ICANNWiki:Content Guide: Difference between revisions

This is the canonical '''Content Guide for ICANNWiki''', containing the rules and conventions that are to be used in the project.

Detailed explanations follow after the table of contents.

 

* The wiki is in the English lanugage, all variants are accepted, as long as they are written in formal style (academic style not required).

In the case of companies, NGOs, and programs, the writing of materials relating to their work must be neutral, without marketing products or services. It is valid and welcome to state what an entity does and how that is related to Internet Governance or how that entity participates in ICANN. Entities are allowed to list their services, but that should not be done as a sales pitch. Occurrences of blatant marketing posting will be moderated.

| '''Summary''': Low bar. The person, entity or concept needs to have a clear proven connection with ICANN or Interent governance.

The criteria for notability of an article are that of being relevant to Internet Governance or ICANN in general, without the need for further qualification as long as that connection is firmly established. The bar is intentionally set lower than that of Wikipedia in order to accommodate concepts and community members that would not otherwise be fit to be included there. Be aware that the other criteria outlined above still hold, and blatant self-advertising will be edited out.

It is undesirable to include long lists of names on ICANNWiki that do not have a designated maintainer and are not directly connected to a relevant project, especially when the list is likely to change. Essential lists, such as those of members of the [[ICANN Board]], the [[GNSO Council]], and participants of [[Working Groups]], are allowed and encouraged due to the necessity of the information and the implicit expectation of their maintenance. Conversely, a list of recipients of a specific award for a particular year is undesirable unless the editor intends to compile a historical list of all recipients of the prize, which would make the list into more of an effort for content curation, rather than vanity editing.