| Revision as of 15:14, 12 August 2005 editRadiant! (talk | contribs)36,918 edits cat:essay← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:24, 12 August 2005 edit undoUser2004 (talk | contribs)23,415 edits rv to last by Angela, moved essay to talk pageNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| The term "wikistalking" or "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor's edits, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This is distinct from following a contributor in order to clear errors. | |||
| '''This is an essay.''' | |||
| '''Definition''' - Wiki-] occurs when an editor abusively trails another editor around wikipedia by way of his or her user contributions page. It entails an evidenced distinctive editing pattern in which one user intentionally follows another editor around wikipedia for purposes that are not constructive to the encyclopedia's content or conducive to its collaborative environment. It occurs when one editor continuously and repeatedly follows another editor between multiple unrelated articles over an extended period of time and a wide variety of unrelated subjects for the purpose of making excessive "followup" changes to the original editor's work - often for the purpose of harassment, disruption, or deconstructing the stalked editor's work for reasons that are not in compliance with Misplaced Pages policies or guidelines. | |||
| '''Why it's a problem''' - Wiki-stalking is an abuse of the user contributions function on wikipedia. This is a tool that otherwise serves valuable purposes in combatting vandalism and problematic users, but like any tool it can be abused when used in excess or with malicious intent. Stalking is problematic because it exhibits incivility, subjects individual editors to unwarranted harassment, and violates the request that all wikipedians should ] about other editors. Often times a stalker conducts himself with the intent of driving another editor away from Misplaced Pages through a series of harassing and hostile behavior. The most notorious case of wiki-stalking to date involved a user who consciously trailed another well established wikipedian's edits with daily "followup" work conducted to the same articles, most of it minor and unnecessary. Even though the stalker edits were minor, the behavior was deemed to be harassing because it was done intentionally to harass the victimized editor. The case was settled by direct intervention from Misplaced Pages founder ], who permanently blocked the stalker for "making a pest of himself" and disrupting the encyclopedia. | |||
| While wikistalking can be very annoying, every editor gets stalked from time to time. You can expect excessive amounts of stalking when you are on ] or similar. While being stalked it might be wise to have impeccable behaviour, but you already were behaving impeccably anyway, right? | While wikistalking can be very annoying, every editor gets stalked from time to time. You can expect excessive amounts of stalking when you are on ] or similar. While being stalked it might be wise to have impeccable behaviour, but you already were behaving impeccably anyway, right? | ||
| ==Good stalking== | ==Good stalking== | ||
| Stalking should not be categorically ill reputed. Although it is highly discouraged to follow a contributor that clashes with your beliefs, practicing stalking against a public nuisance is considered by some contributers as a commendable sign of your dedication. For example stalking an anon ] so that (s)he/it understands vandalizing or degrading Misplaced Pages is a fruitless hobby could be considered Good Stalking. There are many such vandals, so you will need to setup a method to systematically stalk them. In Mozilla, add their contribution pages to a folder of links, which you can load in tabs all at once. | Stalking should not be categorically ill reputed. Although it is highly discouraged to follow a contributor that clashes with your beliefs, practicing stalking against a public nuisance is considered by some contributers as a commendable sign of your dedication. For example stalking an anon ] so that (s)he/it understands vandalizing or degrading Misplaced Pages is a fruitless hobby could be considered Good Stalking. There are many such vandals, so you will need to setup a method to systematically stalk them. In Mozilla, add their contribution pages to a folder of links, which you can load in tabs all at once. | ||
| ==Bad stalking== | ==Bad stalking== | ||
| Notwithstanding the above, stalking does carry ill rupute for a reason. In general, one should try to ], so stalking people who don't have track records of vandalism or other unacceptable editing patterns could be viewed as a sign of being somebody who lacks anything resembling a sense of proportion. <!-- Examples go here. --> | Notwithstanding the above, stalking does carry ill rupute for a reason. In general, one should try to ], so stalking people who don't have track records of vandalism or other unacceptable editing patterns could be viewed as a sign of being somebody who lacks anything resembling a sense of proportion. <!-- Examples go here. --> | ||
| ==How you can help== | |||
| '''Stalking problems''' | |||
| # If you are being stalked in a harassing manner by another user, the first thing you should do is politely approach him/her about it. Inform that editor of your concern and objections and ask him/her politely to stop. | |||
| # If step 1 doesn't work, inform the stalker of the anti-stalking precedent cited above. | |||
| # If the stalking continues make a log of it! Document the cases of stalking on your user page with sourced diffs to show its extent and problems. | |||
| See also: ], ] | See also: ], ] | ||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 19:24, 12 August 2005
The term "wikistalking" or "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor's edits, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This is distinct from following a contributor in order to clear errors.
While wikistalking can be very annoying, every editor gets stalked from time to time. You can expect excessive amounts of stalking when you are on WP:RFA or similar. While being stalked it might be wise to have impeccable behaviour, but you already were behaving impeccably anyway, right?
Good stalking
Stalking should not be categorically ill reputed. Although it is highly discouraged to follow a contributor that clashes with your beliefs, practicing stalking against a public nuisance is considered by some contributers as a commendable sign of your dedication. For example stalking an anon vandal so that (s)he/it understands vandalizing or degrading Misplaced Pages is a fruitless hobby could be considered Good Stalking. There are many such vandals, so you will need to setup a method to systematically stalk them. In Mozilla, add their contribution pages to a folder of links, which you can load in tabs all at once.
Bad stalking
Notwithstanding the above, stalking does carry ill rupute for a reason. In general, one should try to assume good faith, so stalking people who don't have track records of vandalism or other unacceptable editing patterns could be viewed as a sign of being somebody who lacks anything resembling a sense of proportion.
See also: cyberstalking, Wiktionary:stalk