Wikipedia:Assume good faith
“ | Civility, Maturity, Responsibility | ” |
This page documents an English Wikipedia behavioral guideline. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page. |
This page in a nutshell:
|
Assuming good faith is a fundamental principle on Wikipedia. Most people try to help the project, not hurt it. If this were false, a project like Wikipedia would be doomed from the beginning.
When disagreement occurs, explain yourself using talk pages, and give others the opportunity to do the same. Consider whether a dispute stems from different perspectives and look for ways to reach consensus.
When others cast doubt on their own good faith, continue to assume good faith yourself where you can. Be civil and follow dispute resolution processes, rather than attacking editors or edit warring with them.
About good faith
Demonstrate good faith
In addition to assuming good faith, encourage others to assume good faith by demonstrating your own good faith. You can do this by articulating your honest motives and by making edits that show your willingness to compromise, interest in improving Wikipedia, adherence to policies and guidelines, belief in the veracity of your edits, avoidance of gaming the system, and other good-faith behavior. Showing good faith is not required, but it aids smooth and successful interactions with editors.
Dealing with bad faith
Even if bad faith is evident, do not act uncivilly yourself in return, attack others, or lose your cool over it. It is ultimately much easier for others to resolve a dispute and see who is breaching policies, if one side is clearly editing appropriately throughout.
Wikipedia administrators and other experienced editors involved in dispute resolution will usually be glad to help, and are very capable of identifying policy-breaching conduct if their attention is drawn to clear and specific evidence.
Accusing others of bad faith
Making accusations of bad faith can be inflammatory and hence these accusations may be unhelpful in a dispute. It can be seen as a personal attack if bad faith motives are alleged without clear evidence that others' editing is actually in bad faith. The result is often accusations of bad faith on your part, which tends to create a nasty cycle.
See also
Guidelines
Essays
- MeatBall:AssumeGoodFaith (from MeatballWiki)
- Wikipedia:Assume bad faith
- Wikipedia:Assume good wraith
- Wikipedia:Assume no clue
- Wikipedia:Assume the assumption of good faith
- Wikipedia:Assume the presence of a belly-button
- Wikipedia:Competence is required
- Wikipedia:Disruptive editing
- Wikipedia:Don't assume
- Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade
- Wikipedia:Honesty
- Wikipedia:No angry mastodons
- Wikipedia:No vested contributors
- Wikipedia:On assuming good faith
- Wikipedia policy should follow the spirit of ahimsa (from meta)
- Wikipedia:Wiki spirit