Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 09:08, 30 October 2007 view sourceFT2 (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators55,546 edits →What is considered a personal attack?: tweak footnote← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 07:29, 19 December 2024 view source Remsense (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Template editors59,043 edits Undid revision 1263898042 by Uwappa (talk): perfectly redundantTag: Undo
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{short description\|Misplaced Pages policy}}
	{{pp-dispute}}
			{{pp-semi\|small=yes}}
	{{selfref\|"WP:ATTACK" redirects here. This page discusses personal attacks made against other editors. For attacks against living people who are the subjects of articles, see ]. For attack pages, see ]. For, WikiProject Protected areas, see ].}}
			{{redirect\|WP:PA\|text=You may be looking for ], ], ] or ]}}
	{{policy \|]<br/>]}}
			{{policy\|WP:PA\|WP:NPA\|WP:NOPA}}
	{{nutshell\|Comment on content, not on the contributor.}}
			{{nutshell\|'''Comment on content, not the contributors.''' Users that make '']'' attacks may face ] and ].}}
	{{Policylist}}
			{{Policy list}}
			]
			'''Do not make personal attacks''' anywhere on Misplaced Pages. {{anchor\|CONCON\|reason=Target of WP:CONCON shortcut.}}Comment ], not ]. Personal attacks harm the Misplaced Pages community and the collaborative atmosphere needed to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to sanctions including ] or even ].

			== What is considered to be a personal attack? ==
	'''Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Misplaced Pages.''' Comment on '''content''', not on the '''contributor'''. Personal attacks will not help you make a point; they hurt the Misplaced Pages community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia.
			{{anchor\|WHATIS}}
			{{shortcut\|WP:NPA#WHATIS\|WP:WIAPA\|WP:ADHOM\|WP:ADHOMINEM}}
			{{Conduct policy list}}
			There is no rule that is objective and not open to interpretation on what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion, but some types of comments are {{em\|never}} acceptable:
			* Abusive, ], or derogatory phrases based on ], ], ], ], ], ] or political beliefs, ], ], ], etc.<!--Please keep this list synchronized with that at WP:Harassment#TYPES.--> directed against another editor or a group of editors. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse.
			* Using someone's affiliations as an '']'' means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream. An example could be, "You're a ] so what would you know about fashion?" Note that it is not a personal attack to question an editor about their possible ] on a specific article or topic. However, be aware that speculation regarding the real-life identity of another editor may constitute ].
			* Using someone's political affiliations as an ''ad hominem'' means of dismissing or discrediting their views, such as accusing them of being ] or ], is also forbidden. Editors are allowed to have personal political POV, as long as it does not negatively affect their editing and discussions.
			* Linking to external attacks, harassment, or other material, for the purpose of attacking another editor.
			* Comparing editors to ], ], dictators, or other infamous people. {{crossref\|printworthy=y\|(See also ].)}}
			* {{vanchor\|Accusations\|accusations\|ACCUSATIONS}} about personal behavior ]. Serious accusations require serious evidence, usually in the form of ].
			* Threats, including, but not limited to:
			** ]
			** ]
			** Threats or actions which deliberately expose other Misplaced Pages editors to political, religious or other ] by a government, their employer, or any others. Violations of this sort may result in a block for an extended period of time, which may be applied immediately by any ] upon discovery. Admins applying such sanctions should confidentially notify the members of the ] of what they have done and why.
			** Threats to ] (give out personal details about) an editor.

			These examples are not exhaustive. Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack ''regardless of the manner in which it is done''. When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all.
	==What is considered a personal attack?==
	Debate is an essential part of the culture of Misplaced Pages. Different contributors often do not agree on some of the content within an article. Contributors often are members of opposing communities who wish to have their viewpoints included in articles. Synthesizing these views into a single article creates a better, more ] article for everyone. Every person who edits an article is part of the same larger community - we are all ].

			== Why personal attacks are harmful ==
	Accusing someone without justification of making personal attacks is also considered a form of personal attack.
			Personal attacks are disruptive. On article ] they tend to move the discussion away from the article and towards individuals. Such attacks tend to draw battle lines and make it more difficult for editors to work together.

			Contributors often wish to have their viewpoints included in articles. Through reasoned debate, contributors can synthesize these views into a single article, and this creates a better, more ] article for everyone. Every person who edits an article is part of the same larger community—we are all ].
	Editors should be ] and adhere to good ] when stating disagreements. Comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people. However, when there are disagreements about ''content'', referring to other editors is not always a personal attack. A posting that says "Your statement about ''X'' is wrong because of information at ''Y''", or "The paragraph you inserted into the article looks like ]", is ''not'' a personal attack. The appropriate response to such statements is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this policy.

			The prohibition against personal attacks applies equally to all Wikipedians. It is as unacceptable to attack a user with a history of foolish or boorish behavior, or one who has been ], ], or otherwise ], as it is to attack any other user. Misplaced Pages encourages a ]: people make mistakes, but they are encouraged to learn from them and change their ways. Personal attacks are contrary to this spirit and damaging to the work of building an encyclopedia.
	There is no ] about what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion, but some types of comments are ''never'' acceptable:
	*Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, ethnic, or other epithets (such as against disabled people) directed against another contributor. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual preference, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse.
	*Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views -- regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme.
	*].
	*Threats of violence, particularly death threats.
	*Threats of ] to userpages or talk pages.
	*Threats or actions which deliberately expose other Misplaced Pages editors to political, religious or other persecution by government, their employer or any others. Violations of this sort may result in a block for an extended period of time, which may be applied immediately by any administrator upon discovery. Admins applying such sanctions should confidentially notify the members of the ] of what they have done and why.

			== Avoiding personal attacks ==
	These examples are not exclusive. Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack ''regardless of the manner in which it is done''.<ref>This includes, but is not limited to:
			{{Policy shortcut\|WP:AVOIDYOU}}
	* linking to external attacks or harassment for the purpose of attacking another editor,
			{{redirect\|WP:AVOIDYOU\|the guideline on avoiding second-person pronouns in articles\|MOS:YOU}}
	* linking to images or web pages that under the circumstances are insulting, disparaging or attacking, for the purpose of attacking another editor,
			As a matter of polite and effective discourse, arguments should not be personalized; that is, they should be directed at content and actions rather than people.
	* subtle attacks intended to be understood as such only by the attacked party,
	and so on – these would all be treated as forms of "personal attack" for the purposes of this policy.</ref> When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all.

			When there are disagreements about ''content'', referring to other editors is not always a personal attack. A posting that says "Your statement about <var>X</var> is wrong because of information at <var>Y</var>", or "The paragraph you inserted into the article looks like ]", is ''not'' a personal attack. However, "The statement..." or "The paragraph inserted..." is less likely to be misinterpreted as a personal attack because it avoids referring to the other editor in the '']''. "The paragraph inserted here into the article looks like original research" is especially advantageous because the ] cuts down confusion. Similarly, discussion of a user's conduct or history is not in itself a personal attack when done in the appropriate forum for such discussion (for example, the other editor's ], or ]).
	The prohibition against personal attacks applies equally to all Wikipedians. It is as unacceptable to attack a user with a history of foolish or boorish behavior, or even one who has been subject to disciplinary action by the Arbitration Committee, as it is to attack any other user. Misplaced Pages encourages a positive online community: people make mistakes, but they are encouraged to learn from them and change their ways. Personal attacks are contrary to this spirit and damaging to the work of building an encyclopedia.

			Editors should be ] and adhere to good ] when describing disagreements. The appropriate response to an inflammatory statement is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this policy. Accusing someone of making personal attacks without providing a ] is also considered a form of personal attack. (See also: ].)
	==Responding to personal attacks==
	=== Initial options ===
	Frequently, the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is not to respond at all. Misplaced Pages and its debates can become ] for some editors, who may occasionally overreact. Additionally, Misplaced Pages discussions are in a text-only medium that conveys nuances and emotions poorly; this can easily lead to misunderstanding. While personal attacks ''are not excused'' because of these factors, editors are encouraged to disregard angry and ill-mannered postings of others when it is reasonable to do so, and to continue to focus their efforts on improving and developing the encyclopedia.

			== Responding to personal attacks ==
	If you feel that a response is necessary and desirable, you should leave a polite message on the other user's talk page. Do not respond on a ''talk page of an article''; this tends to escalate matters. Likewise, it is important to avoid becoming hostile and confrontational yourself, ]. Although templates have been used at times for this purpose, a customized message relating to the specific situation is often better received. When possible, try to find compromise or common ground regarding the underlying issues of content, rather than argue about behavior.
			=== First offenses and isolated incidents ===
			Often the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is to simply ]. Sometimes personal attacks are not meant as attacks at all, and during heated and ] debates, editors tend to overreact. Additionally, because Misplaced Pages discussions are in a ], nuances and emotions are often conveyed poorly, which can easily lead to misunderstanding (see ]). While personal attacks ''are not excused'' because of these factors, editors are encouraged to disregard angry and ill-mannered postings of others, if it is reasonable to do so, and to continue to focus their efforts on improving and developing the encyclopedia.

			If you feel that a response is necessary and desirable, you can leave a polite message on the other user's ]. Avoid responding on a talk page of an article, as this tends to escalate matters. Likewise, it is important to ], even in the face of abuse. Although ] may be used for this purpose, a customized message relating to the specific situation may be ]. If possible, try to find a compromise or common ground regarding the underlying issues of content, rather than argue about behavior.
	Personal attacks do not include civil language used to describe an editor's actions, and when made without involving their personal character, should not be construed as personal attacks, for instance, stating "Your statement is a personal attack..." is not itself a personal attack.

	Attacks that are particularly offensive or disruptive (such as physical or legal threats) should not be ignored. Extraordinary situations that require immediate intervention are rare, but may be reported ~~on the~~ ].		Attacks that are particularly offensive or disruptive (such as physical threats, ], or blatantly bigoted insults) should not be ignored. Extraordinary situations that require immediate intervention are rare, but may be reported at ].

			Discussion of behavior in an appropriate forum (e.g. user's talk page or Misplaced Pages noticeboard) does not in itself constitute a personal attack.

	=== Recurring attacks ===		=== Recurring attacks ===
	Recurring, non-disruptive personal attacks that do not stop after reasoned requests to cease ~~should~~ be resolved through ~~the~~ ] ~~process~~. Especially when personal attacks arise as the result of heated debate over article content, ] and ] are often the best ways to resolve the conflict. Similarly, ] offers a "streamlined" source of outside opinion. In most circumstances, problems with personal attacks can be resolved if editors work together and focus on content, and immediate administrator action is not required.		Recurring, non-disruptive personal attacks that do not stop after reasoned requests to cease can be resolved through ]. In most circumstances, problems with personal attacks can be resolved if editors work together and ], and immediate administrator action is not required.

	=== Removal of ~~text~~ ===		=== Removal of personal attacks ===
			{{Policy shortcut\|WP:RPA}}
	There is no official policy regarding when or whether most personal attacks should be removed, although it has been a topic of substantial debate.<ref>The ArbCom has found that "he remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly. </ref> Removing unquestionable personal attacks from your own user talk page is rarely a matter of concern. On other talk pages, especially where such text ''is directed against you'', removal should typically be limited.
			{{See also\|Misplaced Pages:Civility#Removing uncivil comments}}
			Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by any editor. However, there is no official policy regarding when or whether most personal attacks should be removed, although it has been a topic of substantial debate. Removing unquestionable personal attacks from your own user talk page is rarely a matter of concern. On other talk pages, especially where such text ''is directed against you'', removal should typically be limited to clear-cut cases where it is obvious the text is a true personal attack. The {{tl\|RPA}} template can be used for this purpose.

	Nevertheless, unusual circumstances do exist. The most serious types of personal attacks, such as efforts to reveal nonpublic personal information about Misplaced Pages editors, go beyond the level of mere invective, and so can and should be ~~excised~~ for the benefit of the community and the project. In certain cases involving sensitive information, a ] may also be appropriate.		Nevertheless, unusual circumstances do exist. The most serious types of personal attacks, such as efforts to reveal nonpublic personal information about Misplaced Pages editors (]), go beyond the level of mere invective, and so can and should be removed for the benefit of the community and the project whether or not they are directed at you. In certain cases involving sensitive information, a ] may also be appropriate.

	===Off-wiki ~~personal~~ attacks===		=== Off-wiki attacks ===
	Misplaced Pages cannot regulate behavior in media not under the control of the Wikimedia Foundation, but personal attacks made elsewhere create doubt as to ~~whether~~ an editor's on-wiki actions ~~are conducted in good faith~~. Posting personal attacks or defamation off-Misplaced Pages is harmful to the community and to an editor's relationship with it, especially when such attacks ~~take the form of violating~~ an editor's privacy. Such attacks can be regarded as aggravating factors by administrators and are admissible evidence in the dispute-resolution process, including Arbitration cases.		Misplaced Pages cannot regulate behavior in media not under the control of the ], but personal attacks made elsewhere create doubt about the good faith of an editor's on-wiki actions. Posting personal attacks or ] off-Misplaced Pages is harmful to the community and to an editor's relationship with it, especially when such attacks violate an editor's privacy. Such attacks can be regarded as aggravating factors by administrators and are admissible evidence in the dispute-resolution process, including Arbitration cases.

	====External links====		=== External links ===
			{{For\|policies related to attacks against living persons in general, whether or not they edit Misplaced Pages\|Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons}}
	{{caution\|The inclusion of a guideline on this issue on this page has caused significant disruption over several months. Please see the relevant discussion on the ]. Work is ongoing in the drafting of a policy aimed to replace this section, at ]. Please consider contributing there.}}
			Linking to off-site harassment, attacks, privacy violations, or threats of physical violence against any persons who edit Misplaced Pages, including those who edit for the purpose of attacking another editor, is never acceptable. This is not to be confused with legitimate critique. The inclusion of links in articles is a matter for sound editorial judgment.

			The interpretation of this rule is complex. See ] for guidance on interpretation.
	==Consequences of personal attacks==
	Although editors are encouraged to ignore or respond politely to isolated personal attacks, that should not imply that they are acceptable or without consequences. A pattern of hostility reduces the likelihood of the community assuming good faith, and can be considered ]. Users who insist on a confrontational style marked by personal attacks are likely to end up in the dispute resolution process, possibly including the serious consequences of ], and may become subject to a ].

			== Consequences of personal attacks ==
	In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a ] for disruption. Legal threats, death threats, and issues of similar severity may result in a block ''without warning''. However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less severe situations when it is unclear if the "conduct severely disrupts the project". Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered "disruption". Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment. A block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks.
			Although editors are encouraged to ignore or respond politely to isolated personal attacks, that should not imply that they are acceptable. A pattern of hostility reduces the likelihood of the community ], and can be considered ]. Users who insist on a confrontational style marked by personal attacks are likely to become involved in the ] process, and may face serious consequences through ].

			In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a ] for disruption. Death threats and issues of similar severity may result in a block ''without warning''. Lesser personal attacks often result in a warning, and a request to ]. If a pattern of lesser personal attacks continues despite the warning, escalating blocks may follow. However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less-severe situations when it is unclear if the conduct severely disrupts the project. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered disruptive. Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment: a block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks.

	== See also ==		== See also ==
			=== Misplaced Pages policies and information pages ===
	{{Spoken Misplaced Pages \| Wikipedia_No_personal_attacks.ogg \| 2005-04-07}}
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]

			=== Misplaced Pages essays ===

	* ]		* ]
	* ]		* ]
	* ]		* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]
			* ]

			=== Related content ===
	==Notes==
			* ]
	{{reflist}}

	]		{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines\|state=uncollapsed}}
	]		{{Misplaced Pages essays\|civility}}

			{{DEFAULTSORT:No personal attacks}}
	]
			]
	]
	]		]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]

Latest revision as of 07:29, 19 December 2024

Misplaced Pages policy

"WP:PA" redirects here. You may be looking for WikiProject Pennsylvania, WikiProject Protected areas, Misplaced Pages:Personal acquaintances or Misplaced Pages:Passive aggression.

This page documents an English Misplaced Pages policy.It describes a widely accepted standard that editors should normally follow, though exceptions may apply. Changes made to it should reflect consensus.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: Comment on content, not the contributors. Users that make ad hominem attacks may face blocking and banning.

Policies and guidelines (list)
Principles
Five pillars Ignore all rules
Content policies
Article titles Biographies of living persons Image use Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability What Misplaced Pages is not (Not a dictionary)
Conduct policies
Civility Clean start Consensus Dispute resolution Edit warring Editing policy Harassment No legal threats No personal attacks Ownership of content Username policy Vandalism
Other policy categories
Deletion Enforcement Legal Procedural
Directories
List of policies List of guidelines Manual of Style contents Searching
v t e

Do not make personal attacks anywhere on Misplaced Pages. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks harm the Misplaced Pages community and the collaborative atmosphere needed to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to sanctions including blocks or even bans.

What is considered to be a personal attack?

Shortcuts

Conduct policies
Block evasion Civility Clean start Consensus Dispute resolution Edit warring Editing policy Harassment No personal attacks Ownership of content Sockpuppetry Username policy Vandalism
v t e

There is no rule that is objective and not open to interpretation on what constitutes a personal attack as opposed to constructive discussion, but some types of comments are never acceptable:

Abusive, defamatory, or derogatory phrases based on race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religious or political beliefs, disability, ethnicity, nationality, etc. directed against another editor or a group of editors. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse.
Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream. An example could be, "You're a railfan so what would you know about fashion?" Note that it is not a personal attack to question an editor about their possible conflict of interest on a specific article or topic. However, be aware that speculation regarding the real-life identity of another editor may constitute outing.
Using someone's political affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views, such as accusing them of being left-wing or right-wing, is also forbidden. Editors are allowed to have personal political POV, as long as it does not negatively affect their editing and discussions.
Linking to external attacks, harassment, or other material, for the purpose of attacking another editor.
Comparing editors to Nazis, terrorists, dictators, or other infamous people. (See also Godwin's law.)
Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence, usually in the form of diffs and links.
Threats, including, but not limited to:
- Threats of legal action
- Threats of violence or other off-wiki action (particularly death threats)
- Threats or actions which deliberately expose other Misplaced Pages editors to political, religious or other persecution by a government, their employer, or any others. Violations of this sort may result in a block for an extended period of time, which may be applied immediately by any administrator upon discovery. Admins applying such sanctions should confidentially notify the members of the Arbitration Committee of what they have done and why.
- Threats to out (give out personal details about) an editor.

These examples are not exhaustive. Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all.

Why personal attacks are harmful

Personal attacks are disruptive. On article talk pages they tend to move the discussion away from the article and towards individuals. Such attacks tend to draw battle lines and make it more difficult for editors to work together.

Contributors often wish to have their viewpoints included in articles. Through reasoned debate, contributors can synthesize these views into a single article, and this creates a better, more neutral article for everyone. Every person who edits an article is part of the same larger community—we are all Wikipedians.

The prohibition against personal attacks applies equally to all Wikipedians. It is as unacceptable to attack a user with a history of foolish or boorish behavior, or one who has been blocked, banned, or otherwise sanctioned, as it is to attack any other user. Misplaced Pages encourages a civil community: people make mistakes, but they are encouraged to learn from them and change their ways. Personal attacks are contrary to this spirit and damaging to the work of building an encyclopedia.

Avoiding personal attacks

Shortcut

WP:AVOIDYOU

"WP:AVOIDYOU" redirects here. For the guideline on avoiding second-person pronouns in articles, see MOS:YOU.

As a matter of polite and effective discourse, arguments should not be personalized; that is, they should be directed at content and actions rather than people.

When there are disagreements about content, referring to other editors is not always a personal attack. A posting that says "Your statement about X is wrong because of information at Y", or "The paragraph you inserted into the article looks like original research", is not a personal attack. However, "The statement..." or "The paragraph inserted..." is less likely to be misinterpreted as a personal attack because it avoids referring to the other editor in the second person. "The paragraph inserted here into the article looks like original research" is especially advantageous because the diff cuts down confusion. Similarly, discussion of a user's conduct or history is not in itself a personal attack when done in the appropriate forum for such discussion (for example, the other editor's talk page, or Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents).

Editors should be civil and adhere to good etiquette when describing disagreements. The appropriate response to an inflammatory statement is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this policy. Accusing someone of making personal attacks without providing a justification for your accusation is also considered a form of personal attack. (See also: Incivility.)

Responding to personal attacks

First offenses and isolated incidents

Often the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is to simply ignore it. Sometimes personal attacks are not meant as attacks at all, and during heated and stressful debates, editors tend to overreact. Additionally, because Misplaced Pages discussions are in a text-only medium, nuances and emotions are often conveyed poorly, which can easily lead to misunderstanding (see Emotions in virtual communication). While personal attacks are not excused because of these factors, editors are encouraged to disregard angry and ill-mannered postings of others, if it is reasonable to do so, and to continue to focus their efforts on improving and developing the encyclopedia.

If you feel that a response is necessary and desirable, you can leave a polite message on the other user's talk page. Avoid responding on a talk page of an article, as this tends to escalate matters. Likewise, it is important to avoid becoming hostile and confrontational yourself, even in the face of abuse. Although warning templates may be used for this purpose, a customized message relating to the specific situation may be better received. If possible, try to find a compromise or common ground regarding the underlying issues of content, rather than argue about behavior.

Attacks that are particularly offensive or disruptive (such as physical threats, legal threats, or blatantly bigoted insults) should not be ignored. Extraordinary situations that require immediate intervention are rare, but may be reported at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Discussion of behavior in an appropriate forum (e.g. user's talk page or Misplaced Pages noticeboard) does not in itself constitute a personal attack.

Recurring attacks

Recurring, non-disruptive personal attacks that do not stop after reasoned requests to cease can be resolved through dispute resolution. In most circumstances, problems with personal attacks can be resolved if editors work together and focus on content, and immediate administrator action is not required.

Removal of personal attacks

Shortcut

WP:RPA

Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by any editor. However, there is no official policy regarding when or whether most personal attacks should be removed, although it has been a topic of substantial debate. Removing unquestionable personal attacks from your own user talk page is rarely a matter of concern. On other talk pages, especially where such text is directed against you, removal should typically be limited to clear-cut cases where it is obvious the text is a true personal attack. The {{RPA}} template can be used for this purpose.

Nevertheless, unusual circumstances do exist. The most serious types of personal attacks, such as efforts to reveal nonpublic personal information about Misplaced Pages editors (outing), go beyond the level of mere invective, and so can and should be removed for the benefit of the community and the project whether or not they are directed at you. In certain cases involving sensitive information, a request for oversight may also be appropriate.

Off-wiki attacks

Misplaced Pages cannot regulate behavior in media not under the control of the Wikimedia Foundation, but personal attacks made elsewhere create doubt about the good faith of an editor's on-wiki actions. Posting personal attacks or defamation off-Misplaced Pages is harmful to the community and to an editor's relationship with it, especially when such attacks violate an editor's privacy. Such attacks can be regarded as aggravating factors by administrators and are admissible evidence in the dispute-resolution process, including Arbitration cases.

External links

For policies related to attacks against living persons in general, whether or not they edit Misplaced Pages, see Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons.

Linking to off-site harassment, attacks, privacy violations, or threats of physical violence against any persons who edit Misplaced Pages, including those who edit for the purpose of attacking another editor, is never acceptable. This is not to be confused with legitimate critique. The inclusion of links in articles is a matter for sound editorial judgment.

The interpretation of this rule is complex. See Misplaced Pages:Linking to external harassment for guidance on interpretation.

Consequences of personal attacks

Although editors are encouraged to ignore or respond politely to isolated personal attacks, that should not imply that they are acceptable. A pattern of hostility reduces the likelihood of the community assuming good faith, and can be considered disruptive editing. Users who insist on a confrontational style marked by personal attacks are likely to become involved in the dispute resolution process, and may face serious consequences through arbitration.

In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a block for disruption. Death threats and issues of similar severity may result in a block without warning. Lesser personal attacks often result in a warning, and a request to refactor. If a pattern of lesser personal attacks continues despite the warning, escalating blocks may follow. However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less-severe situations when it is unclear if the conduct severely disrupts the project. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered disruptive. Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment: a block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks.

P	Verifiability No original research Neutral point of view What Misplaced Pages is not Biographies of living persons Copyright (Copyright violations) Image use Article titles
G	Notability Autobiography Citing sources Reliable sources Medicine Do not include copies of lengthy primary sources Plagiarism Don't create hoaxes Fringe theories Patent nonsense External links

Conduct (?)

P	Civility Consensus Harassment Vandalism Ignore all rules No personal attacks Ownership of content Edit warring Dispute resolution Sockpuppetry No legal threats Child protection Paid-contribution disclosure
G	Assume good faith Conflict of interest Disruptive editing Do not disrupt Misplaced Pages to illustrate a point Etiquette Gaming the system Please do not bite the newcomers Courtesy vanishing Responding to threats of harm Talk page guidelines Signatures

Deletion (?)

P	Deletion policy Proposed deletion Biographies Criteria for speedy deletion Attack page Oversight Revision deletion

Enforcement (?)

P	Administrators Banning Blocking Page protection

Editing (?)

Editing policy

Article size Summary style Be bold Disambiguation Hatnotes Broad-concept article Understandability
Style	Manual of Style Contents Accessibility Dates and numbers Images Layout Lead section Linking Lists
Classification	Categories, lists, and navigation templates Categorization Template namespace

Project content (?)

G	Project namespace WikiProjects User pages User boxes Shortcuts Subpages

WMF (?)

P	Universal Code of Conduct Terms of Use List of policies Friendly space policy Licensing and copyright Privacy policy

List of all policies and guidelines
- P: List of policies
- G: List of guidelines
Summaries of values and principles

Misplaced Pages essays (?)

Essays on building, editing, and deleting content

Philosophy	Article content Articles must be written All Five Pillars are equally important Avoid vague introductions Be a reliable source Civil POV pushing Cohesion Competence is required Concede lost arguments Dissent is not disloyalty Don't lie Don't search for objections Editing Misplaced Pages is like visiting a foreign country Editors will sometimes be wrong Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia Explanationism External criticism of Misplaced Pages Here to build an encyclopedia Leave it to the experienced Levels of competence Levels of consensus Most ideas are bad Need Neutrality of sources Not broken is ugly Not editing because of Misplaced Pages restriction The one question Oversimplification Paradoxes Paraphrasing POV and OR from editors, sources, and fields Process is important Product, process, policy Purpose Reasonability rule Systemic bias There is no seniority Ten Simple Rules for Editing Misplaced Pages Tendentious editing The role of policies in collaborative anarchy The rules are principles Trifecta We are absolutely here to right great wrongs Misplaced Pages in brief Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia Misplaced Pages is a community Misplaced Pages is not RationalWiki
Article construction	100K featured articles Abandoned stubs Acronym overkill Adding images improves the encyclopedia Advanced article editing Advanced text formatting Akin's Laws of Article Writing Alternatives to the "Expand" template Amnesia test A navbox on every page An unfinished house is a real problem Articles have a half-life Autosizing images Avoid mission statements Be neutral in form Beef up that first revision Blind men and an elephant BOLD, revert, discuss cycle Build content to endure Cherrypicking Chesterton's fence Children's lit, adult new readers, & large-print books Citation overkill Citation underkill Common-style fallacy Concept cloud Creating controversial content Criticisms of society may be consistent with NPOV and reliability Deprecated sources Dictionaries as sources Don't demolish the house while it's still being built Don't get hung up on minor details Don't hope the house will build itself Don't panic Don't "teach the controversy" Editing on mobile devices Editors are not mindreaders Encourage the newcomers Endorsements (commercial) Featured articles may have problems Formatting bilateral relations articles Formatting bilateral relations templates Fruit of the poisonous tree Give an article a chance How to write a featured article Identifying and using independent sources History sources Law sources Primary sources Science sources Style guides Tertiary sources Ignore STRONGNAT for date formats Inaccuracy Introduction to structurism Mine a source Merge Test Minors and persons judged incompetent "Murder of" articles Not every story/event/disaster needs a biography Not everything needs a navbox Not everything needs a template Nothing is in stone Obtain peer review comments Organizing disambiguation pages by subject area Permastub Potential, not just current state Presentism Principle of Some Astonishment The problem with elegant variation Pro and con lists Printability Pruning article revisions Publicists Put a little effort into it Restoring part of a reverted edit Robotic editing Sham consensus Source your plot summaries Specialized-style fallacy Stub Makers Run an edit-a-thon Temporary versions of articles Tertiary-source fallacy There are no shortcuts to neutrality There is no deadline There is a deadline The deadline is now Try not to leave it a stub What is a reliable source Understanding Misplaced Pages's content standards Walled garden What an article should not include Misplaced Pages is a work in progress Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source Misplaced Pages is not being written in an organized fashion The world will not end tomorrow Write the article first Writing better articles
Writing article content	Avoid thread mode Copyediting reception sections Coup Don't throw more litter onto the pile Gender-neutral language Myth vs fiction Proseline Use our own words We shouldn't be able to figure out your opinions Write the article first Writing about women Writing better articles
Removing or deleting content	Adjectives in your recommendations AfD is not a war zone Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions Arguments to avoid in deletion reviews Arguments to avoid in image deletion discussions Arguments to make in deletion discussions Avoid repeated arguments Before commenting in a deletion discussion But there must be sources! Confusing arguments mean nothing Content removal Counting and sorting are not original research Delete or merge Delete the junk Deletion is not cleanup Does deletion help? Don't attack the nominator Don't confuse stub status with non-notability Don't overuse shortcuts to policy and guidelines to win your argument Emptying categories out of process Follow the leader How the presumption of notability works How to save an article proposed for deletion I just don't like it Identifying blatant advertising Identifying test edits Immunity Keep it concise Liar liar pants on fire Nothing Nothing is clear Overzealous deletion Relisting can be abusive Relist bias The Heymann Standard Unopposed AFD discussion Misplaced Pages is not Whack-A-Mole Why was the page I created deleted? What to do if your article gets tagged for speedy deletion When in doubt, hide it in the woodwork No Encyclopedic Use

Essays on civility

The basics	Accepting other users Apology Contributing to complicated discussions Divisiveness Don't retaliate Editors' pronouns Edit at your own pace Encouraging the newcomers Enjoy yourself Expect no thanks High-functioning autism and Asperger's editors How to be civil Maintaining a friendly space Negotiation Obsessive–compulsive disorder editors Please say please Relationships with academic editors Thank you Too long; didn't read Truce Unblock perspectives We are all Wikipedians here You have a right to remain silent
Philosophy	A thank you never hurts A weak personal attack is still wrong Advice for hotheads An uncivil environment is a poor environment Be the glue Beware of the tigers! Civility warnings Deletion as revenge Failure Forgive and forget It's not the end of the world Nobody cares Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals Old-fashioned Wikipedian values Profanity, civility, and discussions Revert notification opt-out Shadowless Fists of Death! Staying cool when the editing gets hot The grey zone The last word There is no Divine Right of Editors Most ideas are bad Nothing is clear Reader The rules of polite discourse There is no common sense Two wrongs don't make a right Misplaced Pages clichés Misplaced Pages is not about winning Misplaced Pages should not be a monopoly Writing for the opponent
Dos	Assume good faith Assume the assumption of good faith Assume no clue Avoid personal remarks Avoid the word "vandal" Be excellent to one another Be pragmatic Beyond civility Call a spade a spade Candor Deny recognition Desist Discussing cruft Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass Encourage full discussions Get over it How to lose Imagine others complexly Just drop it Keep it concise Keep it down to earth Mind your own business Say "MOBY" Mutual withdrawal Read before commenting Settle the process first
Don'ts	ALPHABETTISPAGHETTI Misplaced Pages:Because I can Civil POV pushing Cyberbullying Don't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack Don't be a fanatic Don't be a jerk Don't be an ostrich Don't be ashamed Don't be a WikiBigot Don't be high-maintenance Don't be inconsiderate Don't be obnoxious Don't be prejudiced Don't be rude Don't be the Fun Police Don't bludgeon the process Don't call a spade a spade Don't call people by their real name Don't call the kettle black Don't call things cruft Don't come down like a ton of bricks Don't cry COI Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify Don't drink the consensus Kool-Aid Don't eat the troll's food Don't fight fire with fire Don't give a fuck Don't help too much Don't ignore community consensus Don't knit beside the guillotine Don't make a smarmy valediction part of your signature Don't remind others of past misdeeds Don't shout Don't spite your face Don't take the bait Don't template the regulars Don't throw your toys out of the pram Do not insult the vandals Griefing Hate is disruptive Nationalist editing No angry mastodons just madmen No Nazis No racists No Confederates No queerphobia No, you can't have a pony Passive aggression POV railroad Superhatting There are no oracles There's no need to guess someone's preferred pronouns You can't squeeze blood from a turnip UPPERCASE
WikiRelations	WikiBullying WikiCrime WikiHarassment WikiHate WikiLawyering WikiLove WikiPeace

Essays on notability

Humorous essays

About essays

About essays	Essay guide Value of essays Difference between policies, guidelines and essays Don't cite essays as if they were policy Avoid writing redundant essays Finding an essay Quote your own essay
Policies and guidelines	About policies and guidelines Policies Guidelines How to contribute to Misplaced Pages guidance Policy writing is hard

Categories: