Guild Wars 2 Wiki:Code of Conduct

This page is a suspended policy proposal. It has been superseded by a list of common wiki practices. The Guild Wars 2 Wiki has no policies. All former proposals are kept for historical preservation.

The Code of Conduct had good faith at its core. The following guidelines help to ensure that not a single person is discouraged or fearful upon contributing. Several key sections will be discussed in great detail, they are:

• No Personal Attacks
• Do Not Be a Dick
• Ignore the Rules
• Quietly Dealing with Vandals

Spirit of Policies and Codes

The spirit of the policy is as important, if not more important, than the literal presentation of it. The spirit refers to its original intent (in other words, the general meaning which underlies it). It is not always possible to create an all-inclusive presentation of guidelines which accounts for every possibility.

• An unexpected or unanticipated event which violates the spirit can be dealt with in the same manner as a one which violates the literal wording
• Trolls or nonconstructive editors can be dealt with faster -- the wiki's best interests are always first and foremost.

When administrators are brought into a situation, their duties not only lie in the literal words of a guideline, but also in its spirit. To this effect, guidelines and policies should not be the unchangeable and absolute law. Rather, it should reflect what the Guild Wars 2 wiki community feels is most vital to perfecting the content, protecting the community, and ensure the well-being of the wiki.

No Personal Attacks

Do not make personal attacks anywhere in the Guild Wars 2 Wiki. When discussing content or interacting with other editors, one must always remember to comment on the content, and not on the person. Personal attacks never help anyone make a point; in fact, they hurt the community as a whole and deter editors from helping to create outstanding articles. Accusing another editor of making a personal attack is also something that is not taken lightly. It is best for an uninvolved observer to intervene when someone has made a personal attack, and for the discussion to return to considering the content, not the person.

What is considered a personal attack?

Editors will often disagree on some of the content within an article, or even on the other editors. While being a part of the wiki community is encouraged, it is best to remember that, more often than not, editors will be members of opposing parties who have an equal right to have their views shared. Synthesizing these views into a single article creates a better article for everyone. Every person who edits an article is part of the same larger community.

Editors should be civil when stating disagreements. Any conversations or comments pertaining to the page's content should be kept to talk pages at all times, and never the articles themselves. Comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people. Occasionally, an innocent comment may be misconstrued as a personal attack. When disagreements form about content, referring to other editors is not always a personal attack. For instance, a posting that says "Your statement about A is wrong because of information located at B", or "The paragraph you inserted into the article C resembles an opinion piece", is not a personal attack. Even some comments that might appear to be a personal attack, such as labeling an edit that removes a substantial amount of text as "vandalism", may be well-intentioned. The appropriate response to such statements is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this code of conduct.

There is no clearly defined rule or standard about what constitutes a personal attack as, but some types of comments that are never acceptable include, but are not limited to:

• Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, or ethnic description directed against another editor. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion, race, sexual preference, or ethnicity is not a legitimate excuse.
• Using someone's affiliations as a means of dismissing or discrediting their views — regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream or extreme.
• Threats of legal action.
• Threats of physical violence, particularly death threats.
• Threats of vandalism to userpages or talk pages.
• Threats to interfere with the usual operation of a user's computer.
• Threats or actions which expose other editors to political, religious or other persecution by government, their employer or any others.
• Posting a link to an external source that fits the commonly accepted threshold for a personal attack, in a manner that incorporates the substance of that attack into discussion, including the suggestion that such a link applies to another editor, or that another editor needs to visit the external source containing the substance of the attack.
• Revealing or threatening to reveal personal information about another editor.
• Making inappropriate comments that are intentionally meant to harm another user (such as cursing at a user for making a change and/or contribution).

These examples are not all inclusive. 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 editors, including Guild Wars 2 Wiki administrators. The Guild Wars 2 Wiki 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 continued growth of the wiki.

Responding to Personal Attacks

Initial Options

The foremost way to respond to an isolated personal attack is not to respond at all. Debates can become stressful for some editors, who may occasionally overreact. Additionally, talk page discussions are in a text-only medium that conveys nuances and emotions poorly; this 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 Guild Wars 2 Wiki.

If you feel that a response is necessary and desirable, you should leave a polite message on the other user's talk page. Do not respond on a talk page of an article; this tends to escalate matters. It is important as well to remain calm and collected. Do not respond immediately, take a couple minutes to evaluate your position of the content being discussed. If it is at all possible, try to compromise or find common ground regarding the underlying issues. Responding in a hasty matter generally leads to higher tensions and more attacks. If you believe that you are too angry to respond without using attacks of your own, consider taking a short break from the wiki or contacting an administrator.

That being said, attacks that are particularly offensive or disruptive (such as verbal, physical, or legal threats) should not be ignored. Extraordinary situations that require immediate intervention are seldom, but may be reported to any active site admin on their talk page or on the admin noticeboard.

Recurring Attacks

Recurring personal attacks that do not stop after reasoned requests to cease should be reported to any active site administrator on their talk page or on the admin noticeboard. Especially when personal attacks arise as the result of heated debate over article content, informal mediation and discussions with third parties are often the best ways to resolve a conflict. In most circumstances, problems with personal attacks can be resolved if editors work together and focus on content not the contributor, and immediate administrator action is not required.

Removal of Text

Removing unquestionable personal attacks from your own user talk page is much less of a concern than removing comments from other pages. If a personal attack against you is located on a talk page, excluding your own, a requests should be directed to an administrator to determine if the comments should remain on the talk page, be archived, or be deleted.

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 or without consequences. 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 plagued by personal attacks can receive administrative disciplinary action, including short-term or extended bans. If personal attacks continue action by the Arbitration Committee may be necessary.

Do Not Be a Dick

Don't be a dick is the golden rule of all social spaces. If people abide by this, there would be no need for any policies about behavior.

Fundamentals

Being a dick makes people dislike you. Having people dislike you will only make editing the wiki a difficult and unpleasant experience for everyone involved.

If a significant number of reasonable editors suggest, whether bluntly or politely, that you are being a dick, then you are most likely being a dick. In contrast, accusing someone of being a dick also makes you a dick. To avoid becoming a dick yourself, ensure that you are polite and provide a good explanation as to why the other editor is being a dick.

Being right about an issue does not mean you're not being a dick. Dicks can be right; however, they are still dicks. When a dick edits an article or posts an opinion on a talk page, it often goes unheard because no one enjoys listening to dicks, irregardless of the content.

In general, if you want to avoid being a dick, do not say anything on the internet to anyone that you would not say to their face. Anyone can be tough on the internet.

Definition

Being a dick generally revolves around a few characteristics: abrasiveness, selfishness, a lack of empathy, and general inconsiderateness for others. A dick is also a person who talks down to others and instead of using their knowledge and experience to help others, will use it to intimidate others and make them feel inferior.

A dick's behavior may entail:

• Attempting to win an argument by making others feel as if they are not knowledgeable enough to participate in a discussion.
• Using terms such as "scrub" or "noob".
• Disregarding the opinions of others without explanation
• Using personal attacks instead of arguing the point.

Coping with being labeled a dick

Generally, a dick will be unable to identify them self as a dick. That being said, a dick will need to be told when they are acting as such. If you suspect that you are a dick, you should temporarily remove yourself from the conversation and identify what behaviors were making you a dick. Try modifying your language and behavior to be less abrasive. When you feel ready to debate appropriately, resume conversing.

It is also important to honestly examine your motivations. Are you intending on contributing towards a better article? Or is your goal only to find fault? Are you willing to seek a compromise of ideas? Or are you attempting to be the one in control? When someone is being a dick, the entire atmosphere changes. Many debates never reach a consensus, and the whole community therefore suffers.

Though not generally necessary, an apology to anyone whom you may have been a dick to is always a nice gesture. This does not have to occur in the same conversation, a note on the editor's talk page would suffice. It must be noted that an apology does not make you weak in any way. On the contrary, people will take notice of your willingness to cooperate and will almost always meet your efforts with increased respect.

Notes

• This sub-category of the Code of Conduct is an edited version of an essay used from [Meta]

Ignore the Rules

If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining the Guild Wars 2 Wiki, ignore it.

You do not need to read any rules before contributing to the Guild Wars 2 Wiki. If you do what seems sensible, it will usually be right If it is not right, there is no need to worry, we all make mistakes. Even the worst mistakes are easy to correct: older versions of each page remain in the revision history and can easily be restored. If the community disagrees with your changes, a discussion will usually commence on the article's discussion page to talk about it thoughtfully and politely. The result of any such description will then shape the information on the page, just remember not to be a dick and never use any personal attacks. So don't worry. Be bold.

Despite its name, "Ignore the rules" does not sabotage any actual rules. Its purpose is to keep them from sabotaging what the community is doing here: documenting Guild Wars 2. Rules have no importance compared to that goal. If a rule conflicts with that goal, the goal takes precedence.

Here are several other things that "Ignore the rules" does and does not mean:

What "Ignore the rules" means

• You are not required to learn the rules before contributing.
• Don't follow written instructions mindlessly, but rather, consider how the wiki is improved or damaged by each edit.
• Rules derive their power to compel not from being written down on a page labeled "guideline" or "policy", but from being a reflection of the shared opinions and practices of a great many editors.
• Most rules are ultimately descriptive, not prescriptive; they describe existing current practice. They sometimes lag behind the practices they describe.
• WikiLawyering doesn't work. Loopholes and technicalities do not exist on the Wiki. The Guild Wars 2 Wiki is not a bureaucracy.
• The spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule. The common purpose of documenting the game trumps both.
• Following the rules is less important than using good judgment and being thoughtful and considerate, always bearing in mind that good judgment is not displayed only by those who agree with you.

What "Ignore the rules" does not mean

• "Ignore the rules" does not mean that every action is justifiable. It is neither a trump card nor a carte blanche. A rule-ignorer must justify how their actions improve the wiki if challenged. Everyone should be able to do that at all times. Make sure to always have an answer ready.
• "Ignore the rules" does not stop you from pointing out a rule to someone who has broken it, but do consider that their judgment may have been correct.
• "Ignore the rules" is not an answer if someone asks you why you broke a rule. Most of the rules are derived from a lot of thoughtful experience and exist for pretty good reasons; they should therefore only be broken for good reasons.
• "Ignore the rules" is not an exemption from accountability. You're still responsible for reasonably foreseeable effects of your actions on the wiki and on other editors.
• "Ignore the rules" is not an invitation to use the wiki for purposes contrary to that of documenting Guild Wars 2.

See also

This policy was adapted from What "Ignore all rules" means and Ignore all rules on Wikipedia.

Quietly Deal with Vandals

Details

Malicious vandals and trolls feed on attention. Verbal warning and threats will not stop them. Posting on their talk pages when they start only challenges them to keep going, giving them a good time and treating it as a game, trying to bait more of us to flame them.

When dealing with disruptive edits, keep in mind the following:

1. Remember to assume good faith when possible. If an IP or account makes a single edit that screws up an article somehow, try to imagine if someone completely new to wiki may have accidentally saved the article while experimenting around (or blanking a section etc). If so, kindly point them to the Sandbox, and explain how their edits may have been viewed as disruptive. You may also want to point them to the "Show preview" button. This is sufficient for most new users.
2. If an edit is obviously nonsense or vandalism judging from the language used in the edit, just quietly revert it without making a fuss.
3. If an IP or account is repeatedly making disruptive edits, revert the article and file a report on the Admin Noticeboard. Do not post messages such as "Stop vandalizing" on their talkpage, as this accomplishes nothing and may make the situation worse.
4. "Sockpuppetry" - In all but the most obvious cases, treat each IP or account as a unique person. We cannot actually know if they are the same people. A different vandal might simply claim to be the same as the previous vandal just for fun and for the sake of building up a reputation (fame). By treating each IP or account on a case-by-case basis, we rob them of that fun.
5. Do NOT troll the vandal's talk page under ANY circumstances, even if you yourself were a target for vandalism. This only provokes them and brings you down to their level.
6. If a vandal starts a discussion in reply to a report on the admin noticeboard, politely and succinctly explain why the notice is there.
7. Do not dignify those who are trolling with a response at all, even if it is on your own talk page - that is exactly what they wish for. Do not play into their hands.
8. Do NOT get into lengthy discussions over whether vandals and trolls can or cannot be banned. If they have a problem, they can contact an admin directly and discuss it.
9. Do not go into a debate with other users over any technicality, interpretation, accusation, or any other aspect of a ban - it only serves to create unnecessary drama and give attention to the accused. The admins will examine the evidence presented in the original post and make a decision.
10. Corollary: If you disagree with a ban on someone else, clearly and concisely explain the situation and your point of view in a single post at the admin noticeboard, and leave a note on the banning admin's talk page pointing to your post. If necessary, you may also contact other admins who are online.

Notes

• When reminding other users to quietly deal with vandals, please do so on their own talk page, instead of the (potential) vandal's talk page.

See also

• Wikipedia's definition of troll