Academic Guidelines

Sissipedia documents terminology, history, psychology, and contemporary practice across feminization, submission, and related subcultures. Contributors write as archivists: descriptive, sourced, and precise.

These guidelines apply to new entries, revisions, category notes, and related-term annotations. Where practice is contested, present competing accounts fairly and mark speculation as provisional.

Use a calm, encyclopedic voice. Prefer clinical or scholarly phrasing over slang-heavy narration, erotic performance, or moral judgment.

Avoid first-person testimony as the primary evidence of an entry. Personal experience may inform research, but published text should remain third-person and evidence-led.

Open with a concise definition that situates the term historically or conceptually. Follow with sections that move from origins and usage to frameworks where relevant.

Keep paragraphs focused. Prefer short sections with clear headings. Define specialized vocabulary on first use, and cross-link related entries with [[wikilinks]].

Titles should be the canonical term or phrase. Avoid clickbait and duplicate entries for minor spelling variants — note variants in etymology or related terms instead.

When sources are informal (forums, oral history, community glossaries), state that limitation. Distinguish primary documentation from secondary commentary.

External citations should include author, year, and title where available. Internal archive references may use established entry codes.

Banner and figure images must be relevant, non-exploitative, and correctly captioned. Prefer archival or illustrative imagery over unrelated decoration.

Complete category, etymology, and related terms where applicable. Do not upload copyrighted material you lack rights to use.

Submitted entries undergo editorial screening for guideline compliance, link integrity, and clarity. Drafts may remain unpublished until corrections are complete.

Use Request Revision for factual corrections, missing citations, or tone adjustments on live entries. Repeated guideline violations or bad-faith submissions may result in draft rejection and account review.