Wikipedia:Responding to incivility
 | This is an essay on the civility policy. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Responding to incivility with genuine encouragement and guidance can yield productive and meaningful results. |
The best way to approach someone on Wikipedia in regards to civility and their recent behavior (assuming that they've been responding and commenting uncivilly) is to do so in a peaceful and encouraging manner, and with words that the editor will interpret as being an attempt to provide them a friendly and informal warning about their behavior, and an offer to help them out if they need it.
Identifying incivility
[edit]Examples of incivility:
- Bad-faith comments or the assumption of bad faith
- General rudeness, deliberate mocking, personal attacks, and/or disrespect
- Casting aspersions or making unfounded accusations
- POV-pushing (except civil POV-pushing)
Examples of comments that are civil, but are often mistaken for incivility:
- Any comments that assume good faith
- Calling a spade a spade or blunt honesty
- Controversial discussion
Before you respond
[edit]There are a few very important things that you need to know and understand before you decide to approach anyone about their recent incivility or personal attacks made toward others. First and foremost, you need to understand that uncivil editors are likely to be very upset, extremely frustrated, and in a very confrontational and in-your-face kind of mood. Because of that, they will likely misinterpret any words that you use toward them–and that have even a tiny remote possibility of being negative, threatening, or confrontational–as being such, and they will quite likely respond to you with the same level of unpleasantness that they believe that you made toward them (see Wikipedia:Don't call the kettle black). That's why it's important to pay very close attention and be very selective with the words that you use in your message to them. Be clear with your reason for reaching out to them, how you feel, what you're trying to do, your desired outcome from approaching them, and your expectations.
How to respond
[edit]A good approach to others about civility is filling the role of a "concerned editor who just wants to help." It has proven successful as far as receiving civil replies in return.
Here's an example of an excellent response to incivility:
Hi [Username of editor], I hope you're doing well. I wanted to address some concerns about recent comments you've made, like [example diff link] and [example diff link], which seem uncivil and conflict with Wikipedia's civility policy. These behaviors could lead to trouble with the community, and I encourage you to reflect and adjust before it escalates. Reviewing Wikipedia's founding principle's may help you understand things further. If you have questions or need help, feel free to reach out. Best regards, [signature].
Leave a message similar to this with someone who needs to be talked to about their recent lack of civility, and there's a good chance of it turning out well. It doesn't need to be this lengthy, but just make sure you're being understood and coming off as an empathetic, concerned editor. As long as you come across with that genuine sentiment, you're off to a good start.
What to expect
[edit]Poor reactions
[edit]Another important thing to understand, expect to have happen, and be prepared for, is the fact that the user that you're approaching is highly likely to respond to your discussion negatively, uncivilly, and in a confrontational and battleground-like manner toward you. If this happens, don't take it personally–they're just upset with the situation, and they're upset that someone is now talking to them about their behavior. Consider this to be the typical and expected outcome of your discussion with them, and be prepared for this emotionally. When this happens, don't make any further responses or replies to the discussion. Just walk away and consider the matter closed; you've told them about their behavior, pointed them toward relevant policies and guidelines, and were civil and offered to help them.
The goal
[edit]The most important objective with approaching someone about their behavior is that you've informed them and that you've warned them. If anything, they now understand that they're violating one of Wikipedia's founding principles, and they can't come back to us later and use the "I didn't know" or the "I wasn't told" or "I wasn't warned" excuse if their repeated behavior results in sanctions or editing restrictions. Your ultimate goal, and the desired outcome that you're aiming for, is to receive a response from the editor that isn't unpleasant and full of uncivil personal attacks. If that happens, consider it a bonus and a huge win towards you and how you handled things with them. Ultimately though, a negative and uncivil response to your message to them about their incivility should be expected. Just don't let it get to you emotionally, and walk away when that happens. You did your job.
Done well, a response to incivility can improve civility on Wikipedia.