Starfield Wiki:Code of Conduct

The Outer Worlds wiki is a community driven project that anyone is free to contribute to, with a user account or anonymously and aims to provide a complete reference for the game itself.

All users are volunteers
No matter the rights held by a user, Moderators, Administrators and Bureaucrats are all volunteers with their own lives. Please keep this in mind when making requests and discussing topics. If you don't get a response from a user or they don't something straight away may mean that they do not have the time in the present to do so. Feel free to ask another user or staff member if someone has more availability to help or be patient.

Be civil in your discussions
We all get frustrated on occasion and discussions can be personally emotive, a curse word or a bad reaction on occasion may be slung about during these times. Try to remain civil and discuss issues with other users and try to resolve them.

Abuse or aggression towards individuals is unacceptable and may result in actions being taken against the offender, based on the severity. Administrators have full discretion on how to act on each case and must give a justification of their actions at the time.

Anons are important too
Because a user does not have an account with Fandom (or chooses not to use it) does not make their opinion or work any less important than that of any other user. Anonymous users should be treated the same as any other member of the community.

Community guidelines

 * 1) The spirit, not the word of the rule should be followed.
 * 2) All users are equal in decision making, however bureaucrats have executive power.
 * 3) All decisions are based on consensus.
 * 4) All decisions are open to challenge.

Spirit of the rule
The spirit of the rule is the why the rule was put in place. It isn't there to be taken to the word.

All users are equal
Regardless of user rights, all opinions are a matter are to be considered equally. Bureaucrats do have the ability to overrule the community, where they can demonstrate reasonable concern that allowing a decision to pass will be counter productive or cause harm to the wiki.

Consensus
In short, consensus isn't about everyone saying I (dis)agree to this idea/appointment/decision; it is in fact about understanding why people feel that way.

When related to user (de)appointment, consensus is about ability to carry out the role. Have they demonstrated concerning behaviour, or done something that shows promise or ability? "I do/don't like him" or what x said style views won't be counted as the former is not based on ability and the latter isn't user opinion.

Challenging decisions
Sometimes the right decision isn't made in the heat of the moment or something that was decided by a user doesn't work and change is required. Any decision (including those made by Bureaucrats) is open to challenge and debate can occur. As with any decision, bureaucratic veto can be applied where concern can be reasonably demonstrated.