You must define terms used at openpolitics.ca itself if:
  • There are two or more links to a related method: unlike issues, methods tend to invite early definition
  • There are four or more links to a related issue - add it to all issues even if it is only a stub?
  • There are six or more links to any page. Exceptions:
    • proud redlink?
    • open term?
  • There are external links to the same article in more than one page
    • Two such links suggests a redirect should be used so that the significance of that external link is described only in one place, unless it is an example of multiple phenomena
    • Three to five such links suggest a refer link at least is required, typically to GFDL corpus which originate ((GFDL corpus namespace|namespace) conventions and name precedents
    • Six or more such links suggest a cite link to a clear and authoritative source is probably required
  • They must be disambiguated to be used properly, and open content source?s remain unreliable after multiple attempts to insert the correct distinctions
  • They are deliberately ambiguate?d in politics itself or used in rhetoric. If the term is only rhetorical, i.e. not just choosing one of many conceptual metaphors but imposing one on a debate that has objective terms of reference, redirect to an article explaining that in the term:namespace
  • The living ontology specifies a particular meaning for the word within Living Ontology Web

Show php error messages