Editing Charter

1.1.All statements must be attributable to a reliable, published source.

1.2.In-universe articles must be based on sources officially licensed by Lucasfilm.

1.3.For out-of-universe articles and behind-the-scenes material, reliable sources are defined as credible published materials with a verified publication process.

1.4.Authors of sources should generally be regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject matter at hand.

2.1.Statements from authors published on blogs or personal websites may be included as reliable sources, provided they pertain to the author's official work or insight into the subject.

3.1.No original research shall be permitted.

3.2.All content must be verifiable and directly supported by reliable sources as defined above.

4.1.This policy shall be enforced by the administrative staff of starwars.archivum.wiki.

4.2.Any amendments to this policy must be proposed and approved by the administrative body following standard procedural protocols.

1.1.Editing deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free Star Wars encyclopedia, is strictly forbidden.

2.1.Vandalism includes, but is not limited to:

2.1.1.Inserting false or misleading information.

2.1.2.Deliberately altering content to disrupt the integrity of articles.

2.1.3.Removing content without valid reason or explanation.

2.1.4.Inserting inappropriate content, such as offensive language or images.

2.1.5.Engaging in disruptive editing patterns or harassing other contributors.

3.1.Users are encouraged to report suspected vandalism to the administrative staff.

3.2.Reports should include specific details, such as affected pages and the nature of the edits.

4.1.The administrative staff shall investigate all reported incidents of vandalism.

4.2.If vandalism is confirmed, appropriate measures shall be taken, including but not limited to:

4.2.1.Reverting the vandalized edits.

4.2.2.Issuing warnings to the offending user.

4.2.3.Temporarily or permanently blocking the offending user from editing.

5.1.Certain pages may be protected from editing to prevent repeated vandalism.

5.2.The level of protection shall be determined by the administrative staff based on the severity and frequency of past incidents.

1.1.Consensus shall be defined as the general agreement among contributors, reached through reasoned discussion and compromise.

1.2.The goal of consensus is to ensure that all significant viewpoints are considered and to create a collaborative and respectful decision-making process within the community.

2.1.Discussions aimed at achieving consensus shall take place on the relevant article's talk page or in designated forums.

2.2.Contributors are encouraged to present their arguments clearly, referencing reliable sources and addressing the concerns of others.

2.3.Efforts should be made to incorporate diverse perspectives, with an emphasis on finding common ground and reaching a mutually acceptable solution.

3.1.While unanimity is ideal, it is not required for consensus.

3.2.In cases where a full agreement cannot be reached, the decision shall be made based on the strength of arguments presented, the reliability of sources, and the extent to which the proposed solution aligns with the project's goals and policies.

4.1.If a consensus cannot be reached, the matter may be referred to the administrative staff for mediation.

4.2.The administrative staff shall review the discussion, consider the arguments, and make a determination in line with the project's policies and objectives.

4.3.In rare cases where mediation fails, a final decision may be made by a majority vote among the administrative staff, with the decision being binding.

5.1.All discussions and decisions made through the consensus process shall be documented and made publicly accessible for transparency.

5.2.Summaries of the discussions and final decisions should be recorded on the relevant talk pages or forums for future reference.

This Act shall be known as the “Media Order Act.”

The purpose of this Act is to establish an order for media types to determine the sequence in which they should be referenced if different versions of an event exist.

The following order shall be used to organize the presentation of media sources when multiple tellings of an event are available. Exceptions to this rule may be determined by editorial consensus in individual cases:

(1)This Act shall be implemented and enforced by editing staff appointed for such matters by the Prime Minister.

(2)The Prime Minister (or any minister delegated this power by the Prime Minister) may:

This Act shall take effect immediately upon assent by the Prime Minister.

1.1.Any descriptions intended to be in-universe are canon, whether they be item descriptions, lore/databank entries, or anything else that fits under the description.

1.2.Names of characters, creatures, weapons, or any other items, are considered canon. Appearances of these things are also canon.

1.3.Any battles or other events that take place in games are canon.

2.1.Gameplay mechanics such as bodies disappearing on death, or how much damage a certain weapon does, are not considered canon.

2.2.If it is unclear whether something is a gameplay mechanic or a fact, it will be settled on the article's talk pages as per the guidelines for consensus.

3.1.In the case where an event has multiple outcomes, a tool similar to retcon view will be used to show the various possible outcomes.

3.2.If a certain choice is confirmed canon, or one is considered non-canon, all choices will still be specified on the tool, but their canonicity will be stated.

4.1.Information stated in material outside the game but related, such as game manuals, will be considered canon. Game manuals have the same canonicity status as RPG Sourcebooks.