Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:20, 20 September 2008

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 WP:CIV WP:CIVIL WP:CIVILITY WP:POLITE

This page in a nutshell: Participate in a respectful and civil way. Do not ignore the positions and conclusions of others. Try to discourage others from being uncivil, and avoid upsetting other editors whenever possible.

Misplaced Pages editors are expected to behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other users. These principles reflect the commonsense expectation of civility and apply to all editing on Misplaced Pages, including user pages, talk pages, edit summaries, and any other discussion with fellow Wikipedians.

The community realizes that editors are human, capable of mistakes, and so a few, minor, isolated incidents are not in themselves a concern. However, egregious incidents involving threats, severe personal attacks, or harassment may result in warnings or blocks.

This policy is not meant to be used as a weapon against other contributors. To insist that an editor be sanctioned for an isolated, minor offense, or to treat constructive criticism as an attack, is itself disruptive.

Co-operation and civility

Misplaced Pages invites editors to improve text. Often there are differences of opinion over whether a change is an improvement. Editors, in trying to be clearly understood, can be unnecessarily harsh. Conversely, editors can also be oversensitive when they see their contribution replaced by an edit that is said to be better, despite a possible difference of opinion as to whether the replacement was truly an improvement. Community members may become interested in "triumphing" over the "enemy" instead of improving articles.

Silent and faceless words on talk pages and in edit summaries do not transmit fully the nuances of verbal conversation, sometimes leading to misinterpretation of an editor's comments. An uncivil remark can easily cause escalation into a heated discussion that no longer focuses objectively on the editing problem at hand. These exchanges waste our efforts and they undermine and erode a positive, productive working environment. Attempts should always be made to solve possible disagreements through a civil discussion. Be welcoming of new users.

Editors are expected to be reasonably cooperative, refrain from making personal attacks, operate within the scope of policies, and are urged to be responsive to good-faith questions.

Engaging in incivility

Treat your fellow editors as respected colleagues who are working, in collaboration with you, on an important project.

These behaviors can all contribute to an uncivil environment:

• Rudeness
• Insults and name calling. Comment on the actions and not the editor
• Judgmental tone in edit summaries (e.g. "snipped rambling crap") or talk-page posts ("that's the stupidest thing I've ever seen")
• Gross profanity or indecent suggestions directed at another contributor
• Belittling contributors because of their language skills or word choice
• Taunting; deliberately pushing others to the point of breaching civility even if not seeming to commit such a breach themselves
• Ill-considered accusations of impropriety; for instance, calling someone a liar, or accusing him/her of slander or libel
• Lies, including deliberately asserting false information on a discussion page in order to mislead one or more editors
• Quoting another editor out-of-context in order to give the impression that he or she hold views they do not hold, or in order to malign them
• Making personal attacks, including but not limited to racial, ethnic, sexual, and religious slurs
• Using derogatory language towards other contributors or in general referring to groups such as social classes, nationalities, ethnic groups, religious groups, or others in a derogatory manner
• Feigned incomprehension, "playing dumb"

As well, lack of care when applying other policies can lead to conflict and stress. For instance, referring to a user's good-faith edits as vandalism may lead to them feeling unfairly attacked. Use your best judgement, and be ready to apologize if you turn out to be wrong.

Dispute resolution

In a case of ongoing incivility, consider discussion on that user's talk page, not to escalate the situation, but to explain your objection. Be polite. You may also wish to include a diff of the specific uncivil statement.

If the problem continues, the mediation cabal can be requested to intervene. The mediation cabal consists of volunteers who will work with all editors involved with the conflict, and attempt to decrease tensions and find a compromise. Alternatively, Wikiquette alerts is a non-binding noticeboard where users can report impolite, uncivil or other difficult communications with editors, and seek perspective, advice, informal mediation, or a referral to a more appropriate forum.

If the problem continues and further action is required, a (Request for Comment on user conduct) (RfC) can be requested. RfCs are intended to discuss a specific user who has violated Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines persistently, or in a major way. During an RfC, scrutiny may be applied to all editors involved. The last step - only when other avenues have been tried and failed - is the Arbitration Committee, who will scrutinise all sides involved in the dispute, and create binding resolutions.

For death threats, racist attacks, threats of violence, and other cases where immediate action is required, use the Administrator's Noticeboard Incidents page to contact the site's admins.

Personal attacks

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 and may result in blocks.

Removal of uncivil comments

Where the incivil comment is yours, any of these options will help to reduce the impact:

• Where someone is taking offense at your comment where none was intended, calmly explain what you meant.
• Strike them out (using <s>HTML strikeout tags</s>), to show, publicly, that you withdraw the comment.
• Quietly remove it, or rewrite the comment to be more civil - Usually only a good idea if you think better of it before anyone took offense to it. If someone has taken offense already, you should acknowledge the change in a quick comment after the changed text, for instance, Comment removed by author.
• Simply apologise. This option never hurts, and can be combined well with any of the others. Even if you feel the thrust of your words is true, or that they are misunderstanding what you meant, you can still apologise for the offense caused.

In the event of rudeness or incivility on the part of another editor, it is usually appropriate to discuss the offending words with that editor, and to request that editor to change that specific wording. Some care is necessary, however, so as not to further inflame the situation. It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment.. Exceptions include attempted outing, to remove obvious trolling or vandalism, or if the comment is on your own user talk page.

Apologizing

Disputes, and even misunderstandings, can lead to situations in which one party feels injured by the other. The apology is a form of ritual exchange between both parties, where words are said that allow reconciliation.

For some people, it may be crucial to receive an apology from those who have offended them. Demanding an apology is almost never helpful and often inflames the situation further, though a polite, good-faith request for an apology may be acceptable. Offering an apology is even better, and can be a key to resolving conflict. An apology provides the opportunity for a fresh start, and can clear the air when one person's perceived incivility has offended another.

Footnotes

See also

• Misplaced Pages:No legal threats
• Misplaced Pages:Harassment
• Misplaced Pages:Outing
• Ethic of reciprocity
• Misplaced Pages:Honesty
• Misplaced Pages:How to be civil
• Misplaced Pages:An uncivil environment is a poor environment
• Misplaced Pages:Be reasonable
• Misplaced Pages:Don't be inconsiderate
• User:Kirill Lokshin/Professionalism
• Category:User essays on civility

• Misplaced Pages policies
• Misplaced Pages user conduct
• Misplaced Pages conduct policy