In the lead section, changed "Consensus is part of a range of policies on how editors work with others" to "Consensus is wikipedias fundamental model for decision making, and determines how editors work with others"
Also in the lead section, added "While on-wiki text is considered to be the canonical consensus, creative use of other means of reaching consensus is permitted and encouraged."
In WP:CON#Process, changed "legal and ethical restrictions" to "legal restrictions"
Added to WP:CON#Exceptions: [Some exceptions supersede consensus decisions on a page] "or wiki."
In the same section, changed [local debate on a WikiProject does not override the larger consensus] "behind a policy or guideline." to "of the community, as documented in for instance policies or guidelines."
Same section, changed "These represent the consensus decisions achievable among all Wikimedia projects, and affect all of them." to "These represent the consensus among all Wikimedia projects, and affect all of them. Because there's such a large community subscribing to them, they are rather hard to change."
Added to WP:DISPUTE#Focus on content: "If your reasoning is complex, add a section to the talk page of the article to explain it and refer to that section in the edit summary."
Added to WP:DISPUTE#Informal mediation: "The Mediation Cabal also assists in settling disputes without turning to formal mediation, and is a good place to learn dispute resolution techniques."
Added to WP:EP#Try to fix problems: preserve information: "In biographies of living people, there may be good reasons to disregard the imperative to preserve information. There is a tension between WP:PRESERVE and WP:BURDEN, and editors should consider whether the information is harmful. WP:PRESERVE deals with content, but not necessarily with subjects or topics. If an article is not notable, WP:PRESERVE may not mean "keep the article". It may mean "move sourced and encyclopedic content to another article" instead."
In lead section, removed: "All Wikipedia contributions are licenced under the GNU Free Documentation License, giving readers the rights to copy, redistribute and modify a work."
In WP:OWN#Overview, changed "If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." to "If you do not want your writing to be edited and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here."
Added to lead section: "If negotiable elements of a policy are unclear or do not conform to actual practice, then consensus should be found in order to change the policy to reflect that practice. This is an ongoing task, as policy at WP evolves."
In WP:SOCK#Identification and handling of suspected sock puppets, changed [The only definitive proof that an account is a sock puppet is an actual admission.] "Anything short of such may provide mere circumstantial evidence that may be used as grounds for suspicion generally when multiple signs are present." to "Since such admissions are unusual, most determinations of sockpuppetry are based on various combinations of circumstantial evidence."
In WP:U#Company/group names, changed "Use of Wikipedia for promotion of a company or group is not permitted, and accounts that do this will be blocked. Use of a company or group name as a username is not explicitly prohibited, but it is not recommended, and depending on the circumstances may be seen as a problem. Similarly, editing with a possible conflict of interest, such as editing an article about your employer, is not prohibited, but anyone wishing to do so is advised to read the Business' FAQ." to "Explicit use of a company or group name as a username will result in your username being blocked. Use of Wikipedia for promotion of a company or group is not permitted and accounts that do this will be blocked. Accounts that add promotional material or demonstrate a conflict of interest can be reported to the conflict of interest noticeboard or to administrator intervention against vandalism, where further action may be taken. Editing an article about your employer is not prohibited, but anyone wishing to do so is advised to read the Business' FAQ."
In WP:U#Inappropriate usernames, added: [Domain names and e-mail addresses are likewise prohibited] "for new users (a few pre-prohibition accounts remain in use)."
In the same section, changed "Promotional usernames are used to promote a group or company on Wikipedia." to "Promotional usernames are advertisements for a company or group."
Added to WP:VAN#How to spot vandalism: "Edits tagged by the abuse filter may also contain vandalism. However, many tagged edits are legitimate, so they should not be blindly reverted."
Removed: "Dispute resolution is meant to be a process for figuring out the best way to proceed. This means it is only useful if there's a well-definable end condition (although, naturally, the disputants need not know in advance what the resolution will be). ... If it becomes obvious that no established procedure is going to ping a resolution to the dispute, other means need to be used. (Creativity can be quite helpful here.) It's a good thing that outside politics and pseudoscience, this happens very rarely."
Added: "Wikipedia content (including articles, categories, templates, and others) is collaboratively edited. Wikipedia contributors are editors, not authors, and no-one, however expert they think they are (and may actually be) has the right to act as if they own a particular article. All Wikipedia contributions are licenced under the GNU Free Documentation License, giving readers the rights to copy, redistribute and modify a work."
Added: "For easy and direct access to dispute resolution requests, along with concise and accurate summaries of their respective guidelines, use Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests (WP:DRR). Note also that the "dispute resolution" sidebar (right) has direct links to filing requests for many of the dispute resolution levels, but requesting dispute resolution involves different guidelines and application processes for each level, and WP:DRR can familiarize you with each of them."
Added: "(however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW)."
Added: "The template {{uw-vandalism1}} - although being a vandalism template - is also appropriate because it's courteous enough not be perceived as offensive and it doesn't imply vandalism. This is the default template for Twinkle and Huggle."
Added: "Reversion or removal of unencyclopedic material, or of edits covered under Biographies of Living People. Some material - sometimes even factually correct material - does not belong on Wikipedia, and removing it is not vandalism. Check to make sure that the addition was in line with Wikipedia standards before restoring it or reporting its removal as vandalism."
Added: "Lack of understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia. Some users are not familiar with Wikipedia's purpose or policies and may start editing it as if it were a different medium - such as a forum or blog - in a way that appears unproductive, or borderline vandalism to experienced users. Although such edits can usually be reverted, it should not be treated as vandalism."
Added to the introduction: "Never edit war for the purpose of satirically illustrating a point about Wikipedia practices. Such behavior may quickly lead to a block even if you come nowhere near breaching the three-revert rule."
Added: [A pattern of incivility is disruptive and unacceptable, and may result in blocks ] "if it rises to the level of harassment or egregious personal attacks."
Removed: "Writing according to the "perfect article guidelines" and following the NPOV policy can help you write "defensively", and limit your own bias in your writing."
Added: "In summary: Don't take others' actions personally. Explain to them what you're doing, and always be prepared to change your mind."
Removed: "Edit warring is not necessarily any single action; instead, it is any mindset that tolerates confrontational tactics to affect content disputes."
Added: "As "edit-warring" is a concept about which reasonable people may disagree, administrators must warn users in good standing before blocking them for edit-warring."
Removed: "Editors with combative mindsets should only revert when necessary. Before making multiple reverts, discuss the disputed changes on the other editor's user talk page or yours, and remember that it is easy to misunderstand intentions and overestimate others' aggression on the Internet. Believing that an adversary is "wrong", "POV pushing" or "uncooperative" never excuses edit warring."
Removed footnote: "The ArbCom has found that "[t]he remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly.[1]"
Added: "In particular, sockpuppet accounts should not be used in internal project-related discussions, such as policy debates or Arbitration Committee proceedings."
