Illogicopedia:No Total Crap
- For a description of warnings and ban durations/levels for various offenses, see here,
and for a short list of points summing it all up, see The Illogicopedia Commandments.
|This page documents what purports to be Illogicopedia policy, as applied by the powers that be.|
“It's like Illogicopedia:Amusing, only negated!”
We don't accept content that we technically define as "total crap". This means stuff that is completely boring and/or has absolutely no redeeming value. Our standards are pretty low. In fact, we purposefully make them so low that just about anyone can write stuff for our web site without worrying about it too much. But we do have standards. They're just very relaxed.
 No flaming
“Wiki wars suck.”
Illogicopedia does not tolerate flamewars or cyber-bullying within its site and community. Keep it civil. Should conflicts arise, work peacefully toward solving them - or take them elsewhere. Flaming or otherwise abusing others will result in warning or banning. If someone engages in such against you, take it up with the administration.
Abusive content written about individuals or groups is also restricted; you do not need to keep your articles politically correct - merely clean as defined below - but articles considered or suspected of being libel or otherwise made primarily to taunt will be removed on sight. (should you find the deletion of an article to have been unfair, feel free to take it up with an admin - provided you can make a good case for so doing, the article can be restored)
 No explicit content
This section describes where the line for "clean" content is drawn.
- Very graphic or explicit content involving excessive swearing or of a sexual or scatological nature - or describing in detail for example mutilation - is forbidden.
- Suggestive references and swearing in moderation is acceptable (though recommended not to be used where it doesn't add to the value of the content - mindless usage is not very appreciated). Filling an article with it is not acceptable, unless censored.
In essence, quantity as well as "quality" (here referring to level of potential "inappropriateness") matters - pushing one or the other too far can result in the content being rejected, and potentially a warning - or ban if such has already been given. If in doubt, feel free to ask if something would be allowed.
This essentially means that you are free to use artistic license and swear once in a while, but not constantly. Example:
- Acceptable content: "The word hell is unacceptable in most contexts", "motherfucking snakes on a motherfucking plane".
- Unnacceptable content (highlight to show): "This is the best god-damn fucking article that has ever fucking been written. And if you rat-fuck bastards don't agree, then you can eat shit and go to hell. And while I'm at this shit, I might as well say FUCK YOU!"
Content (particularly images) depicting extreme graphic violence is not allowed. Cartoonish violence and slapstick can of course be depicted, but not disturbing images of real or apparently real gore / carnage. Moderate morbid humor and nonsense involving random violence in text form is allowed, graphic depictions of violence that is real or apparently real is not. The staff and community have to use good judgement to stay away from extremes and plot a middle course.
 No spam
We normally don't accept articles that are just single images, and never accept articles that contain only YouTube videos. This is because Illogicopedia content must be Illogicopedia content - we're not a link farm for your retarded YouTube channel. And certainly not for your business so keep your commercial spam links the hell off our web site.
It is, of course, perfectly legitimate to write an article making fun of spam, or in a spam-like fashion about something else, or a spamlike article about spam, and even to post an article written by an actual can of spam. But not to spam an article, or to post spam on the site. Shamelessly plugging an Illogicopedia article or something else that is actually cool or relevant to the Illogicopedian community is OK as long as it doesn't go overboard.
 No gibberish
Illogicopedia doesn't accept pure gibberish unless for literary/artistic effect. An example of pure gibberish that we don't want would be an article entitled "asdfasdf" containing nothing but the text "sio;d8904ohia3f890p0a4fjkk ckizv iodfklvj h".
This kind of thing can be summed up as random mashing of the keyboard and is generally unwanted, unless it has some redeeming value to it. A good example of where gibberish would be allowed is the article "This is what came out" which does at least contain a clever title and a partially complete sentence.
Other exceptions can be made in the case of such articles as A hamster on a keyboard which utilises text actually written by a hamster and has some originality and interest, partially in the article about the article. Gibberish created to support non-gibberish in a creative way would definitely be welcome.
Pure gibberish is also distinct from abstract/surreal sentence structure or non sequiturs, such as:
- Colourless green ideas sleep furiously
- Fnurdles are small blue creatures. Oh look, a pink pony!
Both the above are acceptable in that they require at least some thought. Simply running your fingers across/bashing your palm against the keyboard, on the other hand, requires little thought or effort and will be deleted on sight. If you really want people to see you do that, you can edit Template:MainPageVandalism.
 We frown on vanity
Vanity is content written about a person/group/organization, the author typically being or being affiliated with the subject. Some wikis, in order to cut down on spam and useless content, make use of a vanity policy that defines when something is "vanity" - and forbidden - and when it isn't. This is one of the few restrictions of content on Illogicopedia, along with the "keep it clean" and "keep it civil" rule, though it is kept relatively lenient. Here follows the basic rules regarding vanity:
- Notability in itself is no requirement; content about obscure subjects is accepted as long as it is in accordance to the rest of the rules.
- References to users of the wiki should not be made within articles unless they add to the value of the content, nor excessively; do not insert them in a spammish fashion.
- Users explicitly mentioned within articles may decide to have the references removed if they so wish.
- Articles primarily concerning specific users can be made freely within the userspaces as long as they are in accordance to the rest of the rules. Within the rest of the wiki, they are required to be of relatively high standard; when deemed needless, they might be put in the trash, deleted, or moved to the appropriate userspace.
An example of vanity:
This is not a prohibition against all in-jokes, but against in-jokes that users of the web site are not in on, and are not likely to become in on. No one cares about your math teacher's hair, for example, unless you write about it in a way that applies to weird teachers that everybody has had. An in-joke about the web site itself, in which the Illogicopedian community is "in" is also acceptable. The administrators also have the privilege of a few admins-only in-jokes from time to time, as long as it doesn't get out of hand.
 We frown on unwise replacement of pages
It is recommended that you do not replace an established page without good reason; if you do, and your action is reverted, it is best to either fork the article, creating the new one under a different name, or discussing the matter first, as continuing to remove the content could count as vandalism. This goes particularly for featured pages, as the old article contains that which was chosen for feature; feel free to add to and revise such pages all you want, but try to preserve them in the sense that their feature status remains valid for the original reasons.
If an article with content in accordance to the rules of the wiki is replaced, you are free to fork it, moving either the old or the new content to a new page. If the original title would remain the most suitable one, add something distinguish within parentheses. For an example, see IllogiDictionary:Sanity.ish