Guild Wars 2 Wiki talk:No personal attacks 2010-08-16

Impressions

This proposal has the basic idea of No Personal Attacks in mind, but a few things concern me.

• "Guild Wars 2 Wiki is based on being respectful to it's users as they are the core of the development of this wiki." This sounds more like the start of You Are Valuable speech. It's a nice thought for users to respect one another, but being respectful is not necessary for compliance with a No Personal Attacks policy.

• In the 1st paragraph under What is considered a personal attack?, the usage of the word many is too strong. That word should just be omitted.

• Same section, paragraph after the bulleted examples. "This example is not inclusive:". Grammatically incorrect. Should be These examples are not inclusive.

• The last bullet, "Assumptions of another user in a negative manner", should be removed. It serves no purpose that isn't already stated or implied. For example, "By the way you act, you must be autistic," or "I assume you don't know what you are talking about." Both of these assumptions fall under the "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack..." part of this section. — Gares 16:17, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, the part of the draft which Gares Redstorm quoted in his first bullet has a grammatical error. It should read "... to its users ...", instead of "... to [it is] users ..." and there should not be contractions anywhere in a formal document. -~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) 16:34, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Fixed. Ariyen 06:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I corrected a typo, "Every person who contributes to an article is apart of the Guild Wars 2" was changed to "Every person who contributes to an article is a part of the Guild Wars 2". I think that this is a fine draft, I would like to see it implemented. I had a question about wording though. there is a line that reads "Comments should be directed at the content and not at the people.", I was thinking that it may want to read ...and not at the person. Generally disputes are between 2 people and not groups. Venom20 01:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Changed that from people to person. Ariyen 02:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, considering Pling's idea about a different way to make a policy system, I think it would be better to have something like a "Code of conduct" or something along those lines, merging "No personal attacks" with "Assume good faith" and even "You are valuable" in order to let people know what the community sees as a valuable contributor. Erasculio 02:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

That does sound like a good idea, but I don't know what all should go in code of conduct. I did try something similar offline... but I didn't get far lol. Ariyen 05:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)