What we will not blueprint

Seven categories are refused at every depth. Each one is here because a confidently wrong blueprint about it is a hazard rather than a bad article.

Mains-voltage wiring

A wiring error at 230 V kills. This is work for a qualified electrician, and a blueprint that reads as permission to attempt it is the harm.

Lithium pack assembly beyond a protected single cell

Series/parallel packs without balancing and protection fail as fires. The safe envelope is a single protected cell in a commercial holder.

Pressure vessels

A vessel that fails does so explosively, and the calculation that makes it safe is a certified engineering discipline rather than a build guide.

Solvent and reagent chemistry

The hazard is in the fumes and the mixtures rather than the steps, and it does not survive being summarised.

Energetics and pyrotechnics

There is no depth setting at which this is responsible to publish.

Firearms and anything weapon-adjacent

Not a build we will describe, at any depth, regardless of legality where you are.

Load-bearing structure and rigging

A failure hurts whoever is under it, and the margin comes from a signed-off calculation rather than a guide.

Enforced at request time

This list runs when a request arrives, not when a draft is reviewed. Hoping a model declines is not a control — it is a wish about a system whose behaviour changes with every version.

It is also a traffic decision

Every category here has real search volume behind it. Ranking for a hazardous build we cannot get right would bring us readers we would be failing, so these are on the do-not-target list as well as the do-not-publish one.

Questions

What if my project touches one of these?

The parts of it that do not are still fair game. What we will not do is describe the hazardous step and leave you to judge the rest.