Project:Content policy

In accordance with the project's goal, the following policy lays out what types of content should be included and how content should be presented on the project.

Language

For the purposes of upholding project policies all content written on this project, anywhere on this project, must be in English unless it is a quotation.

Neutrality

All content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing information included on the wiki fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias.

Achieving neutrality means carefully and critically analyzing relevant sources and then attempting to convey to the reader the information contained in them fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without editorial bias. This project aims to describe disputes, but not engage in them. The aim is to inform, not influence. Editors, while naturally having their own points of view, should strive in good faith to provide complete information and not to promote one particular point of view over another. As such, the neutral point of view does not mean the exclusion of certain points of view. It means including all points of view. Observe the following principles to achieve the level of neutrality that is appropriate.

• Avoid stating opinions as facts. Usually, articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects. However, these opinions should not be stated in this project's voice. Rather, they should be attributed in the text to particular sources, or where justified, described as widespread views, etc. For example, an article should not state that "genocide is an evil action" but may state that "genocide has been described by John So-and-so as the epitome of human evil."
• Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts. If different sources make conflicting assertions about a matter, treat these assertions as opinions rather than facts, and do not present them as direct statements.
• Avoid stating facts as opinions. Uncontested and uncontroversial factual assertions made by sources should normally be directly stated in the project's voice.
• Prefer nonjudgmental language. A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize. When editorial bias towards one particular point of view can be detected the article needs to be fixed. The only bias that should be evident is the bias attributed to the source.
• Indicate the relative prominence of opposing views. Ensure that the reporting of different views on a subject adequately reflects the relative levels of support for those views and that it does not give a false impression of parity, or give undue weight to a particular view. For example, to state that "According to Simon Wiesenthal, the Holocaust was a program of extermination of the Jewish people in Germany, but David Irving disputes this analysis" would be to give apparent parity between the supermajority view and a tiny minority view by assigning each to a single activist in the field.

Preserving community informational security

Access to information varies based on both the community's genre and on the position a person has in it. A competitive community may restrict access to tactics, future activities, or training to only those in the relevant teams. A community that hosts servers may restrict access to disciplinary documents because it has personally identifiable information, may make the community look poorly as it'll be taken out of context, or it is restricted to maintain trust in the community's discretion in handling sensitive matters.

No information regarding a community may be added anywhere on this project that is not available to someone with general membership in the relevant community. "General membership" is defined as access to information that does not require appointment to a named position or user group via any method. Access to information that does require appointment is considered to be outside the scope of "general membership". If such information is discovered or reported, administrators may remove it and perform revision deletion to remove it from page history.

Conversely, community leaders may not petition the Online Community Wiki to remove information that they do not wish to be displayed. If the information is in line with our content policies and relevant laws, unless there is a consensus amongst editors to remove it, it may remain. Community leaders are similarly not able to circumvent this policy by retroactively concealing information that was once available to the general member base; if it was ever available to the member base, it may remain unless it is abundantly clear it was done in error.

Verifiability

Prose may generally be written without providing citations to prove statements made. Editors are heavily encouraged to provide citations whenever they reasonably can.

The following situations, if they apply, do require the presence of a citation to a source that is reliable for the statement(s) it is supporting in order to maintain inclusion. Otherwise, editors may remove it, and it may not be restored until it is cited. If the information cannot be cited, it is inappropriate for inclusion on this project.

1. Content that describes actions or behavior that characterizes a specific person in a negative light.
2. Extraordinary claims regarding a community's accomplishments or that of it's participants.
3. Any claim made within an article that is challenged by an autoconfirmed editor.
   1. If an editor wishes to invoke this, it must be done on the talk page of the article with an explicit statement challenging the claim and the claim provided verbatim.
4. Any content which serves to show that the community meets the inclusion criteria.