From BereaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


The site rules are pretty straightforward, if it's illegal don't do it, give attribution, no racism, no profanity, no plagiarism, no ad hominems. Use reliable sources, treat others the way you'd want to be treated, that kind of thing.

Rules Structure

Biblical Point of View

Unlike Wikipedia which uses a Neutral Point of View, BereaWiki exists to defend a Biblical, Christian point of view. Editing of content pages should be Biblically backed and defensible, debate is intended more for the Debates section. While BereaWiki welcomes disagreement and opposing points of view, the site is intended to present a Biblical point of view specifically, and for that reason editing of content pages should be consistent with a Biblical point of view.

Three Revert Rule

Editors should not revert three times IF those reverting are giving reasons for their reversions other than "Consensus." Unlike in Wikipedia where "Consensus" is a justifiable explanation for reverting, here there should be a decent explanation given on the article talk page for why a revert was performed. Consensus alone is not an argument, and is regularly used on Wikipedia by those who just get a gang of friends or multi accounts to help them declare their opinions the rule.

Consensus With Basis

As such, reverts should have a logical reason given based on sourcing, facts, Biblical references, etc. The Three Revert Rule is intended only to prevent edit wars, not allow people to outnumber others without giving logical explanations for their edits. First violation is a warning, second a 1 day suspension, third a 3 day suspension. I am more concerned about potential abuse of the Three Revert Rule than with its necessity.

No Spamming

If people want to put links to their personal sites on their user pages that's fine, as long as it's not obvious bot-created spam to payday loan sites for example (which was a problem when Bereawiki was first created, multiple bot users were designed with no other purpose than to produce pages on payday loans). Reasonable mention of other sites in the context of talk page discussions is acceptable also, as long as the sites in question provide useful, fact-based information pertinent to the topic. This rule is just intended to stop the abuse of bots and posting of numerous links to irrelevant, unrelated sites that lack relevance to BereaWiki's goal of defending the Bible. As long as the sites contribute to the discussion with factual, credible information they can be used as sources.

No Plagiarism

By writing here you agree that you wrote the material yourself or it is properly attributed under Fair Use guidelines. Copying other people's work isn't polite or honest.

Focus on Facts, Not Namecalling

This site makes little pretense at its disdain for liberalism and atheism. Nonetheless, when debating we should focus on facts, evidence, and sources for purposes of a constructive debate, even when talking to those whose purpose contradicts Bereawiki's stated purpose. Bereawiki is intended not only as a presentation of the evidence for the Bible and conservatism, but also as a free forum for debate and search for the truth. To that end conversation should be CONSTRUCTIVE and seek to focus on the other person's arguments rather than attacking them personally, and avoid the fallacy known as Ad Hominem.

Debate Rules

No Censorship for Viewpoint Alone

While editing of content pages is expected to be strictly in support of the Bible and Christianity, the Debates section is provided for the sole purpose of allowing those who disagree with the Bible and Christianity to express disagreement. Censorship is tyrannical and while the wiki's purpose of defending the Bible cannot be compromised, nonetheless in the interest of an honest examination of all perspectives, conflicting viewpoints are allowed in the Debates section. Viewpoint alone is no basis for restriction.

Debate Questions Should Be Constructive

However, presentation of Debate questions and points should be constructive, and not just consist of mocking or namecalling (which I'm sure most Christians have encountered from atheists, and conservatives from liberals; although to be fair it can occur on both sides as well). That means using logical arguments supported by evidence and reasoning. If you think the Bible is bad for X reason, for example, specify why exactly you think that.

Alleged Bible Contradictions Formatting Guide

The basic design for Alleged Bible Contradiction articles is as follows:

Mention here who the critic is and provide a citation to their claim of a contradiction.

==Verse Addressed==

{{cquote|Verses and comments from the Bible critic are quoted in a cquote quotation. The cquote
may fail to work if there are blank lines between content, in which case said lines will need 
to be replaced with <br> tags to link all cquote content together within the cquote.}}

Explanation of why the alleged contradiction is not a contradiction with quality sources where

[[Category:Name of critic category]]

If there are any other questions about editing practice, I recommend the tutorials at Wikipedia.