This is the main page for the rules and regulations of this wiki.
I. Article Policy (Revised March 25, 2020)
- Articles must be related to SpongeBob or the wiki: While it should be a given, there have been problems with this rule in the past. Pages for crossover characters are acceptable, but you must include some kind of indication of their relationship to SpongeBob, the fanon, or the wiki (user articles, etc).
- No Vandalism: No exceptions. Any intentional defacing or destruction of information or structure will not be tolerated.
- No Plagiarism: Please don't plagiarize other works. Having the same idea as someone else with noticable differences is okay, but copying an entire page and claiming it to be your own is not. See the content ownership policy for more details.
- Do not add incorrect, random, or pointless categories: It creates clutter around the wiki, which is something we do not want to have here. The user will receive a punishment based on the type of offense. (Example: If a user creates a random category by mistake, a friendly reminder will be given out. If a user has created multiple random ones, the user will most likely be given a block for a certain amount of days.) (Good Category Examples: Episodes, Livin' With The Squid, Spin-Offs.) (Bad Category Examples: GROJBAND SUCKS!, Pinkie Pie is Cute, So long suckers!) For a list on which categories are appropriate for whichever article, click here.
II. User Policy (Revised April 24, 2020)
- Don't discriminate: Don't discriminate against anyone on the basis of their race, sexuality, religion, gender, or any other such characteristics. Bigotry will not be tolerated here. Discriminatory themes are allowed to be published as content (ex. a fanfiction about Starfish segregation), as long as it doesn't endorse this behavior or isn't personally targeting users on this site.
- No sockpuppetry: Sockpuppetry is the act of creating alternate accounts with the intent to manipulate proposals or evade a block. Committing this act will result in a ban, and its' length shall be determined by the impact of the socks.
- Don't harass others: The SpongeBob Fanon Wiki will not tolerate harassment. While calling your old pal a "damn fool" or any sort of thing which could clearly be interpreted as a joke is okay, personally attacking others in a serious manner (ex. telling someone you hate to commit suicide) isn't. Content that endorses this behavior will be removed.
- Users may only have an approval template if: they have at least 2,500 edits OR have a role of content moderator or above. Approval templates by users who do not fit either requirement will be swiftly deleted and removed from all pages they appear on.
III. Proposal Policy (Revised July 26, 2020)
- Voting rights are granted to users who have made 10 edits to the wiki and have edited in the last three months. This is to prevent sockpuppetry. If you were a user blocked for longer than three months and have completed your sentence, the second requirement is waived. Voters who don't meet the above will not have their votes counted.
- Proposals, except proposals that seek to raise the passing threshold, must gain 51% support in order to be passed
- All users have the right to freedom of speech: All users have the right to speak their opinions. Unless specified in the policy, users have the right to make any proposal about anything they want, as long as it is not extreme enough to threaten the safety of the community. Violations of this right shall reviewed by SBFW administration to determine if the act may be reverted and what types of consequences are to follow.
- Proposals that seek to raise the passing threshold are required to meet their own proposed threshold
- Polls are not a valid deciding factor: Support, opposition, or neutrality gained through the usage of polls will not be factored into a proposal's final results. Polls can be easily manipulated/rigged and thus can not be trusted to accurately measure the community's opinion.
- Proposals must be open for at least five days: This is so all of the active members of the community have a chance to voice their opinions on the matter. Proposals closed before a week passes will be promptly re-opened and have their time extended.
- Proposals can't be open for more than three weeks: This is to prevent the unnecessary drawing out of voting periods.
- Shortening of voting lengths is prohibited: Only extensions may be made to a proposal's voting length. No shortening is allowed. This is to prevent users from deliberately deciding to close their proposals when the numbers are favorable to them.
- Users Cannot Add A Provision to a Proposal Three Days Before It's Closing: Exceptions include if another user requests the change to be added.
- Users cannot force or bribe someone to change their vote: If it was the user who proposed or not, forcing or bribing anyone to support or oppose a proposal is strictly prohibited. Asking users to simply vote on a proposal is acceptable, as long as it is done publicly and not to specific users in private. If any user asks for/bribes/forces a vote from another user on a demotion proposal or block proposal for them, they will be swiftly demoted, blocked, or subject to any other consequences according to the situation.
- All proposals to prohibit suggestive and mature content, user communication or relationships (friendships, enmities, romantic, sexual, etc.) or wiki politics will automatically be declared invalid: Exceptions may be allowed by SBFW administration.
- No admin, content mod, discussion mod, etc. may propose to make any attempts for users to vote them out of power invalid. (For example: if AwesomeUser126 became admin, no matter how necessary it may seem, nothing he proposes can remove the right to vote demote him by the people.)
- Proposals that have a variety of different options must utilize ranked-choice-voting: This is to prevent splitting of the vote. If a proposal doesn't use the traditional support/oppose method, then voters must rank the proposed options in the order from preferred to least-preferred.
- No unamendable/irrevocable proposals: All policies are able to be repealed or altered at any time, as long as they receive majority support. Any proposals that claim to be unamendable/irrevocable or have provisions that are unamendable/irrevocable will automatically be considered invalid.
- All joke proposals will be treated as valid proposals: Unless the user specifies that their proposal is simply lighthearted and won't be enforced, any proposal that has a viable and concise outcome yet isn't carried out in a serious manner will still count.
IV. Promotion Policy (Revised March 25, 2020)
- All promotions must have gone through the application process: No administrator/bureaucrat should promote any user without community consensus.
- Users must request via valid formats: This means requests must be done through blog posts.
- Applicants shall not force other users to support them: Applicants are allowed to publicly notify other users of such discussion, without imposing an agenda, and as long as it's not a direct notification to a specific user.
- Administrator and bureaucrat requests may be highlighted through forums in order to gain more input.
Voting and Closure
- All requests for rights are considered to be proposals and are to be held under the same guidelines as them seen here: SpongeBob Fanon Wiki:List of policies#II. Proposal Policy
V. Staff Activity Policy (Revised June 27, 2020)
- Any staff member, with the exception of bureaucrats, will be swiftly demoted after two months of inactivity whilst still able to edit on the wiki, unless the user meets any of these requirements.
- They have given prior notice, preferrably via an announcement blog post, of their 'wikibreak'. A set time period is not mandatory although if the staff member has reached four months of inactivity within this wikibreak, they shall be demoted.
- They are a bureaucrat. In this case, they shall follow the rules that apply to staff members after three months of unannounced inactivity.
- They are taking a designated 'mental health break', which would preferrably be announced on the wiki or integrated social media, like the Discord server. This mental health break can extend to as long as six months before demotion but does not require a set time period, and can be declared by the staff member within reason. If they are considered by users to have abused their mental health break, a demotion request is valid.
- Any staff member who is blocked from SBFW or FANDOM for a valid reason for at least a month will be demoted, unless the user meets any of these requirements.
- They were globally blocked or disabled by FANDOM. In this case, they can be reinstated as administrator within three months if the account returns to the wiki. If an alternate account is made to evade the block, they will be required to request for the position again.
- Their block is overturned with valid justification. 'Valid justification' refers to a mental health break in which the staff member is blocked by their own request, or community consensus (i.e., a successful block repeal is made as a blog post that promises the rights be reinstated). For example, if an administrator were to take a mental health break and blocked themselves on SBFW to emphasise their break, their rights can be reinstated without hesitation by another administrator when the user intends to return from the wiki.
VI. Content Ownership Policy (Revised June 9, 2020)
- Any user may edit fanon content or wikipolitics parties owned by someone else only if;
- They themselves are worker/s of the content.
- The edit being made is simply for grammatical adjustments.
- Formatting adjustments.
- The edit was productive and/or was given consent from the owner/s of the fanon.
- Does not alter the plot or any major point of the fanon content without the consent of any of the owner/s of the content. These may include release dates, adding of workers, change of plot, or any other edit in which the owner/s' consent was not given.
- Any major adjustments that may come off as vandalism: Vandalism such as blanking of the page, drastic changing of content, adding spam content, etc. should immediately be reverted by any online staff or the owner/s or worker/s of the content.
- Any staff may give an automatic warning for the vandal: Failure to respond whilst continuing vandalism may result in an immediate ban.
- If you’d like to attain control over someone's piece of fanon work (such as a spin-off) or wikipolitics party, you'll need to receive permission from the owner themself, even if they are no longer active: You cannot make a proposal to gain control over the series.
- Any page with the "community page" template means that it can be contributed to by anyone: However, vandalism rules still apply to all pages.
- Only the creator of the page can mark it as a community page: Users can not create a proposal to nationalize a page. All proposals that are made for the purpose of making something a community page will be swiftly declared invalid.
- Once a page is marked as a community page, it is collectively owned by the community: No user may declare a community page their own. If the creator of the page wishes to regain ownership of their work, then they must contact an administrator.
- Editors may not remove or replace any mentions of the creator or the creation of the work.
- Community consensus is required in order to rename any page marked as a community page: Unless a majority consensus is reached via a blog post with at least 7 votes, then community pages may not be renamed.
- Any edit warring will lead to the page's protection: No exceptions. Wiki staff may protect the page until the conflict is resolved.
- A semi-community page is a piece of fanon that is owned by a user but can still be collectively edited by the community.
- The owner is allowed and advised to create a simple ruleset for their page, particularly regarding formatting: All users must follow these rules if they wish to edit the page.
- Any edit warring will be handled by the owner of the page: They may decide which users' edits they want to keep and which ones they want to remove. The owner may take or request any action necessary in order to prevent further edit wars.
- All removal and replacing of content must be approved by the owner: Although the user has control over all contributions to the page, removing and altering of content is required to be approved by the owner in order to be done.
- All transferring of ownership is protected by the content ownership policy: Just like with other works, if a user wishes to gain ownership of a semi-community page, they must get consent by the owner. Similarly, the owner of the page may remove the semi-community status at any time.
SpongeBob Fanon Series
VII. Rating Policy (Revised March 25, 2020)
- Only the creator and content moderators/administrators have the authority to rate a page. The creator of the work, who made it himself and knows what he wrote, is allowed to rate their own work. Only content moderators and administrators have been deemed fit by the community to manage all the content here. Anyone else who rates a work will be warned, then blocked. If a user feels that a work needs to be rated, they can report it to someone who is allowed to.
- Any user can create their own rating system for their own work, but the SpongeBob Fanon Wiki strongly encourages users to use the wiki rating system. The wiki rating system, in which the guidelines can be found here, is universal and rates dozens of spin-off's and fanfictions. Users are permitted to create their own system, soley for their own productions, as long as they clearly explain what type of content is there, akin to the wiki rating system. (EXAMPLE: Luis TV uses the Filipino rating system, but as they are clear enough to explain the level of content shown, it is acceptable on this wiki.)
- Any valid dispute in ratings must either be solved by an administrator, or resorted to community discussion. If a rating is validly disputed between a creator and a content moderator/administrator (EXAMPLE: a spin-off episode with moderate sexual scenes is disputed between C- and D-ratings), the issue must be brought to a neutral administrator. If any party feels that the decision was unfair, a community discussion will be launched into which rating is deemed most appropriate. The community's decision is final.
- Blatant misappropriation of ratings will result in a swift change, then warning, then a block. A user rating a profanity-laced article "A - All Ages" is blatantly wrong, and a content moderator/administrator will change the rating to align with its' content. If the user disobeys the decision and changes it back, a warning will be issued. A repeat offense will result in a block, and the block sentencing will increase from there.
If you need any help, refer to this list of administrators/bureaucrats. Any user on that list would be happy to help with any problem that you have, whether it be with another user or just some help on a new article.