Wikipedia:Pledges

To avoid conflicts, many editors have voluntarily pledged to conform to certain principles beyond what is required on Wikipedia. The purpose of this page is to provide an overview over these pledges and to allow for accountability. In this essay, the term "pledger" refers to any editor pledging to abide by a certain principle, or pledge. Please report and discuss violations of pledges on the talk page of this essay (unless there is already a specific process in place, as for AOR).

Editing
The pledges listed below are in order of increasing extremeness, i.e. less extreme pledges first.

1RR: One-revert rule
Editors with this pledge choose to voluntarily follow the rule that if someone reverts their revert, they don't revert it again, but discuss it with them. (See Revert only when necessary and WP:1RR.)

Don't re-revert
Editors with this pledge choose to voluntarily follow the rule that if someone reverts any change or theirs, they don't re-revert it, but discuss it with them. (See Proposal.)

0RR: Zero-revert rule
(See WP:0RR.)

Revert-even-if-you-agree rule
Editors take a principled stand that if somebody makes a change that hasn't been previously agreed to, and another reverts it, and the first remakes it again without discussing it, then you, as a third party will revert it, even if you agree with it, and take it to the talk page. When you do this you can add your views on the talk page. If it gets enough support (at the very least more than 2 to 1 majority to form consensus), then you replace it on the main page. (A main purpose of this principle is to avoid simple majorities dominating without reaching consensus.)

Cool: Staying cool when the editing gets hot
(See WP:Cool.)

NVC: Nonviolent Communication
There is no definitive definition of this pledge. One pledger defines it as follows: "I always will do an earnest attempt to look for an NVC way to say things, and if I can't find one I will at least come close." There exists a page User talk:SebastianHelm/NVC, where pledgers discuss how well they are doing on this pledge. (See Nonviolent Communication.)

Confi: E-mail confidentiality
This consists of the following promises:
 * 1) Pledger will not, without explicit approval of sender, pass on any information from any e-mail that was
 * 2) either sent only to pledger or
 * 3) obviously not intended to be passed on.
 * 4) Pledger will not pass any email address without the owner's permission.
 * 5) If pledger sends email to two different people who may not have each other's e-mail address, pledger will put them on BCC.
 * 6) If pledger accidentally gets someone's email address (e.g. with a forwarded mail), then pledger will use it only if that doesn't compromise the person who passed the address on.

PINOT: Private information – no offence taken
Pledger promises to not be insulted by anything that is communicated privately to pledger only. (See User:SebastianHelm/PINOT)

AOR: Administrators open to recall
WP:AOR specifies: "These administrators are willing to stand for "re-confirmation" of adminship if a sufficient number of editors in good standing request it." In late 2007, some recalls were marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when, resulting in some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the pledger was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. To address this issue, Administrators open to recall/Admin criteria was created, where pledgers announce their criteria or process information before the need arises.

Unclear pledges
The following have been indicated as pledges, but there are currently no criteria to hold pledgers accountable:
 * WP:NPOV: This is a Wikipedia policy that applies to articles as a whole. It is unclear how it can apply to individual editors since by definition each editor has a point of view.
 * WP:VERIFY: This is a core policy, which every editor is already required to follow. It is unclear what adding that pledge adds over and beyond the policy.
 * WP:CSB: WikiProject Countering systemic bias. It is unclear how referring to a WikiProject constitutes a pledge, and what should happen when an editor believes that pledger does not follow this pledge.