Wikipedia:Honesty

Honesty is expected in all processes of Wikipedia, including content discussion, the dispute process and all other functions of the community. Editors are reminded that while you may expect an assumption of good faith, this is based on the counter-assumption of honesty in your actions.

Being honest does not mean being perfect. An honest Wikipedian may make honest, good faith mistakes.

Honesty in actions
An honest Wikipedian:
 * Does not cite sources they know to be unreliable, intentionally misrepresent sources, or knowingly claim that biased sources are neutral. In cases involving articles with a very long list of citations, not all citations may be fully examined, and editors should not abuse this tendency as an avoidance of the citation requirements.
 * Does not intentionally misrepresent their identity or credentials. The choice of anonymity and pseudonymity is part of Wikipedia, but it is not a license to fabricate real-world credentials. It is strongly recommended that you decline to share details you wish to keep secret rather than to invent alternatives. Fabrication of credentials will lose an editor credibility and damage the credibility of the project as a whole. (See Essjay controversy for an example of an editor falsely claiming to hold a doctorate and professorship)
 * Does not say things they know or believe to be untrue simply to support their argument.
 * Does not argue or act in favor of something they think is wrong. Disruptive point making is one of the most oft-cited and important real-world examples of this.
 * Does comply with the conflict of interest guideline. Per the privacy policy, editors may remain pseudonymous.  The conflict of interest guideline strongly encourages editors to disclose when they edit on topics where their real-world employment, family, and other connections may create an appearance of impropriety.  Such disclosures, if made, should be factual; and although editors may decline to give information, false denials would be dishonest.
 * Does proffer all relevant information to a discussion, even when it might not support their argument. Withholding of information that contradicts other information, or filtering out data-points that do not match one's assumptions, is dishonesty by omission.