Misplaced Pages:Ownership of content: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 18:31, 7 May 2009 editTransporterMan (talk \| contribs)Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Mass message senders, Pending changes reviewers23,031 edits Removed " " from last example under On Revert, as being potentially misleading under WP:NFCC← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 20:03, 18 December 2024 edit undoCrystallizedcarbon (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers44,334 editsm Reverted edits by 49.237.35.146 (talk) (HG) (3.4.10)Tags: Huggle Rollback
(815 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Short description\|Wikimedia project policy}}
	{{Policy\|WP:OWN\|WP:OWNER\|WP:OWNERSHIP}}
			<noinclude>{{pp-move-indef}}</noinclude>
	{{nutshell\|You do not own articles (nor templates and other features of Misplaced Pages). If you create or edit an article, know that others will edit it, and within reason you should not prevent them from doing so.}}
			{{Redirect\|WP:OWN\|the guideline about users' own talk pages and the removal of posts and comments\|WP:OWNTALK}}
	{{Policylist Behavioral}}
			{{Redirect\|WP:OOP\|the humorous essay on the usage of "OOPS" to defend oneself\|WP:OOPS}}
	{{About\|control over an article's text\|the ownership of copyright in an article\|Misplaced Pages:Copyrights}}		{{About\|control over an article's text\|the ownership of copyright in an article\|Misplaced Pages:Copyrights}}
			{{Policy\|WP:OWN}}
			{{nutshell\|
			No one "owns" content (including articles or any page at Misplaced Pages). If you create or edit an article, other editors can make changes, and you cannot prevent them from doing so. In addition, you should not undo their edits without good reason. Disagreements should be ], starting with a discussion on the article ]. There is generally no responsibility on subjects or authors to maintain articles.}}
			{{conduct policy list}}

			All ] pages and articles are edited collaboratively by the ]. '''No one''', no matter what, has the right to act as though they are the ''owner'' of a particular article (or any part of it). Even a subject of an article, be that a person or organization, '''does not''' own the article, '''nor has any right to dictate''' what the article may or may ''not'' say. No one, whether a subject or an article creator, has a responsibility to maintain an article or can normally be held responsible for its content.
	Some contributors feel very possessive about material (be it categories, templates, articles, images, essays, or portals) that they have contributed to this project. Some go so far as to defend them against all others. It is one thing to take an interest in an article that you maintain on your watchlist. Maybe you really are an expert or you just care about the topic. But if this watchfulness starts to become possessiveness, then you may be overdoing it. Believing that an article has an owner of this sort is a ] people make on Misplaced Pages.

			Some contributors feel possessive about material they have contributed to Misplaced Pages. A few editors will even defend such material against others. It is quite reasonable to take an interest in an article on a topic you care about—perhaps you are an expert, or perhaps it is just your hobby; however, if this watchfulness starts to become possessiveness, then you are overdoing it. Believing that an article has an owner of this sort is a ] people make on Misplaced Pages.
	You cannot stop everyone in the world from editing "your" stuff, once you have posted it to Misplaced Pages. As each edit page clearly states:

			Once you have posted it to Misplaced Pages, you cannot stop anyone from editing text you have written. As each edit page clearly states:
	*If you don't want your material to be ''edited mercilessly'' or redistributed for profit by others, '''do not submit it.'''
			{{quote\|'''Work submitted to Misplaced Pages can be edited, used, and redistributed by anyone.'''}}
			Similarly, by submitting your ideas (for article organization, categorization, style, standards, etc.) to Misplaced Pages, you allow others to challenge and develop them.

			If you find yourself in an ] with other contributors, why not take some time off from the editing process? Taking yourself out of the equation can cool things off considerably. Take a fresh look a week or two later. Or, if someone else is claiming "ownership" of a page, you can bring it up on the associated talk page, appeal to other contributors, or consider the ] process.
	Also:
	*If you do not want your ideas (for article organization, categorization, style, standards, etc.) challenged or developed by others, then do not submit them.

			Even though editors can never "own" an article, it is important to respect the work and ideas of your fellow contributors. Therefore, be cautious when removing or rewriting large amounts of content, particularly if this content was written by one editor; it is more effective to try to work with the editor than against them—even if you think they are acting as if they "own" the article. (See also ], ], and ].)
	If you find yourself warring with other contributors over deletions, reversions, and so on, why not take some time off from the editing process? Taking yourself out of the equation can cool things off considerably. Take a fresh look a week or two later. Or, if someone else is claiming "ownership" of a page, you can bring it up on the associated talk page, appeal to other contributors, or consider the ] process.

			Being the primary or sole editor of an article does not constitute ownership, provided that contributions and input from fellow editors are not ignored or immediately disregarded. Editors familiar with the topic and in possession of relevant reliable sources may have watchlisted such articles and may discuss or amend others' edits. This too does not equal ownership, provided it does not marginalise the valid opinions of others and is adequately justified. Often these editors can be approached and may offer assistance to those unfamiliar with the article.
	Even though people can never "own" an article, it is still important to respect your fellow contributors' work and ideas. Therefore, when removing or rewriting large amounts of content, particularly if this content was written by one editor, it is often more effective to try to work with the editor, instead of against them—even if you think they are acting as if they "own" the article. (See also ], ] and ].)

			==Types of ownership==
	==Do not sign what you do not own==
			There are two common types of ownership conflicts between users: those involving ''one editor'' and those involving ''multiple editors''.
	Since no one "owns" any part of any article, if you create or edit an article, you should not ] it. As for credit, the exact contributions of all editors are seen with their names on the ]. This is the Misplaced Pages equivalent of a ].

			While ownership behavior is often understood to involve the original creator of the article, it can also involve other editors who have conflicting interests in promoting or opposing the subject, hijacking the original article's direction and emphasis, changing the title to reflect such changes, or, if unsuccessful, blanking or deleting the article as a form of revenge.
	On the other hand, when adding comments, questions, or votes to ''talk pages'', it is good to "own" your text, so the best practice is to ] it by suffixing your entry with "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>"—no spaces, no brackets, no quotes, nothing—just the four tildes anywhere in ']' will work. On existing pages, you can get an idea of where it is appropriate to add your signature by noting what previous contributors have done. For more editing dos and don'ts, see the brief ].

			===Single-editor ownership===
	==Ownership examples==
			In many cases (but not all), single editors engaged in ownership conflicts are also ''primary contributors'' to the article, so keep in mind that such editors may be experts in their field or have a genuine interest in maintaining the quality of the article and preserving accuracy. An editor who appears to assume ownership of an article should be approached on the article's talk page with a descriptive header informing readers about the topic. Always avoid accusations, attacks, and speculations concerning the motivation of any editor. If the behaviour continues, the issue may require dispute resolution, but it is important to make a good attempt to communicate with the editor on the article talk page before proceeding to mediation, etc. Editors of this type often welcome discussion, so a simple exchange of ideas will usually solve the problem of ownership.

			If you find that the editor continues to be hostile, makes personal attacks, or wages ], try to ignore ] by discussing the topic on the talk page. You may need to ignore attacks made in response to a query. If ownership persists after a discussion, ] may be necessary, but at least you will be on record as having attempted to solve the problem directly with the editor. It is important to make a good attempt to communicate with the editor on the article talk page before proceeding to mediation, etc. It may also be wise to allow them to withdraw from the conversation and return when they are ready.
	===Events===
	*One editor disputes minor edits concerning layout, image use, and wording in a particular article daily. The editor might claim the right, whether openly or implicitly, to review any changes before they can be added to the article. (This does not include egregious formatting errors.)
	*Article changes by different editors are reverted by the same editor repeatedly over an extended period to protect a certain version, stable or not. (This does not include removing ].)
	*An editor comments on other editors' talk pages with the purpose of discouraging them from making additional contributions. The discussion can take many forms; it may be purely negative, consisting of threats and insults, often avoiding the topic of the revert altogether. At the other extreme, the owner may patronize other editors, claiming that their ideas are interesting while also claiming that they lack the deep understanding of the article necessary to edit it.

			===Multiple-editor ownership===
	===Comments===
			The involvement of multiple editors, each defending the ownership of the other, can be highly complex. The simplest scenario usually consists of a dominant editor who is defended by other editors, reinforcing the former's ownership. This can be frustrating to both new and seasoned editors. As before, address the topic and not the actions of the editors. If this fails, proceed to dispute resolution, but it is important to communicate on the talk page and attempt to resolve the dispute yourself {{em\|before}} escalating the conflict resolution process.
	] guardians of Greek mythology, Misplaced Pages "owners" pose a riddle to all who dare to edit their articles.]]
	*"Are you qualified to edit this article?"
	*"You obviously have no hands-on experience with ]s."
	*"I/he/we created this article."
	* "Hi! I notice that you are a ''new'' contributor to the ] article. Thank you ''sooo'' much for your ideas. It is wonderful to know that so many novices like yourself have taken an interest to widgets. Anyhow, I have made some small amendments to your changes. You might notice that my tweaking of your wording has, in effect, reverted the article back to what it was before, but do not feel disheartened. Please feel free to make any other changes to ''my'' article if you ever think of anything worthwhile. Toodles! :)"
	=== On Revert ===
	*"Do not make such changes or comments until you have significantly edited or written work of this quality."
	*"Unless it is wrong or has errors, please do not make such changes or comments without my/his approval."
	*"Revert. You're editing too much. Can you slow down?" or "Get consensus before you make such huge changes."
	* "We don't need this. Thanks anyways."
	* "I haven't had time to confirm what you wrote. I have other obligations besides wikipedia, you know."
	* "I don't own that book, so I can't confirm your source."
	* "You didn't have consensus because I was offline."
	* "I'm going to add a better one when I have the time."

	==~~Types~~ of ~~ownership~~==		==Ownership and stewardship==
			{{redirect\|WP:STEWARDSHIP\|the group of users\|meta:Stewards}}
	There are two common types of ownership conflicts between ]: those involving ''primary editors'' and those involving ''multiple editors''. Another type of ownership dispute that involves ] is discussed at ].
			Unless an editor ], it's best to ] on their part and regard their behavior as stewardship. Stewardship or shepherding of an article or group of related articles may be the result of a sincere personal interest in the subject matter or in a cause or organization related to it. The editor might also be an expert or otherwise very knowledgeable in the subject matter and able to provide credible insights for locating ]. The editors in question are no less responsible for adhering to core policies like ], ] with reliable sources, and ].

			Misplaced Pages is the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit", but not all edits bring improvement. In many cases, a core group of editors will have worked to build the article up to its present state and will revert edits that they find detrimental in order, they believe, to preserve the quality of the encyclopedia. Such reversion does not indicate an "ownership" problem, if it is supported by an edit summary referring to Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, previous reviews and discussions, or specific grammar or prose problems introduced by the edit.
	===Primary editors===
	Primary editors, that is to say, one editor who takes ownership of an article, should be approached on the article talk page with a descriptive header that informs readers about the topic. Always avoid accusations, attacks, and speculations concerning the motivation of editors. If necessary, ignore attacks made in response to a query. If the behavior continues, the issue may require dispute resolution, but it is important to make a good attempt to communicate with the editor on the article talk page before proceeding to mediation, etc.

			Where disagreement persists after such a reversion, the editor proposing the change should first take the matter to the talk page, without ] or accusations of ownership. In this way, the specifics of any change can be discussed with the editors who are familiar with the article, who are likewise expected to discuss the content civilly. All editors must follow ] and avoid ].
	In many cases (but not all), primary editors engaged in ownership conflicts are also ''primary contributors'' to the article, so keep in mind that such editors may be experts in their field and/or have a genuine interest in maintaining the quality of the article and preserving accuracy. Editors of this type often welcome discussion, so a simple exchange of ideas will usually solve the problem of ownership. If you find that the editor continues to be hostile, makes personal attacks, or wages ], try to ignore disruptive behavior by discussing the topic on the talk page. If the ownership behavior persists after a discussion, dispute resolution may be necessary, but at least one will be on record as having attempted to solve the problem directly with the primary editor. A common response by a primary editor confronted with ownership behavior is to threaten to leave the project. Since the ownership policy ''encourages'' such editors to take a break, it may be wise to let them leave and return when they are ready.

	===~~Multiple~~ ~~editors~~===		===Featured articles===
			{{shortcut\|WP:FAOWN}}
	The involvement of multiple editors, each defending the ownership of the other, can be highly complex. The simplest scenario usually comprises a dominant primary editor who is defended by other editors, reinforcing the former's ownership. This is often informally described as a ], and can be frustrating to both new and seasoned editors. As before, address the topic and not the actions of the editors. If this fails, proceed to dispute resolution, but it is important to communicate on the talk page and attempt to resolve the dispute yourself ''before'' escalating the conflict resolution process.
			While ] (identified by a bronze star in the upper-right corner ]) are open for editing like any other, they have gone through a community review process as ], where they are checked for high-quality sources, a thorough survey of the relevant literature, and compliance with ]. Editors are asked to take particular care when editing a featured article; it is considerate to discuss significant changes of text or images on the talk page first. Explaining civilly why sources and policies support a particular version of a featured article does not necessarily constitute ownership. The {{tl\|article history}} template on the talk page will contain a link to the featured article candidacy and any subsequent ].

			==User pages==
			{{main\|Misplaced Pages:User pages\|Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines#User talk pages}}
			Misplaced Pages offers wide latitude to users to manage their user ] as they see fit. Nevertheless, they are not personal homepages, and '''are not owned by the user'''. They are still part of Misplaced Pages and must serve its primary purposes; in particular, user talk pages make communication and collaboration among editors easier. These functions must not be hampered by ownership behavior.

			While other users and bots will more commonly edit your ], they have rights to edit other pages in your user space as well. Usually others will not edit your primary user page, other than to address significant concerns (rarely) or to do routine housekeeping, such as handling project-related tags, disambiguating links to pages that have been moved, removing the page from categories meant for articles, replacing non-free content by linking to it, or removing obvious vandalism or ] violations.

	==Resolving ownership issues==		==Resolving ownership issues==
	While it may be easy to identify ownership issues, it is far more difficult to resolve the conflict to the satisfaction of the editors involved. It is always helpful to remember to ], ], and remain ]. Accusing other editors of owning the article may appear aggressive, and could be perceived as a personal attack. Address the editor in a civil manner, with the same amount of respect you would expect. Often, editors accused of ownership may not even realize it, so it is important to assume good faith. Some editors may think they are protecting the article from vandalism, and may respond to any changes with hostility. Others may try to promote their own point of view, failing to recognize the importance of the ] policy.		While it may be easy to identify ownership issues, it is far more difficult to resolve the conflict to the satisfaction of the editors involved. It is always helpful to remember to ], ], and remain ]. Accusing other editors of owning the article may appear aggressive, and could be perceived as a personal attack. Address the editor in a civil manner, with the same amount of respect you would expect. Often, editors accused of ownership may not even realize it, so it is important to assume good faith. Some editors may think they are protecting the article from vandalism, and may respond to any changes with hostility. Others may try to promote their own point of view, failing to recognize the importance of the ] policy.

			==Examples of ownership behaviour==
			{{further\|Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks}}
			If an editor consistently demonstrates behavior similar to that shown in the following examples in a certain article talk page, then they may have issues with page ownership.
			{{Shortcut\|WP:OWNBEHAVIOR\|WP:OWNBEHAVIOUR}}

			===Actions===
			#An editor disputes minor edits concerning layout, image use, and wording in a particular article frequently. The editor might claim, whether openly or implicitly, the right to review any changes before they can be added to the article. (This does not include the routine maintenance of article consistency, such as preservation of established ] or ].)
			#An editor reverts justified article changes by different editors repeatedly over an extended period to protect a certain version, stable or not.
			#An editor reverts a change simply because the editor finds it "unnecessary" without claiming that the change is detrimental. This has the effect of assigning priority, between two equivalent versions, to an owner's version.
			#An editor reverts a good-faith change without providing an edit summary that refers to relevant Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, previous reviews and discussions, reliable sources, or specific grammar or prose problems introduced by the edit. Repeating such no-reason reversions after being asked for a rationale is a strong indicator of ownership behavior.
			#An editor comments on other editors' talk pages with the purpose of discouraging them from making additional contributions. The discussion can take many forms; it may be purely negative, consisting of threats and insults, often avoiding the topic of the article altogether. At the other extreme, the owner may patronize other editors, claiming that their ideas are interesting while also claiming that they lack the deep understanding of the subject necessary to edit the article (see the first two comments in the Statements section just below).
			#An editor reverts any edit with a ] in the edit summary.

			===Statements===
			Although the following statements, seen in isolation from any context or other statements, do not indicate ownership behavior or motivation, they may be part of a pattern that indicates ownership behavior. When they occur along with some form of dogged insistence and relentless pushing, without good policy back up, and often including edit warring, they may be an expression of ownership behavior.
			#"Are you qualified to edit this article?" / "You only have X edits." (])
			#"I created/wrote the majority of this article." (implying some kind of right or status exists because of that)
			#"I'm an expert on the subject. If you have any suggestions, please put them in the talk page and I will review them."
			#"Please do not make any more changes without my/their/our approval."
			#"Please clear this with WikiProject Z first."
			#"I can see nothing wrong with the article and there is no need to change anything at all." (misapplying ])
			#"Undo ] editor."
			#"You hadn't edited the article or talk page previously."
			#"You're vandalizing my hard work."

			==Responsibility==
			Subjects and authors aren't responsible for updating content. Examples:
			#The author of an article is not generally required to update an article for outdated information or changes in consensus as long as the content was accurate/according to consensus at the time of creation, see ]. Keep in mind that not all authors are active or check their watchlist and even those that are/do will not necessarily check every edit or identify a problem with an edit.
			#The subject of an article is not required to police it for policy violations or otherwise keep it updated, etc. Keep in mind that even though Misplaced Pages often comes up high on Google searches, the subject may not yet have discovered the article or even if they have, they may not know how to edit it. Although subjects are encouraged to make minor corrections and remove vandalism, they are normally discouraged from making substantial edits, so some subjects may prefer to stay away from editing them at all.

	==See also==		==See also==
	* ]		*{{section link\|Misplaced Pages:Consensus#Levels of consensus}}
	* ]		*]
	* ]
	===Essays===
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	* ]
	{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}}

	==External links==		==External links==
	* - a discussion of authorship of Wiki pages on the		*] – A discussion of authorship of Wiki pages on the ]

	]		{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}}
	]

			]
	]
			]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]

Latest revision as of 20:03, 18 December 2024

Wikimedia project policy "WP:OWN" redirects here. For the guideline about users' own talk pages and the removal of posts and comments, see WP:OWNTALK. "WP:OOP" redirects here. For the humorous essay on the usage of "OOPS" to defend oneself, see WP:OOPS. This page is about control over an article's text. For the ownership of copyright in an article, see Misplaced Pages:Copyrights.

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.

Shortcut

WP:OWN

This page in a nutshell: No one "owns" content (including articles or any page at Misplaced Pages). If you create or edit an article, other editors can make changes, and you cannot prevent them from doing so. In addition, you should not undo their edits without good reason. Disagreements should be calmly resolved, starting with a discussion on the article talk page. There is generally no responsibility on subjects or authors to maintain articles.

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

All Misplaced Pages pages and articles are edited collaboratively by the Wikipedian community of volunteer contributors. No one, no matter what, has the right to act as though they are the owner of a particular article (or any part of it). Even a subject of an article, be that a person or organization, does not own the article, nor has any right to dictate what the article may or may not say. No one, whether a subject or an article creator, has a responsibility to maintain an article or can normally be held responsible for its content.

Some contributors feel possessive about material they have contributed to Misplaced Pages. A few editors will even defend such material against others. It is quite reasonable to take an interest in an article on a topic you care about—perhaps you are an expert, or perhaps it is just your hobby; however, if this watchfulness starts to become possessiveness, then you are overdoing it. Believing that an article has an owner of this sort is a common mistake people make on Misplaced Pages.

Once you have posted it to Misplaced Pages, you cannot stop anyone from editing text you have written. As each edit page clearly states:

Work submitted to Misplaced Pages can be edited, used, and redistributed by anyone.

Similarly, by submitting your ideas (for article organization, categorization, style, standards, etc.) to Misplaced Pages, you allow others to challenge and develop them.

If you find yourself in an edit war with other contributors, why not take some time off from the editing process? Taking yourself out of the equation can cool things off considerably. Take a fresh look a week or two later. Or, if someone else is claiming "ownership" of a page, you can bring it up on the associated talk page, appeal to other contributors, or consider the dispute resolution process.

Even though editors can never "own" an article, it is important to respect the work and ideas of your fellow contributors. Therefore, be cautious when removing or rewriting large amounts of content, particularly if this content was written by one editor; it is more effective to try to work with the editor than against them—even if you think they are acting as if they "own" the article. (See also Misplaced Pages:Civility, Misplaced Pages:Etiquette, and Misplaced Pages:Assume good faith.)

Being the primary or sole editor of an article does not constitute ownership, provided that contributions and input from fellow editors are not ignored or immediately disregarded. Editors familiar with the topic and in possession of relevant reliable sources may have watchlisted such articles and may discuss or amend others' edits. This too does not equal ownership, provided it does not marginalise the valid opinions of others and is adequately justified. Often these editors can be approached and may offer assistance to those unfamiliar with the article.

Types of ownership

There are two common types of ownership conflicts between users: those involving one editor and those involving multiple editors.

While ownership behavior is often understood to involve the original creator of the article, it can also involve other editors who have conflicting interests in promoting or opposing the subject, hijacking the original article's direction and emphasis, changing the title to reflect such changes, or, if unsuccessful, blanking or deleting the article as a form of revenge.

Single-editor ownership

In many cases (but not all), single editors engaged in ownership conflicts are also primary contributors to the article, so keep in mind that such editors may be experts in their field or have a genuine interest in maintaining the quality of the article and preserving accuracy. An editor who appears to assume ownership of an article should be approached on the article's talk page with a descriptive header informing readers about the topic. Always avoid accusations, attacks, and speculations concerning the motivation of any editor. If the behaviour continues, the issue may require dispute resolution, but it is important to make a good attempt to communicate with the editor on the article talk page before proceeding to mediation, etc. Editors of this type often welcome discussion, so a simple exchange of ideas will usually solve the problem of ownership.

If you find that the editor continues to be hostile, makes personal attacks, or wages edit wars, try to ignore disruptive editing by discussing the topic on the talk page. You may need to ignore attacks made in response to a query. If ownership persists after a discussion, dispute resolution may be necessary, but at least you will be on record as having attempted to solve the problem directly with the editor. It is important to make a good attempt to communicate with the editor on the article talk page before proceeding to mediation, etc. It may also be wise to allow them to withdraw from the conversation and return when they are ready.

Multiple-editor ownership

The involvement of multiple editors, each defending the ownership of the other, can be highly complex. The simplest scenario usually consists of a dominant editor who is defended by other editors, reinforcing the former's ownership. This can be frustrating to both new and seasoned editors. As before, address the topic and not the actions of the editors. If this fails, proceed to dispute resolution, but it is important to communicate on the talk page and attempt to resolve the dispute yourself before escalating the conflict resolution process.

Ownership and stewardship

"WP:STEWARDSHIP" redirects here. For the group of users, see meta:Stewards.

Unless an editor exhibits behaviour associated with ownership, it's best to assume good faith on their part and regard their behavior as stewardship. Stewardship or shepherding of an article or group of related articles may be the result of a sincere personal interest in the subject matter or in a cause or organization related to it. The editor might also be an expert or otherwise very knowledgeable in the subject matter and able to provide credible insights for locating reliable sources. The editors in question are no less responsible for adhering to core policies like neutrality of viewpoint, verifiability with reliable sources, and civility.

Misplaced Pages is the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit", but not all edits bring improvement. In many cases, a core group of editors will have worked to build the article up to its present state and will revert edits that they find detrimental in order, they believe, to preserve the quality of the encyclopedia. Such reversion does not indicate an "ownership" problem, if it is supported by an edit summary referring to Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, previous reviews and discussions, or specific grammar or prose problems introduced by the edit.

Where disagreement persists after such a reversion, the editor proposing the change should first take the matter to the talk page, without personal comments or accusations of ownership. In this way, the specifics of any change can be discussed with the editors who are familiar with the article, who are likewise expected to discuss the content civilly. All editors must follow the official policy about discussing disputes and avoid edit warring.

Featured articles

Shortcut

WP:FAOWN

While featured articles (identified by a bronze star in the upper-right corner ) are open for editing like any other, they have gone through a community review process as featured article candidates, where they are checked for high-quality sources, a thorough survey of the relevant literature, and compliance with the featured article criteria. Editors are asked to take particular care when editing a featured article; it is considerate to discuss significant changes of text or images on the talk page first. Explaining civilly why sources and policies support a particular version of a featured article does not necessarily constitute ownership. The {{article history}} template on the talk page will contain a link to the featured article candidacy and any subsequent featured article reviews.

User pages

Main pages: Misplaced Pages:User pages and Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines § User talk pages

Misplaced Pages offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. Nevertheless, they are not personal homepages, and are not owned by the user. They are still part of Misplaced Pages and must serve its primary purposes; in particular, user talk pages make communication and collaboration among editors easier. These functions must not be hampered by ownership behavior.

While other users and bots will more commonly edit your user talk page, they have rights to edit other pages in your user space as well. Usually others will not edit your primary user page, other than to address significant concerns (rarely) or to do routine housekeeping, such as handling project-related tags, disambiguating links to pages that have been moved, removing the page from categories meant for articles, replacing non-free content by linking to it, or removing obvious vandalism or BLP violations.

Resolving ownership issues

While it may be easy to identify ownership issues, it is far more difficult to resolve the conflict to the satisfaction of the editors involved. It is always helpful to remember to stay calm, assume good faith, and remain civil. Accusing other editors of owning the article may appear aggressive, and could be perceived as a personal attack. Address the editor in a civil manner, with the same amount of respect you would expect. Often, editors accused of ownership may not even realize it, so it is important to assume good faith. Some editors may think they are protecting the article from vandalism, and may respond to any changes with hostility. Others may try to promote their own point of view, failing to recognize the importance of the neutrality policy.

Examples of ownership behaviour

Further information: Misplaced Pages:No personal attacks

If an editor consistently demonstrates behavior similar to that shown in the following examples in a certain article talk page, then they may have issues with page ownership.

Shortcuts

Actions

An editor disputes minor edits concerning layout, image use, and wording in a particular article frequently. The editor might claim, whether openly or implicitly, the right to review any changes before they can be added to the article. (This does not include the routine maintenance of article consistency, such as preservation of established spelling or citation styles.)
An editor reverts justified article changes by different editors repeatedly over an extended period to protect a certain version, stable or not.
An editor reverts a change simply because the editor finds it "unnecessary" without claiming that the change is detrimental. This has the effect of assigning priority, between two equivalent versions, to an owner's version.
An editor reverts a good-faith change without providing an edit summary that refers to relevant Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, previous reviews and discussions, reliable sources, or specific grammar or prose problems introduced by the edit. Repeating such no-reason reversions after being asked for a rationale is a strong indicator of ownership behavior.
An editor comments on other editors' talk pages with the purpose of discouraging them from making additional contributions. The discussion can take many forms; it may be purely negative, consisting of threats and insults, often avoiding the topic of the article altogether. At the other extreme, the owner may patronize other editors, claiming that their ideas are interesting while also claiming that they lack the deep understanding of the subject necessary to edit the article (see the first two comments in the Statements section just below).
An editor reverts any edit with a personal attack in the edit summary.

Statements

Although the following statements, seen in isolation from any context or other statements, do not indicate ownership behavior or motivation, they may be part of a pattern that indicates ownership behavior. When they occur along with some form of dogged insistence and relentless pushing, without good policy back up, and often including edit warring, they may be an expression of ownership behavior.

"Are you qualified to edit this article?" / "You only have X edits." (pulling rank)
"I created/wrote the majority of this article." (implying some kind of right or status exists because of that)
"I'm an expert on the subject. If you have any suggestions, please put them in the talk page and I will review them."
"Please do not make any more changes without my/their/our approval."
"Please clear this with WikiProject Z first."
"I can see nothing wrong with the article and there is no need to change anything at all." (misapplying WP:AINTBROKE)
"Undo peanut-gallery editor."
"You hadn't edited the article or talk page previously."
"You're vandalizing my hard work."

Responsibility

Subjects and authors aren't responsible for updating content. Examples:

The author of an article is not generally required to update an article for outdated information or changes in consensus as long as the content was accurate/according to consensus at the time of creation, see WP:MESS. Keep in mind that not all authors are active or check their watchlist and even those that are/do will not necessarily check every edit or identify a problem with an edit.
The subject of an article is not required to police it for policy violations or otherwise keep it updated, etc. Keep in mind that even though Misplaced Pages often comes up high on Google searches, the subject may not yet have discovered the article or even if they have, they may not know how to edit it. Although subjects are encouraged to make minor corrections and remove vandalism, they are normally discouraged from making substantial edits, so some subjects may prefer to stay away from editing them at all.

External links

AuthorshipModel – A discussion of authorship of Wiki pages on the CommunityWiki

Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)

Five pillars
- Ignore all rules

Content (?)

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

Categories: