Contributors // Wiki
Contributor Guidelines
These are the commitments you make when you become an approved contributor. They exist to protect the integrity of the resource and the trust readers place in it.
The Hooded Community Wiki is only as good as the people who write it. Contributors are trusted members of the restoration community who have agreed to uphold a shared standard — not because they are told to, but because they understand why it matters.
These guidelines are not bureaucratic checkboxes. They reflect real editorial principles that distinguish a reliable knowledge base from an unvetted collection of opinions. Read them carefully before applying.
Your commitments as a contributor
Honest, evidence-appropriate content
Write in the informative register — factual, clear, and proportionate to what the evidence actually supports. Do not overstate or understate. If you are uncertain, say so and label it accordingly.
No product endorsements or affiliate links
The wiki is a community resource, not a storefront. Personal product recommendations, affiliate links, referral codes, and promotional language of any kind are not permitted.
No medical advice
Articles may describe what the research says, what restorers commonly report, and what approaches exist — but they must not recommend a specific course of action for a specific individual's health situation. If content approaches that line, flag it for Advisory Panel review.
Evidence tier labeling
Every factual claim must carry an appropriate evidence tier label (Established, Emerging, Community Knowledge, or Founder Perspective). Unlabeled claims will be flagged by HoodieBot and returned for revision.
Citations for factual claims
Any specific statistic, study reference, or causal claim requires a citation in the article body. Use the Citation block type in the Studio. Format follows simplified APA — author(s), year, title, source, URL if available.
Accurate self-credentialing
Credit yourself accurately. Do not misrepresent your background, credentials, or expertise. Readers trust the contributor attribution — that trust is the foundation of the whole project.
Constructive edits with explanations
When editing another contributor's article, your changes must be constructive and explained in the revision notes. "Improved clarity" is not a sufficient explanation. Describe what changed and why.
Editorial decisions are final
The editorial team has full authority to approve, reject, or request revision of any article — including yours. Their decisions are not subject to appeal, though revision and resubmission is always welcome.
Enforcement
Violating these guidelines results in contributor access being revoked. This is not a graduated system — a single serious violation (fabricated credentials, deliberate misinformation, promotional content) may result in immediate removal.
For less serious issues — an unlabeled claim, a missing citation, an insufficiently explained edit — the editorial team will return the article for revision with specific notes. Three revision requests on separate submissions without meaningful improvement may result in contributor access review.
The editorial team manages contributor access. Questions about a specific decision can be directed to the wiki editorial team through the subreddit mod team.