This is an old revision of the document!

ISGAN Wiki editorial guidelines

This page describes how the ISGAN Wiki works, who it is for, and how to contribute. Whether you are writing a topic for the first time or reviewing someone else's draft, this is the place to start.

What this wiki is for

Smart grid transitions draw on knowledge from engineering, policy, economics, sociology, and more. Experts in these fields often use the same terms differently, or different terms for closely related ideas. The ISGAN Wiki addresses this directly. It builds a shared language around smart grid transitions, not as a static glossary, but as a living platform that integrates knowledge across ISGAN working groups.

Each topic page approaches a concept from three complementary angles: who the relevant actors are, what the technical picture looks like, and what institutional structures shape the system. Pages are grounded in real-world examples from different regions and connected through links that make their dependencies visible. After publication, pages are revised and updated as knowledge develops.

Who is this wiki for?

The wiki serves three groups simultaneously. Writing well for all three at once is possible, but it requires deliberate choices.

ISGAN experts across working groups

If you work within ISGAN, the wiki is a space for consolidating what the network knows collectively, including the definitional debates and disciplinary tensions that often stay buried in workshop notes. This audience values precision. Competing definitions should be named, not smoothed over. Technical accuracy is expected.

Policy makers and energy institutions

Energy ministries, regulatory bodies, and international agencies use the wiki to understand the framing of technical and governance debates, and to communicate across departments and to elected politicians. For this audience, jargon needs to be unpacked. Every term that a minister's advisor might not recognise should either be explained in plain language or included in the Key terms section.

Researchers across disciplines

Engineers, social scientists, energy economists, and policy researchers use the wiki when writing proposals and when communicating across disciplinary communities. This audience needs the connections between perspectives made explicit. It is not enough to list what each discipline contributes; the page should show how the perspectives inform each other.

Wiki principles

These principles apply to every topic page. They are the shared standards the whole wiki is built on.

Principle	What it means in practice
Transparency	All contributions, including AI-assisted work, should be documented and attributed.
Credibility	Every factual claim requires a source. Prefer primary sources: original papers, official documents, standards.
Triangulation	Every topic is developed from three perspectives — actors, technology, and institutions — because no single discipline captures smart grid transitions on its own.
Scope	State clearly whether a definition or claim is global, regional, or discipline-specific. Where it originates matters.
Accessibility	Write for all three audiences. If a term is opaque outside one discipline, define it or put it in Key terms.
Knowledge integration	Build on ISGAN publications and tacit knowledge as a baseline. Connect to broader literature where it expands the ISGAN framing.
Critical reflexivity	Where emerging literature or practice challenges the current ISGAN framing, acknowledge it rather than smooth it over. The wiki's value depends on intellectual honesty about the limits of shared knowledge.
Feasible effort	Quality matters more than completeness at first publication. A well-grounded page that grows over time is better than one delayed waiting for an exhaustive first version.
Referencing	Use APA 7th edition. Include a DOI or stable URL where available. Verify all sources before submitting.
Copyright	For any image added to a page, confirm the licence permits use and include an attribution and source link.

Roles

Wiki development is a co-creative process. Every topic has a small team.

Role	What they do
Lead author	Oversees the topic from first draft to publication. Organises co-author collaboration, manages the review process, addresses reviewer comments, and takes responsibility for accuracy.
Co-author	Contributes original input based on their area of expertise, primarily during content creation. May also support later revisions.
Reviewer	Provides at least one round of structured feedback. Critical comments must be addressed before the topic advances.
WG7 Task Lead	Coordinates the overall editorial process, the Quality Review Panel, and publication logistics.
Communications Working Group	Handles language editing, promotional activities, and the wiki upload process. Coordinates professional proofreading before Presidium approval.
Quality Review Panel	ExCo delegates and national experts from at least five countries (at least two from outside the EU). Provides structured feedback at Gate 2.
ISGAN Presidium	Approves topics before publication, in accordance with the ISGAN Handbook.

The three perspectives

Every topic is explored from three perspectives. These are not separate sections to fill in independently; they are lenses that together give a fuller picture of how a smart grid concept operates in the real world. Where the perspectives interact, or where one uniquely exposes something the others miss, this should be made explicit in the text.

Actors and stakeholders

This perspective addresses the activities and practices of the multiple groups whose actions shape smart grid transitions.

Market actors — energy suppliers, producers, aggregators, storage providers, and consumers at the grid edge — participate in markets for energy and capacity. Transmission and distribution grid operators, balancing parties, and the institutions that regulate them carry mandates to operate and invest in specific parts of the electricity system. National and local policy makers, regulatory bodies, civil society organisations, and citizens shape framework conditions through law-making and political decisions. Technology providers and research organisations are part of the innovation ecosystem and play an active role in transitions even when they are not direct market participants.

Key disciplines: Microeconomics, behavioural economics, organisational studies, business administration.

Technologies and infrastructure

This perspective addresses the technical components, systems, and infrastructures that make up the electricity system, and the ways they can be configured to fulfil system functions. It covers generation, transmission, distribution, and storage as functionalities of a cyber-physical system, including both physical infrastructure and the digital layer of data exchange, control systems, and communication protocols.

The technology perspective extends beyond hardware. Interoperability standards, data exchange interfaces, metering systems, and control architectures are all within scope, and often where the most consequential transitions are taking place.

Key disciplines: Electrical engineering, informatics, systems engineering.

Institutional structures

This perspective addresses the rules, regulations, norms, and cognitive frameworks that govern the electricity system. Markets for power and energy, grid codes, regulatory frameworks for grid operation and balancing, and rules for energy communities and aggregation are all institutional arrangements that define what is possible and what is incentivised.

Understanding how open or resistant an institutional structure is to change is often as important as understanding the technical options available.

Key disciplines: Institutional and evolutionary economics, political science, sociology.

Tone and voice

Topics should read as though written by a knowledgeable colleague explaining something clearly. The goal is directness and precision, not performed expertise.

Write for the reader's understanding, not for the author's credibility.

Language rules:

Use plain language. If a technical term is necessary, define it on first use.
Prefer active constructions: “Several countries have introduced regulatory sandboxes” rather than “Regulatory sandboxes have been established.”
Prefer can and could over should when describing possibilities. The wiki describes what institutions do and what options exist — it does not prescribe what countries ought to do.
Avoid hollow evaluative phrases: “a fundamental shift”, “a critical enabler”, “plays an increasingly important role.” State what changed and why it matters.
Avoid AI-generated prose markers: “It is important to note that”, “This section explores”, “Moreover”, “Furthermore.”
Avoid throat-clearing: “In an era of increasing complexity”, “Given the rapidly evolving landscape.”

Sentence rhythm: Vary sentence length. A short sentence after a long one creates emphasis. Two to four sentences per paragraph is the working range. Break when the subject shifts.

Headings: All section headings use sentence case. Write “Why this matters”, not “Why This Matters”.

Editorial process

The process has four stages and three decision gates. Each gate has a checklist that must be satisfied before work moves forward.

Major vs. minor revisions

A change to the ISGAN definition or core framing requires returning to Stage 1. Editorial improvements, updated references, and added examples can be made at any stage without restarting the process.

Stage	What happens	Typical duration
Stage 1: Content creation	Lead author collects inputs from co-authors and produces a first draft using the topic template, in a shared Word document on Teams.	2 to 6 weeks
Gate 1	Lead author checks content against the principles, confirms sensitivity rating, and verifies attribution before moving forward.
Stage 2: Preparation	Topic is revised for readability, style, and coherence. Terms that could be misunderstood outside a specialist context are either removed or explicitly defined.
Gate 2	Quality Review Panel (at least five countries, at least two outside the EU) provides written feedback. All critical comments must be addressed.
Stage 3: Presidium review	Quality Review Panel provides a sensitivity rating and brief review report. CWG arranges professional language editing before Presidium approval. Draft topics may be published with appropriate disclosure while awaiting approval.
Gate 3	ISGAN Presidium approves the topic.
Stage 4: Publication	Content transferred to the wiki. Two-week community review window follows publication. Lead author addresses any substantive concerns raised before the page is considered finalised.

For a detailed version of the process, including the full Gate checklists, contact the WG7 Task Lead.

Sensitivity rating

Each topic is assigned a sensitivity rating before Stage 2.

Level	Criteria	Implication
Low	No politically sensitive claims. Definition broadly shared across disciplines and regions.	Standard review applies.
Medium	Contested definitions between disciplines or regions. Country-specific claims where national positions may differ.	Lead author flags contested interpretations in the text. Quality review panel includes reviewers from affected regions.
High	Normative policy positions. Topics where ISGAN member countries have publicly divergent views. Claims that could be read as taking sides in active geopolitical or regulatory disputes.	Requires explicit ExCo sign-off in addition to Presidium approval. CWG reviews framing before Gate 2.

AI use

AI tools are a legitimate and expected part of the wiki development process. They can be used to reorganise source material into the template structure, improve sentence flow, reformat references, or convert approved Word documents into DokuWiki markup.

Three responsibilities remain with people regardless of AI assistance:

Source verification is mandatory and must be done by a person. The lead author is responsible for confirming that every cited source exists and that the content matches the claim in the text.
Editorial responsibility stays with the lead author. Co-authors and reviewers who become aware that AI has substantially altered text must inform the lead author so the attribution record is accurate.
Recording AI use is required. All AI-assisted work is documented in the Topic notes section of the Word document using the format below. These records stay in the Word document and the Teams folder; they are not published on the live wiki.

AI use record format

Stage: [content creation / editorial revision / reference verification / wiki upload] Type: [structuring from source material / drafting / editorial revision / reference formatting / markup conversion] Tool: [e.g. Claude (Anthropic), GPT-4 (OpenAI)] Reviewed by: [name of human contributor who reviewed the output]