Wikipedia:Etiquette

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page documents an English Wikipedia behavioral guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should follow, though it should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Shortcuts: WP:EQ WP:ETIQ WP:WQT

This page offers some principles of etiquette or "Wikiquette", on how to work with others on Wikipedia. You can read about more basic conventions at the policies and guidelines page.

Wikipedia's contributors come from many different countries and cultures. We have many different views, perspectives, opinions, and backgrounds, sometimes varying widely. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an international online encyclopedia.

[edit] Principles of Wikipedia etiquette

• Assume good faith. Wikipedia works remarkably well based on a policy of nearly complete freedom to edit. People come here to collaborate and write good articles.
• Remember the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would have them treat you – even if they are new. We were all new once…
• Be polite, please!
  • Keep in mind that raw text is ambiguous and often seems ruder than the same words coming from a person standing in front of you. Irony is not always obvious – text comes without facial expressions, vocal inflection, or body language. Be careful of the words that you choose – what you intended might not be what others perceive, and what you read might not be what the author intends.
• Sign and date your posts to talk pages (not articles!), unless you have some excellent reasons not to do so.

• If you have not registered yourself, do not construct a signature that might make it appear that you have.

• Work towards agreement.
• Argue facts, not personalities.
• Do not ignore questions.
  • If another disagrees with your edit, provide good reasons why it is appropriate.
• Concede a point when you have no response to it, or admit when you disagree based on intuition or taste.
• Be civil.
  • Although it is understandably difficult in an intense argument, if other editors are not civil, be more civil than they are, not less. That way at least you encourage conflict and name-calling by your own accord; actively do something about it: take a hit and refrain from hitting back – everybody appreciates that (or at least they should).
  • Do not hesitate to let others know that you are uncomfortable with their tone in a neutral way – otherwise they might think that you are too dense to understand their "subtlety", and you will involuntarily encourage them (e.g. "I know that you have been sarcastic above, but I do not think that is helping us resolve the issue. However, I do not think that your argument stands because...").
• Be prepared to apologize. In animated discussions, we often say things we later wish we had not. Say so.
• Forgive and forget.
• Recognize your own biases and keep them in check.
• Give praise when due. Everybody likes appreciation, especially in an environment that requires compromise. Drop a friendly note on users' talk pages.
• Remove or summarize resolved disputes that you initiate.
• Help mediate disagreements between others.
• If you argue, take a break. If you mediate, recommend a break.
  • Take it slowly. If you are angry, spend time away from Wikipedia instead of posting or editing. Come back in a day or a week. You might find that someone else made the desired change or comment for you. If you think mediation is needed, enlist someone.
  • Walk away or find another Wikipedia article to distract yourself – there are 2,548,710 articles in English on Wikipedia! Take up a Wikiproject or WikiReader, or lend your much-needed services at pages needing attention and Cleanup. Or write a new article.
  • Nominate yourself for a list of other articles to work on, provided by SuggestBot.
• Remember what Wikipedia is not.
• Review the list of faux pas.
• Avoid reverts whenever possible, and stay within the three-revert rule except in cases of clear vandalism. Explain reversions in the edit summary box.
  • Amend, edit, discuss.
• Remind yourself that you are dealing with people. Individuals have feelings and other people in the world who love them. Treat others with dignity. The world is a big place, with different cultures and conventions. Avoid jargon that others might not understand. Use acronyms carefully and clarify if there is the possibility of any doubt.
• When reverting other people's edits, give a rationale for the revert (on the article's talk page if necessary), prepare to enter into a discussion over the edits in question. Calmly explaining your thinking to others can often result in agreement; being dogmatic or uncommunicative evokes the same behavior in others, and embroils edit wars.

[edit] How to avoid abuse of talk pages

• People take pride in their work and in their point of view. Egos can easily get hurt in editing, but do not strike back on talk pages. Talk pages help comfort or undo damage to egos, but most of all they help editors forge agreements that better the attached articles. If someone disagrees with you, try to understand why, and take time to discuss on the talk page the good reasons why your way is better.
• Like science, the improvement process employed by Wikipedia is iterative and the critical analysis of prior work is necessary. If you cannot have your work thoroughly scrutinized, analyzed, and criticized, or if your ego is easily damaged, then Wikipedia is probably not the place for you.
• Do not label or personally attack people or their edits.
  • Terms like "racist", "sexist" or even "poorly written" make people defensive. This makes it hard to discuss articles productively. If you must criticize, do it politely and constructively.
• Always make clear what point or idea you are addressing, especially in replies.
  • In responding, quoting a post is acceptable, but paraphrasing it or stating how you interpreted it is better. Qualify your interpretation by writing, "As you seem to be saying" or "as I understand you" to acknowledge that you made an interpretation. Before writing that someone is wrong, concede that you might have misinterpreted him or her.
  • Interweaving rebuttals into the middle of another person's comments disrupts the flow of the discussion and breaks the attribution of comments. It may be intelligible to some, but it is virtually impossible for the rest of the community to follow.
• Wikipedians generally frown upon changing another editor's signed comments, even if the edit merely corrects spelling or grammar.

[edit] Working towards a neutral point of view

When dealing with suspected violations of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view:

1. Inquire politely on the article's talk page about aspects of the article you consider non-NPOV (unless they are really egregious), and suggest replacements.
2. If no reply comes, make the substitutions. (Use your watchlist to keep track of what you want to do.)
3. If a reply comes, try to reach an agreement.

That way, when you reach an agreement, an edit war is unlikely. The article stays in an unsatisfying state longer, but frequent changes create a bad impression with other Wikipedians or of the project as a whole.

[edit] A few things to bear in mind

• Wikipedia articles should represent all views (more at NPOV), instead of supporting one over another, even if you believe something strongly. Do not debate value judgments on talk (discussion) pages. If you want to do that, instead consider Usenet, public weblogs and other wikis. Use article talk pages to discuss the accuracy concerns, POV bias, or other problems in the article, and not as your soapbox for advocacy.
• If someone disagrees with you, this does not mean that the person hates you, that the person thinks that you are stupid, that the person is stupid, or that the person is mean. When people post opinions without practical implications for the article, leave them be. What you think is not necessarily right or necessarily wrong – a common example of this is religion. Before you think about insulting someone's views, think about what would happen if they insulted yours. Everything that is written on Wikipedia is kept permanently, even if it is not visible.
• Be bold. Before initiating discussion, ask yourself: is this necessary to discuss? Could I provide a summary with my edit and wait for others to quibble if they like?
• You can always take a discussion to e-mail or to your user page if it is not essential to the article.
• If you know you do not get along with someone, do not interact with him or her more than you need to do. Unnecessary conflict distracts everyone from the task of making a good encyclopedia, and is unpleasant. Following someone you dislike around Wikipedia is sometimes stalking, and can be disruptive. If you do not get along with someone, try to be friendlier. If that does not help the situation, then avoid him or her.
• Though editing articles is acceptable and encouraged, editing the signed words of another editor on a talk page or other discussion page is generally not acceptable, as it can alter the meaning of the original comment and misrepresent the original editor's thoughts. Avoid editing another editor's comments unless necessary.

[edit] Other words of advice

Parting words of advice from Larry Sanger:

• Be open and warmly welcoming, not insular,
• Be focused single-mindedly on writing an encyclopedia, not on Usenet-style debate,
• Recognize and praise the best work--work that is detailed, factual, well-informed, and well-referenced,
• Work to understand what neutrality requires and why it is so essential to and good for this project,
• Treat your fellow productive, well-meaning members of Wikipedia with respect and good will,
• Attract and honor good people who know a lot and can write about it well, and
• Show the door to trolls, vandals, and wiki-anarchists, who, if permitted, would waste your time and create a poisonous atmosphere here.

A troll's helpful hint for newcomers: Before interpreting Sanger's parting advice as permission from the current community of participants to engage in personal attacks, harassment or stalking after labeling people with whom you disagree, read and understand the policy or guideline regarding personal attacks and the ad hominem fallacy identified by ancient Greeks.

An outline for a Wikicovenant from Kingturtle:

• Make others feel welcome (even longtime participants; even those you dislike),
• Create and continue a friendly environment,
• Turn the other cheek (which includes walking away from potential edit wars),
• Give praise, especially to those you do not know (most people like to know they are wanted and appreciated), and
• Forgive!

[edit] What to do in case of problems

Listen to this page (info/dl)

This audio file was created from a revision dated 2006-05-16, and does not reflect subsequent edits to the page. (Audio help)

More spoken pages

• Wikipedia:Disruptive editing
• Wikipedia:Dispute resolution
• Wikipedia:No angry mastodons
• Wikipedia:No vested contributors
• Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts