Wikipedia:Assume good faith: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
assume good faith
 
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
If you assume bad faith then several things will happen
If you assume bad faith then several things will happen


*You might make a [[Wikipedia:No personal attack|No personal attack]]s. Once you've made a personal attack on someone, they are likely to take it personally. Once this happens they are likely to stop assuming good faith in you. The edit war will get even uglier. People, like [[elephant]]s, rarely forget.
*You might make a [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal attack]]. Once you've made a personal attack on someone, they are likely to take it personally. Once this happens they are likely to stop assuming good faith in you. The edit war will get even uglier. People, like [[elephant]]s, rarely forget.


*You might lose sight of the [[Wikipedia:NPOV|NPOV]] policy. The ideal is to make articles acceptable to everyone. Every time you revert a biased edit it is a defeat for NPOV, no matter how outrageous the edit was. Consider figuring out why the other person felt the article is biased, and making that point, but in terms you consider neutral. If every side continues to do this they will eventually meet at NPOV - or a rough semblance of it.
*You might lose sight of the [[Wikipedia:NPOV|NPOV]] policy. The ideal is to make articles acceptable to everyone. Every time you revert a biased edit it is a defeat for NPOV, no matter how outrageous the edit was. Consider figuring out why the other person felt the article is biased, and making that point, but in terms you consider neutral. If every side continues to do this they will eventually meet at NPOV - or a rough semblance of it.

Revision as of 22:44, 3 March 2004

When edit wars get hot, its easy to forget to assume good faith.

If you assume bad faith then several things will happen

  • You might make a personal attack. Once you've made a personal attack on someone, they are likely to take it personally. Once this happens they are likely to stop assuming good faith in you. The edit war will get even uglier. People, like elephants, rarely forget.
  • You might lose sight of the NPOV policy. The ideal is to make articles acceptable to everyone. Every time you revert a biased edit it is a defeat for NPOV, no matter how outrageous the edit was. Consider figuring out why the other person felt the article is biased, and making that point, but in terms you consider neutral. If every side continues to do this they will eventually meet at NPOV - or a rough semblance of it.