Misplaced Pages

:No personal attacks: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:39, 17 September 2014 view sourceTlhslobus (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,068 edits Undid revision 625982132 by Scalhotrod (talk) Undoing today's changes 1 by 1, as lacking consensus per BRD,+making things worse - details in Talk← 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 editors60,029 edits Undid revision 1263898042 by Uwappa (talk): perfectly redundantTag: Undo 
(354 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Misplaced Pages policy}}
⚫ {{Redirect3|WP:PA|You may be looking for ], ] or ]}}
{{pp-semi|small=yes}}
{{policy|WP:PERSONAL|WP:NPA|WP:PA}}
⚫ {{redirect|WP:PA|text=You may be looking for ], ], ] or ]}}
{{quotation|Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.|]}}
{{Conduct policy list}} {{policy|WP:PA|WP:NPA|WP:NOPA}}
{{nutshell|'''Comment on content, not the contributors.''' Users that make '']'' attacks may face ] and ].}}
{{Policy list}}
] ]
'''Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Misplaced Pages.''' Comment on '''content''', not on the '''contributor'''. Personal attacks do not help make a point; they only hurt the Misplaced Pages community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other editors may be removed by anyone. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to ]. '''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 ].
__TOC__
{{clear}}


⚫ == What is considered to be a personal attack? ==
⚫ ==Why personal attacks are harmful==
{{anchor|WHATIS}}
⚫ 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 ].
⚫ {{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.
⚫ 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, ], or otherwise sanctioned, 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.


==Avoiding personal attacks== == Why personal attacks are harmful ==
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.
⚫ {{Policy shortcut|WP:AVOIDYOU}}
⚫ As a matter of polite and effective discourse, comments should not be personalized. That is, they should be directed at content and actions rather than people.


⚫ 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 ].
In disputes, the '']'' words "you" and "your" may be taken as a personal attack by some, regardless of your intention. For example, the statements:
:{{cross}} The paragraph ''you'' inserted into the article looks like original research.
:{{cross}} ''Your'' statement about ''X'' is wrong because of information at ''Y''.


⚫ 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.
Would be preferable like this:
:{{tick}} The paragraph inserted into the article looks like original research.
:{{tick}} ''The'' statement about ''X'' is wrong because of information at ''Y''.


⚫ == Avoiding personal attacks ==
Discussion of a user's conduct or history is not a personal attack when done in the appropriate forum for such discussion (for example, the other editor's talk page, ] or ]).
⚫ {{Policy shortcut|WP:AVOIDYOU}}
{{redirect|WP:AVOIDYOU|the guideline on avoiding second-person pronouns in articles|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 <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 ]).
⚫ Editors should adhere to Misplaced Pages's ] policy and ] guidelines 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 convincing ] is also considered a form of personal attack. (See also: ].)


⚫ 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: ].)
⚫ =={{anchor|WHATIS}}What is considered to be a personal attack?==
⚫ {{shortcut|WP:NPA#WHATIS|WP:WIAPA}}
⚫ 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:
* Racial, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, ageist, religious, political, ethnic, national, sexual, or other ]s (such as against people with disabilities) directed against another contributor, or against a group of contributors. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual orientation, 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 train spotter so what would you know about fashion?''" Note that it is not a personal attack to question an editor at their talk page about their possible ] on a specific article or topic. However, speculating on the real-life identity of another editor may constitute ], which is a serious offense.
⚫ * Linking to external attacks, harassment, or other material, for the purpose of attacking another editor.
⚫ * Comparing editors to ], dictators, or other infamous persons. (See also ].)
⚫ * {{anchor|accusations}}Accusations about personal behavior that lack evidence. Serious accusations require serious evidence. Evidence often takes the form of ] presented on wiki.
⚫ * Threats, including, but not limited to:
⚫ ** ]
⚫ ** Threats of violence or other off-wiki action (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.
⚫ ** Threats to ] (give out personal details about) an editor.


⚫ == Responding to personal attacks ==
⚫ 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.
⚫ === 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.
⚫ ==Responding to personal attacks==
⚫ ===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 text-only medium, nuances and emotions are conveyed poorly which 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.


⚫ 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 ].
⚫ 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, ]. Although templates have been used at times for this purpose, a customized message relating to the specific situation is ]. When possible, try to find compromise or common ground regarding the underlying issues of content, rather than argue about behavior.


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


=== Recurring attacks ===
⚫ 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, 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.


===Recurring attacks=== === Removal of personal attacks ===
⚫ Recurring, non-disruptive personal attacks that do not stop after reasoned requests to cease can be resolved through ] and ]. 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===
{{Policy shortcut|WP:RPA}} {{Policy shortcut|WP:RPA}}
{{seealso|Misplaced Pages:Civility#Removing uncivil comments}} {{See also|Misplaced Pages:Civility#Removing uncivil comments}}
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. 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 whether or not they are directed at you. 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 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 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 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}} {{For|policies related to attacks against living persons in general, whether or not they edit Misplaced Pages|Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons}}
Linking to off-site harassment, attacks, or privacy violations against persons who edit Misplaced Pages for the purpose of attacking another person who edits Misplaced Pages is never acceptable. Attacking, harassing, or violating the privacy of any person who edits Misplaced Pages through the posting of external links is not permitted. ''Harassment in this context may include but is not limited to linking to offsite personal attacks, privacy violations, and/or threats of physical violence.'' This is not to be confused with legitimate critique. Inclusion of links in articles is a matter for sound editorial judgment. 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. The interpretation of this rule is complex. See ] for guidance on interpretation.


==Consequences of personal attacks== == 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 ], 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 ]. 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 "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. 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|Nopersonalattacks.ogg|2009-03-05}}
⚫ ===Misplaced Pages policies===
* ] * ]
* ]
* ]
* ]
* ] * ]

* ]
===Misplaced Pages essays=== === Misplaced Pages essays ===

* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
Line 94: Line 94:
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ]


==Related articles== === Related content ===
* ]
* ]


{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines|state=uncollapsed}} {{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines|state=uncollapsed}}
{{Misplaced Pages essays|civility}}
{{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
Content policies
Conduct policies
Other policy categories
Directories

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

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:

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" 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 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 {{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.

See also

Misplaced Pages policies and information pages

Misplaced Pages essays

Related content

Misplaced Pages key policies and guidelines (?)
Content (?)
P
G
Conduct (?)
P
G
Deletion (?)
P
Enforcement (?)
P
Editing (?)
P
G
Style
Classification
Project content (?)
G
WMF (?)
P
Misplaced Pages essays (?)
Essays on building, editing, and deleting content
Philosophy
Article construction
Writing article content
Removing or
deleting content
Essays on civility
The basics
Philosophy
Dos
Don'ts
WikiRelations
Essays on notability
Humorous essays
About essays
About essays
Policies and guidelines
Categories: