Different Wikias have different rules. Very few rules apply to every Wikia, and they are set by the executives of the entire Wiki foundation, so they are likely hard coded. As head administrator, I will lay down the rules of this particular Wikia. Only administrators may edit this article; if a basic contributor wants a change of rules, he or she must petition an administrator to edit this article for them (this can be done on an admin's discussion page, or in the discussion page of this article).

Due to the fact that most people are most familiar with Wikipedia, this article will directly juxtapose the rules of Code Monkeys' Wikia with that of Wikipedia.

Similarities to Wikipedia

Neutral Point of View

Code Monkeys Wikia holds the same standard of neutrality as Wikipedia does. Personal opinions are strictly forbidden, as are a collection of facts that appear to sway a person into one opinion or another without stating the opinion directly. Of course, just like Wikipedia, some exceptions are allowed.

  • An opinion by a bona fide expert. Television critics who write professional reviews of Code Monkeys episodes are bona fide experts, since an expert is defined as someone who performs said action on a regular basis.
  • Consensus opinions. Just like Wikipedia, and their disregard all rules policy, the only rule that is truly absolute in a Wiki website is that of consensus. However, the minimum amount of agreement to be classified as a consensus is very blurry (for example, 95% is definitely consensus, but the exact line in which controversy becomes consensus is simply impossible to define with as much vigor). Do not put a consensus opinion unless you are absolutely sure that it is, indeed, a consensus.
  • Statistics. Even Wikipedia will allow statistics (such as the cumulative score of an episode from a site such as metacritic). However, in accordance with the dictionary definition of a statistic, you must use numbers (see "reliable sources" below for more information).

Assumption of Good Faith

Although not as strongly enforced as neutral point of view, Code Monkeys Wikia will still hold an assumption of good faith. It is idential to Wikipedia's policy of good faith, with the following exceptions.

  • Personal attacks are much more strictly defined. A personal attack is defined as when a contributor openly and blatantly questions the integrity of another contributor. For example, if a person deletes Todd's incest, citing it as "offensive," do not assume that that is the only reason he is deleting it. For all you know, he could easily have another reason that he merely neglected to mention. Accusing him of merely being offended by it is blatantly and openly questioning his integrity as a contributor. Instead, go to his discussion page and ask him to cite another reason. Only if he fails to do so, may you then readd the "offensive" material.
  • Do not make threats to block unless you have the power to do so yourself. Only an admin may make such a threat. If a regular contributor makes this threat, regardless of how reputable he is, he will also be blocked. Also, even administrators must cite a broken rule from this article or of the rules of all of Wikia in order to block the user.

Limitations of adminship

Just like Wikipedia, adminship in the Code Monkeys Wikia is not absolute power. Even the head admin is limited by the rules of all of Wikia.

Adminship is not diplomatic immunity

As an admin, you are charged with the responsibility of enforcing the rules of this Wikia. By that same logic, you are expected to excersise self-enforcement. Adminship does not make you above the rules. Even police officers have due process that they must go through. Failure to obey the rules yourself will likely result in termination of your privilages and, depending on the severity of your offense, being blocked or even permablocked from Code Monkeys Wikia entirely.

Adminship is not sovereign immunity

An admin's position can be challenged without his or her consent, although you will need to go over that admin's head to challenge it (in the case of the head administrator, the only ones who can override him are the global admins).

Of course, by that same token, if the head administrator revokes a lower admin's privilages, that former admin may appeal to the global admins to have their position reinstated. However, do so at your own risk, because getting your position reinstated is like sueing an employer to get your job back after an illegal firing (meaning they may be forced to take you back that one time, but they can always look for any legit reason to get rid of you).

Adminship does not allow you to manipulate the rules in your favor

When it comes to amending the rules stated in this article, the admins are essentially like Congress and government. The majority of the lower admins (in a sense, the unicameral legislature) must request a change. However, the head admin reserves the right to change it back.

Standard of quality

Standard of quality does not just apply to the use of proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar. An article is expected to have the same quality of writing as one would expect from a commercially-published magazine.

Differences between Wikipedia

Original research is allowed with regulation

Since this is a Wikia specific to a work of fiction, obviously, very little can be cited with out-of-universe sources. Because of this, original research is allowed; however, we will hold this original research to the same standard of quality as the rest of the article. This means that your original research must be backed up by a collection citable facts that are used to come to this collection.

For example, the setting of Code Monkeys is believed to be 1983-1984 (seasons 1 and 2, respectively). The only completely citable setting for the show is the 80's; in fact, it cannot even be concretely cited whether it is the early or late 80's, but the fact that ET was released in the first season, and waas released in 1983 in the real world, it is reasonable to assume that it took place inn 1983. On Wikipedia, one would merely be allowed to claim it took place in the 80's, since only that can be concretely verified.

However, one may also come along and claim that this these bits of evidence mean very little, considering Code Monkeys is a work of fiction, and fictional works are almost never canon with the real world. In this case, both bits of original research may exist on the same page. In fact, having these two viewpoints may actually cancel other's bias out, resulting in a neutral point of view!

More sources are reliable

Wikipedia has very strenuous definitions on what makes a source "reliable." For example, message board threads are not reliable on Wikipedia. On here, however, they are. For example, do you remember the allowing of statistical opinions? Well, if you want to create a poll on a Code Monkeys message board asking for the opinion you need, you may cite the end result of that poll as an opinion derived from statistic, because, in the eyes of the head administrator, the likelihood that you created enough accounts to rig the votes, just to get permission to publish an opinion on a webpage that gets little to no traffic anyway, is very unlikely.

However, only cite a poll that has finished being held. If even one person adds a new vote to the poll, thereby changing the statistic, then that citation is obsolete. Therefore, indefinite polls will be technically allowed, but you must cite them at your own risk.

Message board posts

Also, message board posts themselves (as opposed to poll votes) are also reliable in this Wikia, so long as they are used to cite consensus opinion. Citing a message board inhabitant who passes something off as fact is not at all reliable, because he could just be lieing, or misinformed.


Another source that is reliable here, but not on Wikipedia, is screenshots. This is especially true if you are quoting something from a java or flash-based webpage, where a direct link will not take you there. True, it is possible that you tampered with the screenshot, but no more possible than you wrongfully citing a physical document. Just like citing a physically-printed document, linking to a screenshot is merely an at-a-glance citation that encourages sceptics to go and look it up themselves.

More to come

More rules will be added as they become necessary and proper to the Code Monkeys Wikia.

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.