![[Home]](/image.pl?url=https%3a%2f%2fweb.archive.org%2fweb%2f20010416035716im_%2fhttp%3a%2f%2fwww.wikipedia.com%2fwiki.jpg&f=jpg&w=240)
RulesToConsiderSee alsoNaming conventions andRefactoringPolicy.
Rules are established according to the vigor of their enforcement.
Ignore all rules: If rules make you nervous and depressed, and not desirous of participating in the wiki, then ignore them entirely and go about your business.
Supporters of this rule include (at least)Larry Sanger,WojPob,Jimbo Wales,AyeSpy,OprgaG, andInvictus
I now pleasantly ponder the paradox encountered by those who seek to rigorously follow this rule. --Jimbo Wales
Well, what about the related paradox that there is no Rule to decide that something is a Rule (and so should be ignored) --OprgaG
Always leave something undone: Whenever you write a page, never finish it. Always leave something obvious to do: an uncompleted sentence, a question in the text (with a not-too-obscure answer someone can supply), wikied links that are of interest, requests for help from specific other Wikipedians, the beginning of a provokative argument that someone simplymust fill in, etc. The purpose of this rule is to encourageothers to keep working on the wiki.
Supporters of this rule include (at least)Larry SangerTimShellInvictus
Explain jargon: It would be great if you would hyperlink all jargon (area-specific terminology that someone who might happen not to have had a college course in your subject might not understand) and explain it, and then explain all the jargon you use to explainthat, until you've reached terms that ordinary educated people can understand.
Supporters of this rule include (at least)Larry Sanger,JerryMuelver,TimShell, andAyeSpy (fervently)
See ExplainJargonDebate?
Avoid bias: Since this is an encyclopedia, after a fashion, it would be best if you represented your controversial views either (1) not at all, (2) on *Debate, *Talk, or *Discussion pages linked from the bottom of the page that you're tempted to grace, or (3) represented in a fact-stating fashion, i.e., which attributes a particular opinion to a particular person or group, rather than asserting the opinion as fact. (3) is strongly preferred. See theNeutralPointOfView page for elaboration.
Supporters of this rule include (at least)Larry Sanger,JerryMuelver, andAyeSpy
See AvoidBiasDebate?
Integrate changes: When you make a change to some text, rather than appending the new text you'd like to see included at the bottom of the page, if you feel so motivated, then please place and edit your comments so that they flows seamlessly with the present text. Wikipedia articles in the end shouldn't be a series of disjoint comments about a subject, but unified, seamless, and ever-expanding expositions of the subject. (Rule introduced 29-03-2001)
Supporters of this rule include (at least)Larry Sanger
Delete patent nonsense: I propose that we deletePatentNonsense when we run across it, and then put it on theBadJokesAndOtherDeletedNonsense page. The problem with this is that people disagree about what isPatentNonsense. So be careful, anyway. It's possible that this makes me a["wiki reductionist."]
Supporters of this rule include (at least)Larry Sanger,TimShell andJerryMuelver
Give the author a chance: I propose that we add comments at the bottom of a page instead of within the text, when we disagree with an author but to delete or re-write portions of his material would substnatially alter its meaning. Then the author may make changes in his own style, and/or discussion of the material can be moved to aTalk Page. When one encounters obvious vandalism of another's work, he should feel free to DeletePatentNonsense.
Supporters of this rule include (at least)AyeSpyTimShell andJerryMuelver
/Establish Context Supporters of this rule include (at least)Jimbo Wales andLarry SangerTimShell
