with a  or comparable template.
 * To preserve links to the edit history of the moved text, the first edit summary of the new article links back to the original.

2nd importance
As of: Wikipedia contains date-sensitive information which may require revision on a future date. The template  is used to help track and maintain such statements.

Broad-concept article: A term with many related meanings should be presented as an article on the broadest understanding of the term, rather than as a disambiguation page merely listing variations on that meaning.

Categories, lists, and navigation templates: Categories, lists, and navigation templates are three different ways to group and organize articles. Although they each have their own advantages and disadvantages, each method complements the others.

Copying within Wikipedia: When copying content from one article to another, at a minimum provide a link back to the source page in the edit summary at the destination page and state that content was copied from that source. If substantial, consider posting a note on both talk pages.

Reviewing good articles: No summary provided

Hatnote: Hatnotes provide links at the very top of an article or a section to help readers locate a different article if the one they are viewing is not the one they're looking for.

Page blanking: If you want a page to be deleted, don't blank the page, instead request deletion.

Overcategorization: Do not create categories for every single verifiable fact in articles. This only makes the category system more crowded and less useful.

Preparing images for upload: No summary provided

Red link: Red links for subjects that should have articles but do not, are not only acceptable, but needed in the articles. They serve as a clear indication of which articles are in need of creation, and encourage it. Only remove red links if you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on that subject.

Redirect: Redirects aid navigation and searching by allowing a page to be reached under alternative titles.

Set index articles: No summary provided

Soft redirect: No summary provided

Spellchecking: No summary provided

Subpages: No summary provided

Updating information: No summary provided

User categories: User categories are navigation aides for Wikipedians, to be used for collaborative purposes to build the encyclopedia.

3rd importance
Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality: Categorizing by ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, or disability should be done only as appropriate.

Categorization of people: No summary provided

Categorizing redirects: Redirects are not articles and most should not be sorted into mainspace content categories; however, all redirects should be sorted into appropriate "maintenance" (non-article) categories whenever possible.

Content assessment: No summary provided

Extended image syntax: No summary provided

In the news/Recurring items: The recurring events listed on this page are considered suitable for inclusion on the Main Page in the In the news section every time they occur. Other recurring events may also be included if they satisfy the usual ITN criteria.

Overcategorization/User categories: No summary provided

People by year: No summary provided

Disambiguation/PrimaryTopicDefinition:


 * 1) A topic is primary for a term with respect to usage if it is highly likely—much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term.
 * 2) A topic is primary for a term with respect to long-term significance if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term.

1st importance
Notability: Wikipedia articles cover notable topics—those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia. We consider evidence from reliable and independent sources to gauge this attention. The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article.

2nd importance
Notability (academics):


 * Subjects of biographical articles on Wikipedia are required to be notable; that is significant, interesting, or unusual enough to be worthy of notice, as evidenced by being the subject of significant coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources.
 * Many scientists, researchers, philosophers, and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources.
 * Having published work does not, in itself, make an academic notable, no matter how many publications there are. Notability depends on the impact the work has had on the field of study. This notability guideline specifies criteria for judging the notability of an academic through reliable sources for the impact of their work.

Notability (astronomical objects):


 * An astronomical object is notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the scientist(s) who discovered the object or who have a vested interest in its study.
 * Specific criteria are listed to help determine whether an astronomical object meets the notability requirement.

Notability (books): A book is presumed notable, and to generally merit an article, if it verifiably meets through reliable sources, one or more of the following criteria:


 * 1) The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews. This excludes media re-prints of press releases, flap copy, or other publications where the author, its publisher, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the book.
 * 2) The book has won a major literary award.
 * 3) The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable or significant motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement.
 * 4) The book is, or has been, the subject of instruction at two or more schools, colleges, universities or post-graduate programs in any particular country.
 * 5) The book's author is so historically significant that any of the author's written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is notable by Wikipedia's standards; rather, the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of written work would be a common subject of academic study.

Notability (events): An event is presumed to be notable if it has lasting major consequences or affects a major geographical scope, or receives significant non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time. Coverage should be in multiple reliable sources with national or global scope.

Notability (films): No summary provided

Notability (geographic features):


 * A geographical area, location, place or other object is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are, in the case of artificial features, independent of the bodies which have a vested interest in them.
 * Legally recognized, populated places are presumed to be notable. Places with nationally protected status (e.g. protected areas, national heritage sites, cultural heritage sites) and named natural features, with verifiable information beyond simple statistics are presumed to be notable.
 * It is advised to include identifiable minor geographic features within articles for larger features.

Notability (music): This page lists the specific criteria for whether musicians, ensembles, composers, lyricists, albums, singles, and songs are notable. These criteria inform the decision whether an article should be dedicated to these people or works.

Notability (numbers): No summary provided

Notability (organizations and companies): An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable. If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it.

Notability (people):


 * A person is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject.
 * Notability criteria may need to be met for a person to be included in a stand-alone list.

Notability (sports): An athlete is likely to have received significant coverage in multiple secondary sources, and thus be notable, if they have been successful in a major competition or won a significant honor, as listed on this page.

Notability (web): Wikipedia should avoid articles about web sites that could be interpreted as advertising. For material published on the web to have its own article in Wikipedia, it should be notable and of historical significance. Wikipedia articles about web content should use citations from reliable sources.

1st importance
Article titles: Article titles should be recognizable, concise, natural, precise, and consistent.

Category names: Category names should be specific, neutral, inclusive and follow certain conventions, such as "Natural history of Venezuela", "Hospitals in Denmark" or "Australian journalists".

File names: Use descriptive file names. Don't upload files with generic, non-specific file names.

2nd importance
Naming conventions (capitalization): Article titles should be in sentence case, not title case. Only the first word is capitalized, except for proper names.

Naming conventions (country-specific topics): No summary provided

Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name): No summary provided

Naming conventions (events): No summary provided

Naming conventions (geographic names): Use modern English names for titles and in articles. Historical names or names in other languages can be used in the lead if they are frequently used and important enough to be valuable to readers, and should be used in articles with caution.

Naming conventions (numbers and dates): No summary provided

Naming conventions (lists): No summary provided

Naming conventions (people): No summary provided

Naming conventions (plurals): No summary provided

Naming conventions (technical restrictions): No summary provided

Naming conventions (use English): No summary provided

3rd importance
Naming conventions (astronomical objects): This guideline describes the article titles that should be used for astronomical objects, from small Solar System bodies to galaxy groups and clusters.

WikiProject Belgium/Castle, country house, château and kasteel naming conventions: Don't translate places named 'château' or 'kasteel' into English.

WikiProject Belgium/Alternate language names:


 * 1) The English name (unless archaic) should take precedence over all other names.
 * 2) If there is no English name (which is most cases) use the official local name first.
 * 3) If there is a name for this place in the other national language (i.e. Dutch or French), include that also in the lead immediately following the local name.
 * 4) Include other languages (e.g. German) and local languages (e.g. West Flemish, Walloon) where appropriate. (Including a West-Flemish name for Liège, for example, is not necessary.)
 * 5) Brussels-related articles follow the separate Brussels naming conventions
 * 6) These guidelines reflect a consensus in order to reduce disputes.

Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies): United Kingdom Parliamentary constituencies (current or defunct) should have a uniform suffix of "(UK Parliament constituency)" or "(Scottish Parliament constituency)" as appropriate, whether or not this is required for disambiguation. A redirect or disambiguation page entry/hatnote must always be made from the basic name.

Naming conventions (sportspeople): Sportsperson articles should follow the general naming conventions for articles on people, but there are some special points to consider in disambiguation. The recommendations within also apply to non-sport competitive gaming.

1st importance
Manual of Style: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Contents: No summary provided

2nd importance
Manual of Style/Accessibility: Wikipedia pages should be easy to navigate and read for people with disabilities.

Manual of Style/Biography: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Linking: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid: Wikipedia's free content is reused in many places: do not assume that the reader is reading Wikipedia, or indeed any website. Articles may refer to themselves, but they shouldn't refer to Wikipedia in a non-neutral fashion except under special circumstances.

Manual of Style/Words to watch: Be cautious with expressions that may introduce bias, lack precision, or include offensive terms. Use clear, direct language. Let facts alone do the talking.

Wikimedia sister projects: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Abbreviations: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Capital letters: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Dates and numbers: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Pronunciation: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Spelling: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Text formatting: This page provides guidance on when to format text in articles. For instructions on how to do that, see Help:Wiki markup § Format.

Manual of Style/Titles of works: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Layout: This guide presents the typical layout of Wikipedia articles, including the sections an article usually has, ordering of sections, and formatting styles for various elements of an article.

Manual of Style/Lead section: The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight.

Manual of Style/Lists:


 * Lists present similar information in bulleted, enumerated, or definition format.
 * Lists may be embedded in articles or may be stand-alone articles
 * Lists should have a self-explanatory title, and a lead-in description with further explanation as required.
 * Lists, categories, and navigation templates are synergistic.

Manual of Style/Lists of works: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Road junction lists: No summary provided

Stand-alone lists: Stand-alone lists, like other articles, are subject to Wikipedia's Core content policies. They should be used for appropriate topics, and have clear selection criteria. A well-written lead section is important, especially if there is little or no other non-list content.

Manual of Style/Tables: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Trivia sections: Sections with lists of miscellaneous information (such as "trivia" sections) should be avoided as an article develops. Such information is better presented in an organized way.

Manual of Style/Images: No summary provided

Manual of Style/Captions: Image captions should be succinct and informative.

Manual of Style/Icons: While icons can be useful in Wikipedia articles in some circumstances, there are also problems associated with their misapplication and overuse. Words can be clearer.

3rd importance
Manual of Style/Stringed instrument tunings: When describing the tuning of a stringed instrument:


 * Always list the closest (normally bass) string first.
 * Always number the furthest (normally treble) string as "one".
 * In other matters, be consistent within the article.

Manual of Style/Writing about fiction: Wikipedia articles should describe fiction and fictional elements from the perspective of the real world, not from the perspective of the fiction itself. Jump to § Conclusions for a more detailed summary of this guideline's contents.

Manual of Style/Trademarks: Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules, regardless of the preference of trademark owners.

Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles:


 * Article titles use the scientific or medical name.
 * Write for the average reader and a general audience—not professionals or patients.
 * Explain medical jargon or use plain English instead if possible.
 * Become familiar with the common sections, info boxes and citation templates.
 * Use the highest-quality medical sources available.
 * Avoid trivia sections and external link farms.

1st importance
Civility:


 * Participate in a respectful and considerate way.
 * Do not ignore the positions and conclusions of your fellow editors.
 * Present coherent and concise arguments, and refrain from making personal attacks; encourage others to do the same.

Consensus: Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental method of decision making, and is marked by addressing editors' legitimate concerns through a process of compromise while following Wikipedia policies.

Editing policy: Improve pages wherever you can, and do not worry about leaving them imperfect. Preserve the value that others add, even if they "did it wrong" (try to fix it rather than remove it).

Harassment: Do not stop other editors from enjoying Wikipedia by making threats, repeated annoying and unwanted contacts, repeated personal attacks, intimidation, or posting personal information.

Vandalism: Intentionally making abusive edits to Wikipedia will result in a block.

2nd importance
Clean start: A user who is not under current restrictions or blocks may stop using their current account and start using a new one. Clean start does not guarantee the two accounts will not be connected, and a user who uses clean start to resume old habits of editing may be identified and seen as trying to evade scrutiny.

Dispute resolution: Resolve disputes as soon as they arise. When two editors disagree over what to do with an article, they must talk things through politely and rationally.

Edit warring: Don't use edits to fight with other editors. Disagreements should be resolved through discussion.

No personal attacks: Do not make personal attacks anywhere on Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor.

Ownership of content: No one "owns" content (including articles or any page at Wikipedia). If you create or edit an article, other editors can make changes, and you cannot prevent them from doing so. In addition, you should not undo their edits without good reason. Disagreements should be calmly resolved, starting with a discussion on the article talk page.

Sockpuppetry: The general rule is one editor, one account. Do not use multiple accounts to mislead, deceive, vandalize or disrupt; to create the illusion of greater support for a position; to stir up controversy; or to circumvent a block, ban, or sanction. Do not ask your family or friends to create accounts to support you. Do not revive old unused accounts and use them as different users, or use another person's account. Do not log out just to vandalize as an IP address editor.

Username policy: When choosing an account name, do not choose names which may be offensive, misleading, disruptive, or promotional. The username should represent one person; do not use your organisation's name.

1st importance
Assume good faith:


 * Unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it.
 * If criticism is needed, discuss editors' actions, but avoid accusing others of harmful motives.

Conflict of interest: Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests, nor in the interests of your external relationships.

Disruptive editing: Editors who persistently disrupt Wikipedia, knowingly or unknowingly, may be blocked or banned indefinitely.

Etiquette: Wikipedia etiquette, while often wiki specific, is rooted in common sense intuitions about working together. Be friendly and flexible. Act in good faith. Focus on improving Wikipedia articles.

Talk page guidelines: Talk pages are for improving the encyclopedia, not for expressing personal opinions on a subject or an editor.

2nd importance
Appealing a block: A block is not a punishment, but a way to prevent further disruption. Blocked users should understand the reasons for the block, and convince administrators that they won't disrupt the project if they are unblocked.

Canvassing: When notifying other editors of discussions, keep the number of notifications small, keep the message text neutral, and don't preselect recipients according to their established opinions. Be open!

Changing username/Guidelines: No summary provided

Courtesy vanishing: Courtesy vanishing means any user in good standing—upon leaving Wikipedia forever—may request renaming of their account; deletion or blanking of user pages; and possibly the deletion or blanking of discussions related to their conduct. This courtesy vanishing does not include the deletion of user contributions, and normally does not include the deletion of user talk pages.

Deceased Wikipedians/Guidelines: No summary provided

Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point: When you have a point to make, use direct discussion only.

Gaming the system: Playing games with policies and guidelines to avoid the spirit of consensus, or thwart the intent and spirit of the policy, is strictly forbidden.

Please do not bite the newcomers: Don’t be hostile toward fellow editors; newcomers in particular. Remember to assume good faith and respond to problematic edits in a clear and polite manner.

Responding to threats of harm: No summary provided

Reviewing pending changes: Reviewing pending changes consists of determining whether a new revision is broadly acceptable for public view, and if not, editing the article to obtain an acceptable revision.

Rollback: No summary provided

Signatures: Please ensure that your posts on talk pages are signed (using  if not automatically handled by the software). Keep the coding of your signature short, do not make the signature too large, do not embed files in it, and ensure that the end result is easily readable by virtually everybody.

Spam blacklist: As a countermeasure to spam, the spam blacklist is used to prevent blacklisted URLs from being added to Wikipedia.

Linking to external harassment: Links that contain privacy violations or malicious harassment should be avoided. Links in articles are a matter for sound editorial judgement.

1st importance
Deletion policy: Administrators have the ability to delete articles and other Wikipedia pages from general view, and to undelete pages that were previously deleted. These powers are exercised in accordance with established policies and guidelines, and community consensus. There are often alternatives to deletion.

Criteria for speedy deletion: Under certain limited conditions, a page may be deleted by an administrator without waiting for any discussion.

Proposed deletion: As a shortcut to the normal deletion discussion process, an article or file can be proposed for uncontroversial deletion, but only once. If no one contests the proposed deletion within seven days, an administrator may delete the page.

2nd importance
Attack page: Do not create pages which serve no purpose beyond disparaging or threatening their subjects, or biographical articles which are unsourced and entirely negative in tone.

Oversight: Suppression (historically "oversight") is used within strict limits to protect privacy, to remove defamatory material, and sometimes to remove serious copyright violations, from any page or log entry.

Proposed deletion of biographies of living people: Biographies of living persons without any sources (reliable or unreliable) or links to support the claims made in the article may be proposed for deletion and will be deleted unless at least one reliable source is added.

Revision deletion: RevisionDelete is a MediaWiki function used to redact grossly improper posts and log entries. It is available to administrators in accordance with the criteria for use. It can also be used in "Suppression" mode by oversighters to remove certain defamatory content and privacy breaches from public and administrator view.

1st importance
Deletion process: No summary provided

2nd importance
Deletion guidelines for administrators: No summary provided

Speedy keep: In certain circumstances, a deletion discussion can be closed with a result of "speedy keep" before the normal discussion period ends.

1st importance
Policies and guidelines: Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are pages that serve to document the good practices accepted in the Wikipedia community. This policy describes how our policies and guidelines should normally be developed and maintained.

Arbitration/Policy: No summary provided

Wikimedia policy: Certain policies are set by the Wikimedia Foundation and not subject to local consensus. These pages are hosted on the Foundation website.

2nd importance
Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight: Access to privacy-related tools on English Wikipedia is supervised by the Arbitration Committee. This page describes the procedures and practices for granting and revoking access to these tools.

Bot policy: Automated editing processes, known as "bots", must be harmless and useful, have approval, use separate user accounts, and be operated responsibly. This wiki also allows global bots to be run, subject to local requirements.

CheckUser: No summary provided

Global rights policy: Users with global rights should not use them on the English Wikipedia except as detailed below. The use of global rights which are prohibited by this policy may result in blocking and requested rights removal.

IP block exemption: Editors in good standing whose editing is disrupted by unrelated blocks or firewalls may request IP address block exemption, which allows editing on an otherwise-blocked IP address. The right is given to trusted users and may be removed if concerns arise or when it is no longer needed. To request an IP address block exemption, use the Unblock Ticket Request System or the template on your talk page (if you have talk page access). If you will be editing using an anonymous proxy, including a VPN service, send your request to checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org instead.

Page mover:


 * The extendedmover permission allows editors to move pages, and subpages, without leaving redirects. Also allows creation and editing of editnotices and moving of categories.
 * The right is granted to experienced users (with at least 6 months of activity and at least 3,000 edits) who have demonstrated a good understanding of the Wikipedia page naming system.

Open proxies: Because of the potential for abuse and technical limitations on the MediaWiki software, open proxies may be blocked from editing for any period at any time.

Volunteer Response Team: The volunteer response team handles a range of liaison and assistance tasks across all Wikimedia projects. A dispute resolution process exists for any editor querying actions based on a VRT ticket.

To contact the volunteer response team, please see Wikipedia:Contact us.

To agree to allow your material to be used under an open licence, see Donating copyrighted materials.

1st importance
Bureaucrats: No summary provided

Office actions: Sometimes the Wikimedia Foundation may have to delete, protect, or blank pages, suppress revisions, block or globally lock users, or take other actions without going through the normal site/community processes to do so. These measures may be temporary or permanent and are taken to prevent legal trouble or personal harm. They should not be undone by any user without permission from the Wikimedia Foundation.

1st importance
Administrators: Administrators are volunteer editors trusted with access to certain tools on the English Wikipedia. They are expected to observe a high standard of conduct, use the tools fairly, and never use them to gain advantage in a dispute.

Blocking policy: User accounts and IP addresses may be blocked from editing to protect Wikipedia from disruption.

Protection policy: While Wikipedia strives to be as open as possible, sometimes it is necessary to limit editing of certain pages in order to prevent vandalism, edit warring, or other disruptive edits.

2nd importance
Contentious topics: Contentious topics are specially designated topics that have attracted more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project. Administrators are allowed to impose editing restrictions on editors who do not follow project expectations within contentious topics. Administrators are also allowed to set special rules on pages within a contentious topic to prevent inappropriate editing.

Banning policy: Problematic behaviour may lead to editing restrictions (partial or complete) to be applied to any editor, either by community consensus or by the Arbitration Committee.

1st importance
Copyrights: No summary provided

No legal threats: If you post a legal threat on Wikipedia, you are likely to be blocked indefinitely. A polite report of a legal problem, such as defamation or copyright infringement, is not a threat and will be acted on quickly.

Terms of use: Usage of Wikipedia is subject to the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use.

2nd importance
Child protection: Wikipedia does not tolerate inappropriate adult–child relationships in any form. Please report incidents to legal-reportswikimedia.org.

Copyright violations: Do not add content to Wikipedia if you think that doing so may be a copyright violation. Contributors should take steps to remove any copyright violations that they find.

Libel: Delete libelous material when it has been identified.

Non-free content criteria: Respect the rules of non-free content and only use non-free content as a last resort.

Paid-contribution disclosure: If you are paid in any way for contributing to Wikipedia, you must disclose it.

Reusing Wikipedia content: No summary provided

1st importance
Project namespace: Project pages are for information or discussion about Wikipedia. They should be used to allow Wikipedians to better participate in the community, and not used to excess for unrelated purposes nor to bring the project into disrepute.

User pages: User pages are for communication and collaboration. While considerable leeway is allowed in personalizing and managing your user pages, they are community project pages, not a personal website, blog, social networking medium, or a Wikipedia article. They should be used to better participate in the community, and not used to excess for unrelated purposes nor to bring the project into disrepute.

2nd importance
Userboxes: No summary provided

WikiProject Council/Guide: No summary provided

1st importance
Template namespace:


 * The Template: namespace on Wikipedia contains templates created for consistent formatting, maintenance, and navigation.
 * Templates should not normally be used to store article text. Such content belongs in the article pages themselves.

2nd importance
High-risk templates: High-risk templates and Lua modules may be edit protected. Edits to such pages should be made only after careful testing.

Substitution: Substitution is the one-time, permanent copying of template content on Wikipedia. It differs from transclusion, which continually updates as the linked-to content changes.

Talk page templates: When creating a template to be used on talk pages, try to follow the established standards.

2nd importance
Reference desk/Guidelines: Keep the core policies and guidelines in mind when responding on the reference desk, and try to make it useful for our readers and a benefit to Wikipedia.

Reference desk/Guidelines/Medical advice: No summary provided

Other policies and guidelines
Password strength requirements: While all users are asked to maintain a strong password, some users with advanced permissions are required to do so and the strength of their passwords may be audited by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Top importance
Five pillars:


 * 1) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
 * 2) Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view.
 * 3) Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute.
 * 4) Wikipedia's editors should treat each other with respect and civility.
 * 5) Wikipedia has no firm rules.

Link rot: Steps may be taken to reduce or repair dead external links.

Writing better articles: No summary provided

What "Ignore all rules" means: Editing Wikipedia is all about making improvements, not following rules. However, WP:IAR should not be used as a reason to make unhelpful edits.

How to write a plot summary: No summary provided

Responsible tagging: If you identify problems in an article but don't have the knowledge or time and/or energy to fix them yourself, please take care to only add the most relevant and specific tags, and leave an explanation on the talk page so that others can understand what the problem was and determine if they can do anything to fix it.

Why was the page I created deleted?:


 * Deletion, like most other things in Wikipedia, is about consensus between editors.
 * Deletion is not necessarily permanent.

Wikipedia is not a reliable source: Do not use a Wikipedia article as a source for another Wikipedia article.

Bare URLs: Simply copying and pasting the URL of an online reference is not ideal, exposing the reference to linkrot. It is preferable to use proper citation templates when citing sources.

Tag bombing: Adding multiple tags without explaining the reason is disruptive.

Chesterton's fence: Don't change something until you understand why it is the way it is. There may be a valid reason for it to be that way.

Essays: No summary provided

NPOV dispute: No summary provided

New account: No summary provided

Too long; didn't read: Be concise.

High importance
Inline citation: This page describes various inline citation techniques used in Wikipedia. Some short illustrative examples can be seen at Inline citation/examples.

When to cite: No summary provided

Edit summary legend: No summary provided

Sexual content: No summary provided

The perfect article: No summary provided

Vagueness: Try to use clear and well-defined words in all articles.

Community response to the Wikimedia Foundation's ban of Fram: No summary provided

Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions:


 * Please remember that deletion discussions are not decided through head count
 * Explain why an article does or does not meet specific criteria, guidelines or policies
 * Always try to make clear, solid arguments in deletion discussions
 * Avoid short one-liners or simple links (including to this page)

Don't stuff beans up your nose: If you tell people not to do something, your advice may backfire and instead tempt them to do it. In fact, they might have not even thought of doing it until you told them not to do it. See also WP:NEEDTOKNOW for a more in-depth presentation of this maxim.

Userfication: No summary provided

Essay directory: No summary provided

Close paraphrasing: Summarize in your own words instead of closely paraphrasing. Closely paraphrased material that infringes on the copyright of its source material should be rewritten or deleted to avoid infringement, and to ensure that it complies with Wikipedia policy. Public domain sources and CC-BY-SA-compatible sources may be closely paraphrased, and limited close paraphrasing of copyrighted sources may also be permitted as fair use. Attribution is always required.

Humor: No summary provided

Free encyclopedia: A free encyclopedia, like any other form of free knowledge, can be freely read, without getting permission from anyone. Free knowledge can be freely shared with others. Free knowledge can be adapted to your own needs. And your adapted versions can be freely shared with others.

Systemic bias: No summary provided

BOLD, revert, discuss cycle: Making bold edits is encouraged, as it will result in either improving an article or stimulating discussion. If your edit gets reverted, do not revert again. Instead, begin a discussion with the person who reverted your change.

No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man: No Wikipedia editor may climb the Reichstag building dressed as Spider-Man or anyone else to gain advantage in a content dispute or otherwise.

Here to build an encyclopedia: Wikipedians are here to build an encyclopedia, i.e., a neutral, reliable public reference work on notable topics. Users whose behavior suggests they are here for some other purpose risk being blocked or banned.

An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing: You may face problems if there is an article about you on Wikipedia. So think about it before you really go out of your way to try to get one.

Why Wikipedia is not so great: No summary provided

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia: No summary provided

Emerson and Wilde on consistency: Emerson's and Wilde's dismissals of consistency – often quoted out of context – do not refer to what so many people seem to think they do. Didn't read it? Don't quote it.

Avoiding common mistakes: No summary provided

Policy writing is hard: Policy writing is hard.

Guidance for younger editors: Welcome to Wikipedia!


 * Feel free to write, but remember that we have some rules.
 * Ask the other writers if you need help. They are usually friendly.
 * You should never give out any personal information of any kind to anyone.
 * Never tell anyone about your "real" life.
 * Wikipedia is NOT a social media site.

The Free Encyclopedia: Wikipedia is "free" as in free software and free culture, not necessarily "free beer" and "free speech".

Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia: No summary provided

Fancruft: Avoid including information that is trivial and of importance only to a small population of fans. In-universe topics must demonstrate out of universe notability.

Navigation template: A navigation template links between existing articles belonging to the same topic on English Wikipedia. There are two types: "navigation boxes" (or navboxes) and "sidebars".

Further reading: No summary provided

Typography: No summary provided

Wikibreak: A wikibreak, wikiholiday, wikivacation, or leave of wiki-absence is a period when even a wikipediholic must be parted from Wikipedia, although presumably only temporarily.

Principles: No summary provided

Tendentious editing: How to recognize a problematic pattern of editing.

Don't stuff beans up your nose/Uh-huh: No summary provided

Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia: No summary provided

Citation overkill: When citing material in an article, it is better to cite a couple of great sources than a stack of decent or sub-par ones.

WikiProject Languages: This WikiProject aims primarily to provide a consistent treatment of each human language on Wikipedia. Many languages already have extensive pages, and the systematic information on those pages is not presented in a consistent way. The purpose of this WikiProject is to present that information consistently, and to ensure that each of the major areas is covered at least briefly for each language.

WikiLove: WikiLove is a term that refers to a general spirit of collegiality and mutual understanding among wiki users. Happy editing, and spread WikiLove all over the Internet to users who deserve it!

Recentism: Some Wikipedia articles tend to focus on recent events. Wikipedia has been praised for the way it deals with current news breaks. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to be aware of balance and historical perspective.

No Nazis: Racists (and other discriminatory groups) are inherently incompatible with Wikipedia. They will almost inevitably lack a neutral point of view and be a POV-pusher. If you think you've spotted one, see if you can find a number of supporting diffs and if so, report them straight to the incident noticeboard. Also report racist imagery on user pages on sight.

Why is BFDI not allowed on Wikipedia?: Much like non-notable topics, Battle for Dream Island and other object shows cannot be articles unless significant and reliable secondary sources are provided. Also, do not use name look-alikes and other namespaces to recreate a page that was already deleted (and salted) by consensus. Remember: "keep BFDI casual."

The duck test: Administrators may take action against sock puppetry or meat puppetry if there are obvious correlations in behavior.

Deny recognition: Recognition is a motivation for vandalism. Trolls require food − don't feed the trolls.

Potentially unreliable sources: No summary provided

Mid importance
Academic use: No summary provided

Go ahead, vandalize: If you are ever tempted, and are not intimidated by the consequences, go ahead and vandalize all you want. Be warned, you will get caught, and it is a temporary privilege.

Avoiding harm: When deciding whether it is appropriate to include information in a biography of a living person, apply the "inclusion test" (see below). Where a person is notable only in connection with one event, they may not merit a biography at all. If another user removes or deletes such material, discuss it with them, but don't revert them until consensus has been reached.

Civil POV pushing: Civil POV-pushers argue politely and in compliance with Wikipedia civility principles, but also with bad faith, which discourages or upsets the other contributors. In a discussion, blame is often assigned to the person who loses their temper, which is even more frustrating for good-faith contributors trapped in such discussions.

The answer to life, the universe, and everything: Articles generally require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic.

Alternative outlets: There are other places for potentially useful or valuable content which is not appropriate for Wikipedia.

Snowball clause: Use common sense, and don't follow a process all the way to its scheduled end, just for the sake of doing so. (But do allow discussions to take place if in doubt.)

Single-purpose account: No summary provided

Don't-give-a-fuckism: Don't-give-a-fuckism is the idea that attachment to things (articles, policies, AfDs, etc.) which are essentially beyond your control is a stumbling block to being a good Wikipedian.

Avoid instruction creep: When editing guidance, keep in mind the risk of increasingly detailed instructions resulting in bloated pages that new editors find intimidating and experienced editors ignore.

Describing points of view: No summary provided

Handling trivia: No summary provided

Notability (fiction): Fictional elements are expected to follow the same notability guidelines as any other topic.

List of bad article ideas: No summary provided

Writing about women: When writing about women on Wikipedia, ensure articles do not use sexist language, perpetuate sexist stereotypes, or otherwise demonstrate prejudice against women.

Use rationale examples: No summary provided

Printability: How do editors decide whether or not any given type of article-namespace redirect is suitable for an offline, CD/DVD or print version of Wikipedia? printworthy or unprintworthy?

Non-breaking hyphen: No summary provided

Staying cool when the editing gets hot: Remain calm when in an editing dispute. Respond politely and assume good faith.

Polling is not a substitute for discussion: Most decisions on Wikipedia are not made by popular vote, but rather through discussions to achieve consensus. Polling is only meant to facilitate discussion, and should be used with care.

Rouge admin: No summary provided

Wikipedia is not about winning: Wikipedia is all about teamwork. Users must work together to build a reliable encyclopedia, not try to prove themselves to be "better" than others.

Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass: If a debate has died, don't revive it.

Ten simple rules for editing Wikipedia: No summary provided

Quotations: No summary provided

Silence and consensus: Consensus is assumed when there's no evidence of disagreement.

Don't delete the main page: There are jokes, and then there are "oh, hell no" situations.

Taking the road less traveled: Doing things differently from others can often yield better results.

No one cares about your garage band: Don't start an article on your band if you don't have much of an audience yet.

Wikilawyering: Using the rules in a manner to achieve a goal other than compliance with the rule (for example, to "win" an editing dispute) is frowned upon by the Wikipedia community.

Identifying and using primary sources: No summary provided

If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas: Seek to surround yourself with editors respected by the community, both for the sake of your own reputation and for the sake of learning from quality sources.

On privacy, confidentiality and discretion: Be careful about revealing and handling personal and/or private information, as your rights to privacy may not extend as far as you believe.

User account security: Failing to use a sensible password can lead to temporary loss of editing access and may lead to permanent loss of privileged access.

What Wikipedia is not/Outtakes: No summary provided

A nice cup of tea and a sit down: No summary provided

Redirects are cheap: Redirects take up minimal system resources, so it doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around.

Help:Advanced text formatting: No summary provided

WikiSpeak: No summary provided

Very short featured articles: It is somewhat open to debate whether very short articles can become Featured Articles, but consensus tends to be against a set minimum length for FAC.

Non-admin closure: Some discussions on Wikipedia may be closed by non-administrators and some should not. Before doing so, non-administrators should be sure that the closure is appropriate.

Common sourcing mistakes (notability): There are three common mistakes you should avoid when sourcing an article or proposed article to demonstrate that the topic is notable: i) adding citations but to unreliable sources; ii) adding citations to connected (non-independent) sources; and iii) adding citations to sources that merely mention the topic.

Why Wikipedia is so great: No summary provided

Reverting: Revert vandalism on sight, but revert an edit made in good faith only with an explanation and after careful consideration. Edit warring is prohibited. See three-revert rule. Editors should always explain their reverts.

Advice for parents: No summary provided

Verifiability, not truth: Any material added to Wikipedia must have been published previously by a reliable source. Editors may not add content solely because they believe it is true, nor delete content they believe to be untrue, unless they have verified beforehand with a reliable source.

Advanced table formatting: No summary provided

Wall of text: No summary provided

Standard offer: Usually, a user may request appeal of block or ban after a period (usually six months) without sockpuppetry. The purpose of the period is to demonstrate that they can follow simple, clear instructions, so that they may be more likely to abide by community rules.

Introduction to deletion process: No summary provided

Editcountitis: Editcountitis or obsessive edit-counting disorder (OECD) is an addiction consisting of an unhealthy obsession with the number of edits one has made to Wikipedia or another online resource.

There is no deadline: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Don't rush to edit: it is not a competition.

Coatrack articles: Articles about one thing shouldn't be loaded up with unrelated things to make a point.

Outlines: An outline is a list article, arranged hierarchically, that helps a reader learn about a subject quickly, by showing what topics it includes, and how the topics relate to each other. Outlines on Wikipedia combine the benefits of tables of contents, site maps, and glossaries. The system of outlines are also linked together hierarchically. The Contents/Outlines is an entryway to this system.

Content removal: When removing content from a page, it is important to be sure there is consensus to do so.

WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG!: Avoid cryptic language. Try to keep your use of abbreviations down when talking with human beings.

Wikipedia essays: No summary provided

Help:My article got nominated for deletion!:


 * Don't panic. Deletion discussions are processes which aim to find consensus, not simply votes.
 * Alternatives to deletion exist. Anyone, including you, can suggest those!
 * Address the arguments, not the person making them.

Wikipedia is failing: No summary provided

Redirects are costly: Redirects are not always needed. They can sometimes be a burden, and Wikipedia has a very good internal search engine.

Positive feedback: Wikipedia should have methods of positive feedback to allow both incentives for improvement and polite and civil interactions. Wikipedia should help people more than it hurts them (Avoiding harm). Wikipedia should have verifiable civility, and it should have measures to avoid turnover.

NPOV tutorial: No summary provided

Don't template the regulars : When dealing with experienced users, it is generally more effective to write them a short personal message than to apply a standardized template. Mandated templates like are excluded.

"In popular culture" content: "In popular culture" sections should be carefully maintained and should contain only properly sourced examples that are bona fide cultural references. When such sections grow too long, they may be split into subarticles, but this should be done with caution.

Don't poke the bear: Some actions that may appear harmless or helpful, may actually be provocative and result in being growled at—or even mauled.

Criticism: Articles should include significant criticisms of the subject while avoiding undue weight and POV forking.

Image citation: An article's reliability and user experience will generally be improved if, as an optional practice, historical images drawn from a recognized repository are cited in the article itself, just as article's text is cited.

WikiProject Wikipedia essays: WikiProject Essays aims to categorize all Wikipedia essays, classify them, and raise awareness about Wikipedia essays to the larger Wikipedia community.

Why Wikipedia cannot claim the Earth is not flat: Wikipedia reports the prevailing views not because they are believed correct, but because they are the most mainstream and accepted available given our current knowledge. If Wikipedia was available in a time where the mainstream view was that the Earth was flat, Wikipedia would have reported such as correct.

No angry mastodons:


 * Don't get stressed out while editing; defuse stress when possible.
 * Edit while you are at your best, not while angry, scared, or intoxicated.
 * Be considerate of others in the community.

Video links: Videos on user-submitted sites can sometimes be used as references or external links, but copyright infringement and unreliability will rule out the use of many of these videos.

Sarcasm is really helpful: Gee, it would be (sort of) awesome to be stuck inside a nutshell...

Don't be high-maintenance: Don't threaten to quit, or otherwise make trouble, if you don't get your way. Wikipedia is not about you.

WikiDragon:


 * WikiDragons may seem scary or intimidating, but they most often are very helpful in shaking things up and making major improvements, and most are extremely friendly (just don't try to pet one).
 * WikiDragons have long been the target of persecution, but in spite of the constant threat to their well-being, continue on Wikipedia because their contributions significantly and consistently improve the project.
 * WikiDragons are a dying breed and on the verge of extinction, due in large part to hunting, such as prize hunting and vendetta crusades, among other sources of threats, pain, and strife.

Citing IMDb: Anecdotes, trivia, and unreleased film information from IMDb do not meet the reliable sources guideline. The IMDb should be used only as a tertiary source for hard data on released films.

Hyphens and dashes: No summary provided

Call a spade a spade: It's okay to call a spade a spade – to speak plainly – but remember to remain civil, and to stay focused on improving the encyclopedia.

Revert only when necessary: Revert vandalism upon sight but revert an edit made in good faith only after careful consideration. It is usually preferable to make an edit that retains at least some elements of a questionable prior edit than to revert it entirely. Your bias should be toward keeping the entire prior edit.

Common sense is not common: What is "common sense" to you might not be so to others.

Identifying reliable sources (science): Appropriate sources for discussing the natural sciences include comprehensive reviews in independent, reliable published sources, such as recent peer reviewed articles in reputable scientific journals, statements and reports from reputable expert bodies, widely recognized standard textbooks written by experts in a field, or standard handbooks and reference guides.

Tagging pages for problems: "Tags" should be used to clearly identify problems with Wikipedia pages to indicate to other editors that improvements are needed.

Give 'em enough rope: Sometimes it's best to give people one last chance. But only one.

Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause: It is secondary coverage in reliable sources which determines if a topic should be covered by Wikipedia, not how well-intentioned it is.

Complete bollocks: Articles that are obviously false are complete bollocks and should be treated differently from similar articles.

Write the article first: Editors are encouraged to write the article on a given subject BEFORE adding a link to the article in list pages, disambiguation pages, See also sections, or templates.

Parenthetical referencing: Since September 2020, inline parenthetical referencing has been deprecated on Wikipedia.

Gender-neutral language: No summary provided

High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors: Autistic and Asperger's editors may have different wiring patterns in their brains, but that does not mean they are stupid. Understand their differences and try to make good use of them!

The rules are principles: Wikipedia's rules are principles, not civil code or exacting law.

Expert retention: No summary provided

Low importance
How many legs does a horse have?: Simply saying that a horse has five legs doesn't make it true – calling a horse's tail a leg does not make it one.

Griefing: No summary provided

You don't need to cite that the sky is blue: Although citing sources is an important part of editing Wikipedia, there is no need to cite information that is already obvious.

Don't shoot yourself in the foot: Consider your own behavior before bringing attention to the behavior of others.

Editing on mobile devices: We can edit Wikipedia on most mobile devices, despite certain difficulties.

Signs of sockpuppetry: There are many possible signs of sockpuppetry or other multiple account usage. But none of them are absolute proof sockpuppetry is occurring.

Nationality of people from the United Kingdom: No summary provided

IP editors are human too: Unregistered users can edit articles and participate on talk pages in the same way as registered users. Their input is just as important in building consensus.

Wikipedia is a work in progress: Wikipedia is a living document, constantly improving and expanding. It will never be a finished work.

The difference between policies, guidelines and essays: No summary provided

Avoid the word "vandal": Vandals are people who deliberately attempt to damage Wikipedia, not those who make adverse edits.

How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance: A list of recommendations regarding the creation and updating of policy and guideline pages. See WP:PROPOSAL for official procedural details.

Replies to common objections: No summary provided

Credible claim of significance: A credible claim of significance is a statement in the article that attributes noteworthiness, or information written about the subject in reliable sources. Significance is a lower standard than notability. While the inclusion of reliable secondary sources may itself be an indication of significance, not including any sources is entirely irrelevant to an assessment under these speedy deletion criteria.

Unblockables: Some users appear to be impossible to block no matter what behavior they exhibit. However, if you proceed very carefully you may be able to produce a positive result, whether it involves blocking or not.

Race and ethnicity: "Race" and "ethnicity" (and ancestry in general) are usually screwy concepts to use as classifiers of people on Wikipedia.

☣  Wikipedia is a bad place to engage in labelling that isn't absolutely integral to international public perception of the subject.

How to not get outed on Wikipedia: No summary provided

Romanization of Russian: The Wikipedia romanization of Russian is a modification of the BGN/PCGN romanization of Russian. It is used in the English Wikipedia per Naming conventions (Russia) as suitable for Anglophones.

Expert editors: No summary provided

Wikipedia in brief: Wikipedia aims to be a neutral compilation of verifiable, established facts.

Randy in Boise: Randy in Boise is the archetypal uninformed but relentless Wikipedia editor.

Don't bludgeon the process:


 * It is not necessary or desirable to reply to every comment in a discussion.
 * The more often you express the same ideas in a discussion, the less persuasive you become.
 * Dominating a discussion is a violation of the WP:DE policy and can get you blocked.

Reliable source examples: No summary provided

Formal organization: Who does what on Wikipedia? What does Wikipedia say itself about its own formal organizational structure?

Editorial discretion: Common sense and Wikipedia policy dictates that editors must practice discretion regarding the proper inclusion of relevant and well-sourced content.

Comprised of: This page aggregates links about the use of the phrase "comprised of" on Wikipedia.

Tag team: No summary provided

Process is important: Process should be followed if at all possible – not following it tends to harm the project, even if the result is unchanged.

Wikipedia is in the real world: Your activity here has real consequences, because Wikipedia is in the real world.

Wikipedia is a volunteer service: The editors on Wikipedia are mainly volunteers. Editors can contribute as much as they want, and for however long they desire.

Funding Wikipedia through advertisements: No summary provided

Use plain English: Wikipedia articles ought to be written in plain English. Jargon, buzzwords, tautologies and vague abstractions ought to be avoided to the greatest extent possible. Articles with puffery are also not acceptable.

What is consensus?: Consensus is the community resolution when opposing parties set aside their differences and agree on a statement that is agreeable to all, even if only barely.

Don't abbreviate "Wikipedia" as "Wiki"!: The word "wiki" is a common noun which does not refer to any specific website. Do not use "Wiki" as if implying that Wikipedia is the only wiki in existence.

Old-fashioned Wikipedian values: Behaving in an exemplary manner is A Good Thing. Even if the example doesn't spread, you'll feel better about yourself. Sign up and spread the word.

Wikipuffery: Wikipuffery is the puffing of a subject or the addition of praise-filled adjectives and claims. They may be there to exaggerate the notability of the article subject to avoid deletion of the article.

Do not insult the vandals: How to better deal with vandals: revert and ignore.

There is a deadline: The preservation or survivability of the world's knowledge is at stake. Contribute it to Wikipedia before it's too late.

College and university article advice: No summary provided

Controversial articles: No summary provided

The Truth: Your opinions are The Truth, and thus are unquestionably correct.

Trifecta: Remain neutral; Don't be a jerk; Ignore all rules.

The Last Word: In Wikipedia, sometimes debates get heated. Whenever this occurs, it is of primary importance that you always ensure that you get The Last Word.

Words of wisdom: No summary provided

Advocacy: Wikipedia is not a venue for raising the visibility of an issue or agenda. Cooperate with other editors to neutrally summarize notable topics using reliable sources without advocating any particular position or giving undue weight to minority views.

You can and cannot change Wikipedia: Everyone is empowered to change Wikipedia, but that means less than you might think.

Protecting children's privacy: No summary provided

Edit count: Edit counters are a useful tool, but remember that it's the quality of edits that counts, not the quantity.

You can't squeeze blood from a turnip: Don't extend extreme gestures of good faith toward editors with an extensive problematic history.

Principle of Some Astonishment: The Principle of least astonishment notwithstanding, strive to omit obvious details.

Sleeper account: A sleeper account is an account that has not edited in a long time and has essentially lain dormant.

My little brother did it: Blaming any actions made from your account on your little brother or anyone else may seem like a good idea, but it isn't. It's a very common excuse, you're probably lying, we'd keep you blocked if you were telling the truth, and we have no way of verifying it, so we won't bother to try. You are responsible for all edits made from your account, and must admit to all wrongdoings, even if it wasn't you.

Wikipedia does not need you: Get over it.

Indentation: No summary provided

I just don't like it: Expressing a like or dislike for the issue in question is not a helpful or useful argument in a discussion.

When to use or avoid "other stuff exists" arguments: A rationale used in discussions is that other, similar pages or contents exist and have precedential value. The rationale may be valid in some contexts but not in others: Other stuff sometimes exists according to consensus or policies and guidelines, sometimes in violation of them.

WikiLeaks is not part of Wikipedia: The website WikiLeaks, which publicizes leaked information, is not in any way affiliated with Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation. It is an entirely separate website run by people who have no connection to Wikimedia.

Mandy Rice-Davies applies: The mere fact that someone has denied unsavory allegations does not automatically merit inclusion in an article, especially if that allegation is very well sourced. The subject of an article is not exempt from the ordinary rules of reliability as a source on themselves.

Pornography: No summary provided

Run-of-the-mill: There are some items that are very commonplace for which sources verifying their existence do exist. But there are so many of these that can be verified given the same sources, there shouldn't be an article on each one, and only those with additional sources deserve articles.

Offline sources: Offline sources are just as valid as online sources.

Personal security practices: Use caution when posting personally identifiable information online. If you become stalked or harassed through such information, or simply want any identifiable information removed, email a trusted Administrator or Requests for oversight for discreet and confidential handling of such incidents.

For publicists publicizing a client's work: This essay provides publicists with tips on how to legitimately report clients' achievements and how to make it more likely that articles about their clients will not get deleted.

Lunatic charlatans: What Wikipedia won't do is pretend that the work of "lunatic charlatans", as they were described by Jimmy Wales, is the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.

Editing Under the Influence: Editing Under the Influence (EUI) refers to editing while not in one's usual state of mind, unless under the influence is the editor's usual state of mind.

Beware of the tigers: Although we respect editors who feel very passionately about a topic, they often disrupt the project.

Don't revert due solely to "no consensus": If the only thing you have to say about a Wikipedia edit is that it lacks consensus, it's best not to revert it.

Template index/Wikipedia namespace: The Project namespace includes Wikipedia official policies and guidelines, process pages, discussion pages, optional essays, informative pages, humorous and historical pages.

WikiBullying: Bullying is not permitted on Wikipedia, and any violators will be blocked from editing.

Advice for RfA candidates: This advice is based on hundreds of previous RfAs. Being a Wikipedia administrator is not the same as being a moderator on an Internet forum. The tasks are many and varied and require a high degree of competency and judgement. In particular, see: What adminship is not.

Vanispamcruftisement: Vanispamcruftisement (/ˌvænɪˌspæmkrəfˈtaɪzmənt/; sometimes abbreviated as vanispamcruft or VSCA) is a portmanteau neologism comprising several editorial faults which some Wikipedians see as cardinal sins: vanity (i.e., conflict of interest), spam, cruft, and advertisement.

Hardcore pornography images: Wikipedia should not include images from hardcore pornography.

Rage quit: No summary provided

Administrators willing to make difficult blocks: The list below consists of admins who are either certain there is no information on Wikipedia that leads to their real-life identities, or else who are willing to deal with the consequences that difficult blocks can lead to.

Wikipedia is not therapy: Practice being sensible, sane, and productive, but know that your psychological state is not an acceptable excuse for disruptive editing.

You do need to cite that the sky is blue: Just because something appears obvious to you, doesn't mean it's obvious to everyone. Build articles from reliable, expert sources, and cite those sources.

Don't call a spade a spade: When "calling a spade a spade" means applying labels to an editor, doing so is just going to cause the dispute to escalate, and can be really embarrassing if you turn out to be wrong. Sometimes, it's best to not be blunt.

Processes: No summary provided

Editing Your Own Page: No summary provided

Negotiation: No summary provided

Free speech: Although we welcome all constructive contributors, editing Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right. There is no legal right to edit Wikipedia.

Pokémon test: No summary provided

The Heymann Standard: Articles may be improved during a deletion discussion, which may make them more likely to be kept.

Cabals: Two or more people who agree with you constitute a consensus. Two or more people who disagree with you constitute a cabal.

Notability/Historical/Arguments: A topic has notability if it is known outside a narrow interest group or constituency, or should be because of its particular importance or impact.

Assume the assumption of good faith: When involved in a discussion, it is best to think very carefully before citing WP:AGF.

Don't take the bait: Goading others into making uncivil comments is a common tactic. Don't take the bait.

Don't be a fanatic: Recognize that all Wikipedia editors are ultimately colleagues working together, listen with civility, and try to find ways to respect and (within Wikipedia policy limits) incorporate others' viewpoints and material as well as your own.

Revert, block, ignore:


 * 1) Revert the vandalism on the page, so it appears in its pre-vandalised state.
 * 2) Block the user committing the vandalism without comment (or, if you're not an administrator, ask one to do it for you).
 * 3) Ignore the troll by not communicating with them via their talk page, even to notify them of the block.

Dealing with sockpuppets:


 * When handling a sockpuppet problem, use the method that creates the least amount of drama possible.
 * When reporting sockpuppets, be concise, be polite, be patient.
 * Never taunt a sockpuppet or put tags on a sockpuppet's user pages. Doing so is disruptive.

Who is a low-profile individual: A low-profile individual is a person, usually notable for only one event, who has not sought public attention.

What adminship is not: Being a Wikipedia Administrator basically means that you have been trusted to use tools which, as a technical matter, cannot be given to just anyone.

Don't demolish the house while it's still being built: Content that does not yet meet Wikipedia's standards but that has the potential to should generally be improved or tagged so that others may improve it, rather than simply deleted.

Signatures of living persons: There is no consensus to reproduce signatures in Wikipedia articles, and there is some concern regarding reproducing the signatures of living persons. If the person has published their own signature, and it has been reproduced by a reliable secondary source, then reproducing the signature can be discussed on the article talkpage. If the person in question (or their representative) wants a signature removed to protect from identity theft, it should generally be removed.

Arguments to avoid in adminship discussions: Users contribute to Wikipedia in different ways. Don't deny Wikipedia a valuable administrator simply because a user contributes in a different way than you do. Regardless of whether you support or oppose the candidate, be sure to also provide good reasons for your choice.

Don't call the kettle black: The disruptive behavior of another editor is not an excuse for your own disruptive behavior. In other words, don't be a hypocrite.

Cross-namespace redirects: No summary provided

Avoid template creep: Don't overuse templates. Keep it simple, stupid!

Overzealous deletion: Overzealous deletion goes against Wikipedia's assume good faith principle.

What SYNTH is not: Although avoiding original research is an important part of ensuring that Wikipedia content is verifiable, use some common sense about it, and particularly about asserting original research by synthesis.

Advanced source searching: Advanced source searching can provide more comprehensive search results compared to simpler standard searches.

Official names: While common names are generally preferred over official names as article titles, there are some valid exceptions. These are documented in the specific-topic naming conventions.

Wikipedia is a community: There is nothing wrong with occasionally doing other things than writing the encyclopedia, and the community spirit is a positive thing.

Walled garden: Articles should have outgoing and incoming links to the wider encyclopedia. Don't create a group of articles that exclusively link to each other.

Listcruft: No summary provided

These are not original research: No summary provided

It should be noted: If something should be noted, then just note it. Do not also note that it should be noted.

Activist: No summary provided

The world will not end tomorrow: An encyclopedia should not begin to move at lightning speed to keep up with the rat race.

Disinfoboxes: Not every article needs an infobox. Do not add one if it does not provide any value to the article. If there is one, make sure it isn't an oversimplified mass of disconnected facts devoid of context and nuance.

Transclusion costs and benefits: No summary provided

Minors and persons judged incompetent: In light of BLP, editing about minors and persons legally judged incompetent should be especially protective of their rights.

Identifying reliable sources (history): No summary provided

Integrate: Integrate these three factors by organised:


 * Merging
 * Cross-referencing
 * Linking

Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia: A quick overview of some of Wikipedia's most important policies.

No Confederates: Confederate or neo-Confederate symbols and viewpoints are unacceptable in Wikipedia.

Reader: A reader is someone who simply visits Wikipedia to read articles, not to edit or create them. They are the sole reason for which Wikipedia exists.

Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes: No summary provided

Fart: Not all farts are notable.

Nobody cares: Lack of action by others can mean lack of interest.

Sexual content/FAQ: No summary provided

Permastub: A permastub is an article that is currently a stub and has no reasonable prospect for expansion.

100,000 feature-quality articles: No summary provided

Most ideas are bad: Most ideas are bad.

Casting aspersions: An editor must not accuse another of misbehavior without evidence.

OCLC: No summary provided

Cherrypicking: Do not cherrypick. When selecting information from a source, include contradictory and significant qualifying information from the same source.

Writing for the opponent: Represent all point of views neutrally and with due weight, even if you disagree with the view.

Blow it up and start over: For pages that are beyond fixing, it may be better to start from scratch.

Levels of competence: All editors go through a series of levels in their understanding of Wikipedia.

Explanationism: Explanationism is a concept of Wikipedia's purpose as being to some degree based in explanations – the human art of expressing and sharing understanding, and not just facts.

Article series: No summary provided

Proseline: When writing articles, begin paragraphs with the date sparingly. Instead, condense the text and focus on the main ideas.