This blog adheres to the Wikipedia Review Code of Conduct, which means you can write anything you like, as long as it doesn’t adhere to the Jimbo Wales Code of Conduct.

Now, if you’ve read the Jimbo version (actually penned by Tim O’Reilly, of O’Reilly Radar fame), you know that version begins with a section on “unacceptable content” that defines same like so:

…anything included or linked to that:
- is being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others
- is libelous, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person,
- infringes upon a copyright or trademark
- violates an obligation of confidentiality
- violates the privacy of others

The problem, of course, is that the terms used here are largely undefined, or worse, defined by one or two specific people. It may surprise some readers to learn that most members of Wikipedia Review essentially agree with all of these principles. What we usually disagree with is the idea that these principles should be applied to anonymously-created screen names. However, even there we don’t always agree, but no matter - in roughly 97 percent of cases, there’s simply no need to violate these principles, even for people “hiding” behind such screen names.

This website has been accused of many terrible things, almost all of them without any real justification, or with justification based on one or two incidents whose seriousness is practically negligible compared with some of the things that happen on many other internet message boards. To our knowledge, not one person has ever lost their job, been arrested or divorced, or attempted suicide because of Wikipedia Review. Arguably, one or two people may have been inconvenienced for short periods of time, but so far we haven’t had to set up a “Ticketing System” to deal with complaints, which have been few and far between.

Why is that? Could it just possibly be because Wikipedia Review isn’t anywhere near as horrible as some people say it is? And could it be that those people are simply upset because, well, they can’t “ban” us from anything?

Luckily, this is Wikipedia Review. That means you, yes you, get to decide.

Isn’t that refreshing?