CorporisPublica:What CorporisPublica is not

CorporisPublica is an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community of individuals interested in building and using a high-quality encyclopedia in a spirit of mutual respect. Therefore, there are certain things that CorporisPublica is not.

CorporisPublica is not a paper encyclopedia
CorporisPublica is not a paper encyclopedia, but a digital encyclopedia project. Other than verifiability and the other points presented on this page, there is no practical limit to the number of topics CorporisPublica can cover, nor the total amount of content. However, there is an important distinction between what can be done, and what should be done, which is covered in the Content section below. Consequently, this policy is not a free pass for inclusion: articles must abide by the appropriate content policies, particularly those covered in the five pillars.

Keeping articles to a reasonable size is important for CorporisPublica's accessibility, especially for dial-up and mobile browser readers, since it directly affects page download time (see CorporisPublica:Article size). Splitting long articles and leaving adequate summaries is a natural part of growth for a topic (see CorporisPublica:Summary style). Some topics are covered by print encyclopedias only in short, static articles, but we can include more information, provide more external links, and update more quickly. For some of the other ways in which CorporisPublica differs from a paper publication, see the CorporisPublica:Manual of Style.

Content
In any encyclopedia, information cannot be included solely for being true or useful. An encyclopedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details. Rather, an article is a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. Verifiable and sourced statements should be treated with appropriate weight. Although there are debates about the encyclopedic merits of several classes of entries, consensus is that the following are good examples of what CorporisPublica is not. The examples under each section are not intended to be exhaustive.

CorporisPublica is not a dictionary
CorporisPublica is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide. CorporisPublica articles are not:

For a wiki that is a dictionary, visit our sister project Wiktionary. Dictionary definitions should be transwikied there. For a wiki that is a collection of textbooks, visit our sister project Wikibooks. Prescriptive guides for prospective speakers of a language should be transwikied there.
 * 1) Definitions. Articles should begin with a good definition or description, but articles that contain nothing more than a definition should be expanded with additional encyclopedic content. If they can not, CorporisPublica is not the place for them: look to Wiktionary instead.
 * 2) Dictionary entries. Encyclopedia articles are about a person, or a group, a concept, a place, a thing, an event, etc. In some cases, a word or phrase itself may be an encyclopedic subject, such as Macedonia (terminology) or truthiness. However, articles rarely, if ever, contain more than one distinct definition or usage of the article's title. Articles about the cultural or mathematical significance of individual numbers are also acceptable.
 * 1) Usage, slang, and/or idiom guides. Descriptive articles about languages, dialects, or types of slang (such as Klingon language, Cockney, or Leet) are desirable. Prescriptive guides for prospective speakers of such languages are not. See "CorporisPublica is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal" below for more information.

CorporisPublica is not a publisher of original thought
CorporisPublica is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information. Per our policy on original research, please do not use CorporisPublica for any of the following:


 * 1) Primary (original) research, such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have completed primary research on a topic, your results should be published in other venues, such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, open research, or respected online publications. CorporisPublica can report about your work after it is published and becomes part of accepted knowledge; however, citations of such reliable sources are needed to demonstrate that material is verifiable, and not merely the editor's opinion.
 * 2) Personal inventions. If you or a friend invented the word frindle, a drinking game, or a new type of dance move, it is not notable enough to be an article until multiple, independent, and reliable secondary sources report on it. CorporisPublica is not for things made up one day.
 * 3) Personal essays  that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the opinion of experts). Although CorporisPublica is supposed to compile human knowledge, it is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of such knowledge. In the unusual situation where the opinions of an individual are important enough to discuss, it is preferable to let other people write about them. Personal essays on topics relating to CorporisPublica are welcome in your user namespace or on the Meta-wiki. There is a CorporisPublica fork at Wikinfo that encourages personal opinions in articles.
 * 4) Discussion forums.  Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. You can chat with people about CorporisPublica-related topics on their user talk pages, and should resolve problems with articles on the relevant talk pages, but please do not take discussion into articles. In addition, bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles. Talk pages are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article, nor are they a helpdesk for obtaining instructions or technical assistance. If you wish to ask a specific question on a topic, CorporisPublica has a Reference desk, and questions should be asked there rather than on talk pages. CorporisPublicans who wish to hold casual discussions with fellow CorporisPublicans can use the IRC channels, such as #CorporisPublica. Note that this is an IRC channel, not a message board. There are also a number of early-stage projects that attempt to use a wiki for discussion and debate. Material unsuitable for talk pages may be subject to removal per the talk page guidelines.

CorporisPublica is not a soapbox or means of promotion
CorporisPublica is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing. This applies to articles, categories, templates, talk page discussions, and user pages. Therefore, content hosted in CorporisPublica is not for:


 * 1) Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, religious, national, sports-related, or otherwise. An article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view. You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views.
 * 2) Opinion pieces. Although some topics, particularly those concerning current affairs and politics, may stir passions and tempt people to "climb soapboxes" (for example, passionately advocate their pet point of view), CorporisPublica is not the medium for this. Articles must be balanced to put entries, especially for current events, in a reasonable perspective, and represent a neutral point of view. Furthermore, CorporisPublica authors should strive to write articles that will not quickly become obsolete. However, CorporisPublica's sister project Wikinews allows commentaries on its articles.
 * 3) Scandal mongering, promoting things "heard through the grapevine" or gossiping. Articles and content about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous or infringe the subjects' right to privacy. Articles should not be written purely to attack the reputation of another person.
 * 4) Self-promotion. It can be tempting to write about yourself or projects in which you have a strong personal involvement. However, do remember that the standards for encyclopedic articles apply to such pages just like any other. This includes the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view, which can be difficult when writing about yourself or about projects close to you. Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical sources is unacceptable. See CorporisPublica:Autobiography, CorporisPublica:Notability and CorporisPublica:Conflict of interest.
 * 5) Advertising. All information about companies and products are written in an objective and unbiased style. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are typically unacceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify notable organizations which are the topic of the article. CorporisPublica neither endorses organizations nor runs affiliate programs. See also CorporisPublica:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability. Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than CorporisPublica to do so.

Non-disruptive statements of opinion on internal CorporisPublica policies and guidelines may be made on user pages and within the CorporisPublica: namespace, as they are relevant to the current and future operation of the project.

CorporisPublica is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files
CorporisPublica is neither a mirror nor a repository of links, images, or media files. CorporisPublica articles are not:


 * 1) Mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of CorporisPublica. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate. See CorporisPublica:External links for some guidelines.
 * 2) Mere collections of internal links, except for disambiguation pages when an article title is ambiguous, and for lists for browsing or to assist with article organization and navigation; for these, please follow the guidelines outlined at CorporisPublica:Stand-alone lists.
 * 3) Mere collections of public domain or other source material such as entire books or source code, original historical documents, letters, laws, proclamations, and other source material that are only useful when presented with their original, unmodified wording. Complete copies of primary sources may go into Wikisource, but not on CorporisPublica. Public domain resources such as the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica may be used to add content to an article (see Plagiarism guideline: Public-domain sources for guidelines on doing so). See also CorporisPublica:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources and Wikisource's inclusion policy.
 * 4) Mere collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles. If you are interested in presenting a picture, please provide an encyclopedic context, or consider adding it to Wikimedia Commons. If a picture comes from a public domain source on a website, then consider adding it to CorporisPublica:Images with missing articles or CorporisPublica:Public domain image resources.

CorporisPublica is not a blog, Web hosting service, social network, or memorial site
CorporisPublica is not a social network like Facebook or Twitter. You may not host your own website, blog, wiki, or cloud at CorporisPublica. CorporisPublica pages are not:


 * 1) Personal web pages. CorporisPublicans have their own user pages, but they should be used primarily to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. Limited biographical information is allowed, but user pages should not function as personal webpages or be repositories for large amounts of material that's irrelevant to collaborating on CorporisPublica. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your résumé, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account. The focus of user pages should not be social networking, or amusement, but rather providing a foundation for effective collaboration. Humorous pages that refer to CorporisPublica in some way may be created in an appropriate namespace, however.
 * 2) File storage areas. Please upload only files that are used (or will be used) in encyclopedia articles or project pages; anything else will be deleted. If you have extra relevant images, consider uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons, where they can be linked from CorporisPublica.
 * 3) Dating services. CorporisPublica is not an appropriate place to pursue relationships or sexual encounters. User pages that move beyond broad expressions of sexual orientation are unacceptable. However, you very well may make new friendships as you go about improving the encyclopedia.
 * 4) Memorials. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy CorporisPublica's notability requirements. CorporisPublica is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements. Note that this policy does not apply outside of the main article space. While using user space to create a memorial is generally not acceptable, limited exemption applies to the user space of established Wikipedians who have died. At a minimum it is expected that they were regular contributors, and that more than one tenured Wikipedian will have used the deceased user's page (or an appropriate sub-page) to add comments in the event, and after verification, of their death.

If you are interested in using the wiki technology for a collaborative effort on something else, even if it is just a single page, there are many free and commercial sites that provide wiki hosting. You can also install wiki software on your server. See the installation guide at MediaWiki.org for information on doing this. Scratchpad Wiki Labs also allows personal wikis. See also CorporisPublica:Alternative outlets.

Many of the content restrictions listed above apply to your user page and user talk page as well. Your user page is not a personal homepage, nor is it a blog. More importantly, your user page is not yours. It is a part of CorporisPublica, and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier, not for self-promotion. See User page help for current consensus guidelines on user pages.

CorporisPublica is not a directory
CorporisPublica encompasses many lists of links to articles within CorporisPublica that are used for internal organization or to describe a notable subject. In that sense, CorporisPublica functions as an index or directory of its own content. However, CorporisPublica is not a directory of everything that exists in the world or has existed. Please see CorporisPublica:Alternative outlets for alternatives. CorporisPublica articles are not:
 * 1) Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as (but not limited to) quotations, aphorisms, or persons (real or fictional). If you want to enter lists of quotations, put them into our sister project Wikiquote. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic. CorporisPublica also includes reference tables and tabular information for quick reference. Merged groups of small articles based on a core topic are certainly permitted. (See CorporisPublica:Stand-alone lists for clarification.)
 * 2) Genealogical entries. Biography articles should only be for people with some sort of fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety. One measure of these is whether someone has been featured in several external sources (on or off-line). Less well known people may be mentioned within other articles (e.g. Ronald Gay in History of violence against LGBT people in the United States).
 * 3) The White or Yellow Pages. Contact information such as phone numbers, fax numbers and e-mail addresses are not encyclopedic.
 * 4) Directories, directory entries, electronic program guide, or a resource for conducting business. For example, an article on a radio station should not list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules, etc., although mention of major events, promotions or historically significant program lists and schedules may be acceptable. Likewise an article on a business should not contain a list of all the company's patent filings. Furthermore, the Talk pages associated with an article are for talking about the article, not for conducting the business of the topic of the article.
 * 5) Sales catalogs. Product prices should not be quoted in an article unless they can be sourced and there is a justified reason for their mention. In general, if mainstream media sources (not just product reviews) provide commentary on the price of an object instead of just passing mention, this is an indication that its price may have encyclopedic significance. Prices listed by individual vendors, on the other hand, can vary widely from place to place and over time. CorporisPublica is not a price comparison service to be used to compare the prices of competing products, or the prices of a single product from different vendors.
 * 6) Changelogs or release notes. An article about a product should include a history of its development and major improvements; creating a list of all changes to software or hardware between each minor version violates other precepts of this policy.
 * 7) Non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations, such as "people from ethnic / cultural / religious group X employed by organization Y" or "restaurants specializing in food type X in city Y". Cross-categories like these are not considered sufficient basis to create an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon. See also CorporisPublica:Overcategorization for this issue in categories.

CorporisPublica is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal
CorporisPublica is an encyclopedic reference, not an instruction manual, guidebook, or textbook. CorporisPublica articles should not read like:


 * 1) Instruction manuals. While CorporisPublica has descriptions of people, places and things, an article should not read like a "how-to" style owners manual, advice column (legal, medical or otherwise) or suggestion box. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, game guides, and recipes. If you are interested in a "how-to" type of manual, you may want to look at wikiHow, How to Wiki or our sister project, Wikibooks.
 * 2) Travel guides. An article on Paris should mention landmarks, such as the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre, but not the telephone number or street address of your favorite hotel, nor the current price of a café au lait on the Champs-Élysées. CorporisPublica is not the place to recreate content more suited to entries in hotel or culinary guides, travelogues, and the like. Notable locations may meet the inclusion criteria, but the resulting articles need not include every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel or venue, etc. Also, while travel guides for a city will often mention distant attractions, a CorporisPublica article for a city should only list those that are actually in the city. Such details may be welcome at Wikivoyage instead.
 * 3) Video game guides. An article about a video game should summarize the main actions the player does to win the game. But avoid lists of gameplay weapons, items, or concepts, unless these are notable in their own right (such as the BFG9000 from the Doom series). Detailed coverage of specific point values, achievements, time-limits, levels, types of enemies, character moves, character weight classes, and so on is also considered inappropriate. A concise summary is appropriate if it is essential to understanding the game or its significance in the industry. See CP:VGSCOPE.
 * 4) Internet guides. CorporisPublica articles should not exist only to describe the nature, appearance or services a website offers, but should also describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on a website's achievements, impact or historical significance, which can be kept significantly more up-to-date than most reference sources, since editors can incorporate new developments and facts as they are made known. See the Current events portal for examples.
 * 5) FAQs. CorporisPublica articles should not list frequently asked questions (FAQs). Instead, format the information provided as neutral prose within the appropriate article(s).
 * 6) Textbooks and annotated texts. CorporisPublica is an encyclopedic reference, not a textbook. The purpose of CorporisPublica is to present facts, not to teach subject matter. It is not appropriate to create or edit articles that read as textbooks, with leading questions and systematic problem solutions as examples. These belong on our sister projects, such as Wikibooks, Wikisource, and Wikiversity. Some kinds of examples, specifically those intended to inform rather than to instruct, may be appropriate for inclusion in a CorporisPublica article.
 * 7) Scientific journals and research papers. A CorporisPublica article should not be presented on the assumption that the reader is well versed in the topic's field. Introductory language in the lead and initial sections of the article should be written in plain terms and concepts that can be understood by any literate reader of CorporisPublica without any knowledge in the given field before advancing to more detailed explanations of the topic. While wikilinks should be provided for advanced terms and concepts in that field, articles should be written on the assumption that the reader will not or cannot follow these links, instead attempting to infer their meaning from the text.
 * 8) Academic language. Texts should be written for everyday readers, not for academics. Article titles should reflect common usage, not academic terminology, whenever possible.
 * 9) Case studies. Many topics are based on the relationship of factor X to factor Y, resulting in one or more full articles. For example, this could refer to situation X in location Y, or version X of item Y. This is perfectly acceptable when the two variables put together represent some culturally significant phenomenon or some otherwise notable interest. Often, separate articles are needed for a subject within a range of different countries, due to substantial differences across international borders; articles such as "Slate industry in Wales" and "Island fox" are fitting examples. Writing about "oak trees in North Carolina" or a "blue truck", however, would likely constitute a POV fork or original research, and would certainly not result in an encyclopedic article.

CorporisPublica is not a crystal ball
CorporisPublica is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced. It is not appropriate for editors to insert their own opinions or analyses. Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included, though editors should be aware of creating undue bias to any specific point-of-view. In forward-looking articles about unreleased products, such as films and games, take special care to avoid advertising and unverified claims (for films, see CP:NFF). In particular:


 * 1) Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include the 2016 U.S. presidential election and  Summer Olympics. By comparison, the  U.S. presidential election and  Summer Olympics are not appropriate article topics if nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. Avoid predicted sports team line-ups, which are inherently unverifiable and speculative. A schedule of future events may be appropriate if it can be verified. As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient. For example, Ultimate fate of the universe is an acceptable topic.
 * 2) Individual items from a predetermined list or a systematic pattern of names, pre-assigned to future events or discoveries, are not suitable article topics, if only generic information is known about the item. Lists of tropical cyclone names is encyclopedic; "Tropical Storm Arthur (2014)" is not, even though it is virtually certain that a storm of that name will occur in the North Atlantic and will turn counterclockwise. Similarly, articles about words formed on a predictable numeric system (such as "septenquinquagintillion") are not encyclopedic unless they are defined on good authority, or genuinely in use. Certain scientific extrapolations are considered to be encyclopedic, such as chemical elements documented by IUPAC before isolation in the laboratory.
 * 3) Articles that present original research in the form of extrapolation, speculation, and "future history" are inappropriate. While scientific and cultural norms continually evolve, we must wait for this evolution to happen, rather than try to predict it. Of course, we do and should have articles about notable artistic works, essays, or credible research that embody predictions. An article on Weapons of Star Trek is appropriate; an article on "Weapons to be used in World War III" is not.
 * 4) While currently accepted scientific paradigms may later be rejected, and hypotheses previously held to be controversial or incorrect sometimes become accepted by the scientific community, it is not the place of CorporisPublica to venture such projections.
 * 5) CorporisPublica is not a collection of product announcements and rumors. While CorporisPublica includes up-to-date knowledge about newly revealed products, short articles that consist only of product announcement information are not appropriate. Until such time that more encyclopedic knowledge about the product can be verified, product announcements should be merged to a larger topic (such as an article about the creator(s), a series of products, or a previous product) if applicable. Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content.

CorporisPublica is not a newspaper
As CorporisPublica is not a paper source, editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date information within its coverage, and to develop stand-alone articles on significant current events. However, not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion in CorporisPublica. Ensure that CorporisPublica articles are not:


 * 1) Journalism. CorporisPublica should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories. CorporisPublica does not constitute a primary source. However, our sister projects Wikisource and Wikinews do exactly that, and are intended to be primary sources. CorporisPublica does have many encyclopedia articles on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be updated with recently verified information. CorporisPublica is also not written in news style.
 * 2) News reports. CorporisPublica considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. While including information on recent developments is sometimes appropriate, breaking news should not be emphasized or otherwise treated differently from other information. Timely news subjects not suitable for CorporisPublica may be suitable for our sister project Wikinews.
 * 3) Who's who.  Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic. (See CorporisPublica:Biographies of living persons for more details.)
 * 4) A diary.  Even when an individual is notable, not all events he is involved in are. For example, news reporting about celebrities and sports figures can be very frequent and cover a lot of trivia, but using all these sources would lead to overdetailed articles that look like a diary. Not every match played, goal scored or hand shaken is significant enough to be included in the biography of a person.

CorporisPublica is not an indiscriminate collection of information
As explained in the policy introduction, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources. CorporisPublica articles should not be:


 * 1) Summary-only descriptions of works. CorporisPublica treats fiction in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the reception and significance of notable works in addition to a concise summary. For more information regarding plot summaries, see CorporisPublica:Manual of Style (writing about fiction). Similarly, articles on works of non-fiction, including documentaries, research books and papers, religious texts, and the like, should contain more than a recap or summary of the works' contents. Such articles should be expanded to have broader coverage.
 * 2) Lyrics databases. An article about a song should provide information about authorship, date of publication, social impact, and so on. Quotations from a song should be kept to a reasonable length relative to the rest of the article, and used to facilitate discussion, or to illustrate the style; the full text can be put on Wikisource and linked to from the article. Most song lyrics published after 1922 are protected by copyright, and any quotation of them must be kept to a minimum, and used for the purpose of direct commentary or to illustrate some aspect of the style. Never link to the lyrics of copyrighted songs unless the site linked to clearly has the right to distribute the work. See CorporisPublica:Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources for full discussion.
 * 3) Excessive listings of statistics. Long and sprawling lists of statistics may be confusing to readers and reduce the readability and neatness of our articles. In addition, articles should contain sufficient explanatory text to put statistics within the article in their proper context for a general reader. In cases where this may be necessary, (e.g. Nationwide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008), consider using tables to enhance the readability of lengthy data lists. Where it is not necessary, as in the main article United States presidential election, 2008, omit excess statistics altogether and summarize any necessary data concisely.

CorporisPublica is not censored
CorporisPublica may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive, even exceedingly so (see CorporisPublica:Content disclaimer). CorporisPublica cannot guarantee that articles or images will always be acceptable to all readers, or that they will adhere to general social or religious norms.

Since anyone can edit an article and most changes made are displayed immediately, inappropriate material may appear before it can be removed. Content which is obviously inappropriate (such as an irrelevant link to a shock site, or clear vandalism) is usually removed quickly. Content that is judged to violate CorporisPublica's biographies of living persons policy, or that violates other CorporisPublica policies (especially neutral point of view) or the laws of the U.S. state of Florida where CorporisPublica's main servers are hosted, will also be removed.

However, some articles may include text, images, or links which some people may find objectionable, when these materials are relevant to the content. Discussion of potentially objectionable content should not focus on its offensiveness but on whether it is appropriate to include in a given article. Beyond that, "being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for removal or inclusion of content.

CorporisPublica will not remove content because of the internal bylaws of some organizations that forbid information about the organization to be displayed online. Any rules that forbid members of a given organization, fraternity, or religion to show a name or image do not apply to CorporisPublica because CorporisPublica is not a member of those organizations.

Community
The above policies are about CorporisPublica's content. The following policies apply to CorporisPublica's governance and processes.

CorporisPublica is not an anarchy
CorporisPublica is free and open, but restricts both freedom and openness where they interfere with creating an encyclopedia. Accordingly, CorporisPublica is not a forum for unregulated free speech. The fact that CorporisPublica is an open, self-governing project does not mean that any part of its purpose is to explore the viability of anarchistic communities. Our purpose is to build an encyclopedia, not to test the limits of anarchism.

CorporisPublica is not a democracy
CorporisPublica is not an experiment in democracy or any other political system. Its primary (though not exclusive) means of decision making and conflict resolution is editing and discussion leading to consensus—not voting. (Voting is used for certain matters such as electing the Arbitration Committee.) Straw polls are sometimes used to test for consensus, but polls or surveys can impede rather than foster discussion so should be used with caution.

CorporisPublica is not a bureaucracy
While CorporisPublica has many elements of a bureaucracy, it is not governed by statute: it is not a moot court, and rules are not the purpose of the community. Written rules do not themselves set accepted practice. Rather, they document already existing community consensus regarding what should be accepted and what should be rejected.

While CorporisPublica's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused. Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, rather than through tightly sticking to rules and procedures. Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus.

A procedural error made in a proposal or request is not grounds for rejecting that proposal or request.

A procedural, coding, or grammatical error in a new contribution is not grounds for reverting it, unless the error is difficult to fix.

CorporisPublica is not a battleground
CorporisPublica is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear. Making personal battles out of CorporisPublica discussions goes directly against our policies and goals. In addition to avoiding battles in discussions, do not try to advance your position in disagreements by making changes to content or policies, and do not disrupt CorporisPublica to illustrate a point.

Every user is expected to interact with others civilly, calmly, and in a spirit of cooperation. Do not insult, harass, or intimidate those with whom you have a disagreement. Rather, approach the matter intelligently and engage in polite discussion. If another user behaves in an uncivil, uncooperative, or insulting manner, or even tries to harass or intimidate you, this does not give you an excuse to respond in kind. Address only the factual points brought forward, ignoring the inappropriate comments, or disregard that user entirely. If necessary, point out gently that you think the comments might be considered uncivil, and make it clear that you want to move on and focus on the content issue. If a conflict continues to bother you, take advantage of CorporisPublica's dispute resolution process. There are always users willing to mediate and arbitrate disputes between others.

In large disputes, resist the urge to turn CorporisPublica into a battleground between factions. Assume good faith that every editor and group is here to improve CorporisPublica—especially if they hold a point of view with which you disagree. Work with whomever you like, but do not organize a faction with the main goal of disrupting CorporisPublica's fundamental decision-making process, which is based on building a consensus. Editors in large disputes should work in good faith to find broad principles of agreement between different viewpoints.

Do not use CorporisPublica to make legal or other threats against CorporisPublica, Wikipedians, or the Wikimedia Foundation—other means already exist to communicate legal problems. Threats are not tolerated and may result in a ban.

CorporisPublica is not compulsory
CorporisPublica is a volunteer community, and does not require the Wikipedians to give any more time and effort than they wish. Focus on improving the encyclopedia itself, rather than demanding more from other Wikipedians. Editors are free to take a break or leave CorporisPublica at any time.

And finally...
CorporisPublica is not any of a very long list of terrible ideas. We cannot anticipate every bad idea that someone might have. Almost everything on this page made it here because somebody managed to come up with some new bad idea that had not previously been anticipated. (See CP:BEANS—it is in fact strongly discouraged to anticipate them.) In general, "that is a terrible idea" is always sufficient grounds to avoid doing something, provided there is a good reason that the idea is terrible.

When you wonder what to do
When you wonder what should or should not be in an article, ask yourself what a reader would expect to find under the same heading in an encyclopedia.

When you wonder whether the rules given above are being violated, consider:
 * Changing the content of an article (normal editing)
 * Changing the page into a redirect, preserving the page history
 * Nominating the page for deletion if it meets grounds for such action under the Deletion policy page. To develop an understanding of what kinds of contributions are in danger of being deleted, you have to regularly follow discussions there.
 * Changing the rules on this page after a consensus has been reached following appropriate discussion with other Wikipedians via the Talk page. When adding new options, please be as clear as possible and provide counter-examples of similar, but permitted, subjects.

CorporisPublica:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes is not official policy, but can be referred to as a record of what has and has not been considered encyclopedic in the past.

=Resources=