Publishing Standards

Fieldbook publishes electrical learning material only when a reader can see what it is, where it came from, and how far it can be trusted.

Content labels

Every substantial resource should make its status clear:

• Official source: a link to the relevant government, apprenticeship authority, standards body, or other primary source.
• Original study advice: a learning method or organization strategy developed for this site, not an official requirement.
• Original practice question: a question written for learning; never presented as a real or recalled exam question.
• Community contribution: a comment, question, or field perspective that has not become reviewed site content.
• Technically reviewed: a claim used only when a suitably qualified reviewer has checked the stated scope. No credential or review is implied unless it is documented.

Source standard

Factual claims link to the organization responsible for them, such as a provincial or territorial authority, a standards body or a manufacturer. Secondary sources can help explain a topic, but they do not replace the authority that controls a requirement, a standard or a product.

Important notes should identify:

• the source title and publisher;
• the publication date, revision, or edition when available;
• the jurisdiction covered;
• the date the source was checked; and
• a direct link to the relevant page or document.

Electrical-code material

Code-specific instruction is not published without all of the following:

1. the applicable code edition;
2. the province or territory and relevant amendments;
3. links to authoritative sources that readers can verify;
4. a clear distinction between explanation and field direction; and
5. qualified technical review appropriate to the claim.

When those conditions are not met, a page stays at the level of theory, source navigation, or study method.

Practice-question standard

An original practice question should include:

• the learning objective;
• a complete explanation of the answer;
• an explanation of plausible incorrect options;
• the source and scope behind the reasoning; and
• a warning when edition or jurisdiction could change the answer.

The purpose is to expose and correct a mental model, not to imitate confidential exam content.

Community and corrections

Discussion helps identify confusing language, missing context, and useful sources. It remains visibly separate from reviewed pages until it has been checked and edited. Corrections should name the page, quote or summarize the questionable claim, link the strongest available source, and explain the proposed change.

Use the sharing guide to prepare a contribution, or browse the theory tools.