User:Noosphere/Old vs New Wikiethics

Wikiethics (Wikipedia editorial standards and ethics) include the principles of ethical standards related to editing articles on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has a body of policies that presuppose the existence of ethical standards that reflects the common heritage of human literacy in both the editors contributing, and the encyclopedia itself. This document aims to outline their parameters and scope. Understanding the Wiki policies coherently, their place in the whole picture and their relation to the Wiki ethics and standards are the main issues to be addressed.

Editorial Guidelines

It is helpful to have a productive editorial discussion concerning Wikipedia articles when disputes arise. The following sections provide important guidelines for editing an article.

Article-based classifications

Owing to the diversity of backgrounds that the editors come from, the interpretation of terms like 'offensive', 'censorship', 'pornography', 'minority', 'acceptability' etc. should always be decided on an article by article basis, and by following consensus based on the judgement of the contributing editors in that particular article. Generalizations do not help as it is almost impossible to agree on the definitions of these particular terms based on cultures, religions, life styles, etc. As a quantitative measure to 'majority' and 'consensus', by 'majority' more than 50% of the contributing editors is meant and the term 'consensus' refer to 75% or more of the editors voted.

Collective consciousness

Collective consciousness can be explained as common sense and a common understanding between the contributing editors. This does not strictly exclude ideas from minorities in a particular discussion. With Wikipedia policies in mind, consensus among the contributing editors should determine what is 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' in a particular discussion.

The culture of compromise

Empathy and sincerity towards 'the other' during the discussion of articles by editors or third parties is a powerful tool for compromise.

Conflict resolution

It is generally possible to resolve a conflict by taking all possible options available into the consideration.

Images

If a picture is causing concerns in an article, choosing visual or verbal descriptions based on the judgment of the contributing editors might be helpful. Changing the image with a more encyclopedic one, lowering the picture in the article, providing a link instead, or posting a warning template are other options can be considered.

Polls

A 'straw poll' on a particular argument or on part of an article can be started at any time to see where the community stands on that particular issue. It is reasonable to think that an 'approval poll', however, needs to be started upon the completion of the proposals based on a consensus.

Discussion pages

Editors are encouraged to seek whatever process is most likely to result in consensus and build a better encyclopedia using the existing guidelines. For efficiency of the discussions on an article one might chose to copy the part from the article onto the discussion page, express his/her ideas why s/he thinks the part is not appropriate and give his/her suggestion to fix the problem. This could help to get more input from the other editors and consequently may lead to a better article.

Anonymity

The editor's anonymity does not exempt them from a responsibility to their personal ethics.

Editorial standards

High editorial standards would add to the reputation of Wikipedia. Wikipedia recognizes the standards which are shaped for centuries and currently practised in the mainstream media, for example, Harm limitation principle, and Taste, decency and acceptability listed in Journalism ethics and standards. Golden Rule ("not to inflict harm") can be taken to be another example. Some of the important editorial standards in Wikipedia are discussed below.

Objectivity

A Wiki article should reflect judgment based on observable phenomena, physical reality, and should be uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices. Absence of bias and lack of emotional involvement are necessary. Separation between news, opinions, and advertisements is also equally important. Competing points of view need to be balanced and fairly characterized in the articles.

Privacy

As Wikipedia becomes more popular and readership increases, the potential impact of published material, whether positive or negative, also magnifies. Therefore, journalism ethics and standards become relevant and editors are encouraged to consider when editing wikipedia. Editors should also consider notable individuals' rights to privacy and strive to limit unnecessary harm or discomfort to them. These factors should be balanced against the public interest in reporting information about them. This might occasionally lead to an ethical dilemma, and requires greater effort on the part of editors to discuss and deliberate when making editorial decisions.

Responsibility

When making editorial decisions, each editor should make some personal consideration of sensitivity towards private individuals, children and juveniles, victims of crime, and people who are currently suffering grief and tragedy.

Public accountability

Wikipedia has an obligation towards it's readers. It is not in Wikipedia editors' interest to act irresponsibly or improperly, in a manner that is contrary to public interest and in a fashion that violates the trust of our donors and the public. Upholding the public's trust is easier than re-gaining it.

Censorship

Censorship in any form is not acceptable. 'No censorship' means information/descriptions/expressions should be included into or excluded from an article for editorial reasons or ethical concerns only based on the editorial consensus. Based on their judgment concerning verifiability of information, information content, and encyclopedic nature of the article, Wikipedia editors can include or exclude some information, expressions, and visual or verbal descriptions into or from an article. A description can be considered inappropriate for one article but it might be appropriate for another. The article-based classification gives that flexibility in decision-making to the editors.

Offense

It is not in our interest to offend Wikipedians or people who are using Wiki as a source of information. It is generally possible to find a different version of the same description which might be found less offensive or not offensive at all, while expressing the core idea clearly. A careful use of language can help in that direction. Keeping the informative materials stated objectively in the article is necessary as a means to this end. No offense policy restricts deliberate attacks to any religious values or people, cultures, life styles, etc. It is always good to be considerate regarding the concerns raised by 'minorities' of particular discussions or articles.

Pornography

Pornography can be described as visual or verbal descriptions or expressions that are intended to cause sexual excitement and should generally be avoided in Wiki articles. The decision of what is appropriate and what is pornographic is discussed on an article by article basis to form a consensus.

Violence

Editors should be sensitive in portraying violence, that is aggression or rough unwarranted force intended to cause physical or emotional harm on another being, in Wikipedia articles. They should also be sensitive about the rights of victims who are subject to violence and also the possibility, if any, that these portrayals may incite someone to harm others.

Racism

Racism can be defined as the notion that people of one race or creed are superior to another. In Wikipedia articles, expressions that unnecessarily portray prejudice, discrimination or intolerance of people of a certain race or creed are to be avoided. The expressions that intended to be divisive over nationality, race, colour or creed and also that glorify or incite someone to ethnic, racial hatred, strife, and violence cannot be considered as encyclopedic.

Propaganda

Wiki articles must not be written from the perspective of supporting any political, social, or religious movements. Editors should be careful about the information uploaded by an organization or a government to promote a policy, idea, or cause. It is also advisable to be more conscious regarding deceptive or distorted information that is systematically spread.

Bias

Editors should be careful in regard to reflecting their religious or spiritual beliefs as well as ideology into the composition of the articles. It is advised that the possibility of causing animosity between spiritual beliefs, lifestyles or ideologies should be carefully examined and avoided.

Sexism

Sexism can be defined as discriminatory or abusive behavior towards someone based on their gender identification. Expressions that unnecessarily promote sexism in articles are not encyclopedic.

Language

Language used is often as important as the context. Slang words, rudeness, sarcasm are not useful in articles and should be avoided.

Policies relevant to ethics on Wikipedia

Policies

Wikipedia:No_binding_decisions: Wikipedia strives for consensus to build an encyclopedia. Decisions which are made about articles or policies should not be regarded as binding. That does not mean you should ignore a consensual decision; it means that everything in the wiki is subject to change at a later date.
Wikipedia:Civility: Being rude, insensitive or petty makes people upset and stops Wikipedia working well. Try to discourage others from being uncivil, and be careful to avoid offending people unintentionally. Mediation is available if needed.
Wikipedia:Copyrights: The license Wikipedia uses grants free access to our content in the same sense as open source software is licensed freely.
Wikipedia:Harassment: Do not stop other editors from enjoying Wikipedia by making threats, nitpicking good-faith edits to different articles, repeated personal attacks or posting personal information.
WP:IUP: Be very careful when uploading copyrighted images, fully describe the images' sources and copyright details on their description pages, and try to make images as useful and reusable as possible.
Wikipedia:Libel: It is Wikipedia policy to delete libelous revisions from the page history. If you believe you have been defamed, please contact the help desk.
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view: All Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias. This includes reader-facing templates, categories and portals.
Wikipedia:No original research: Articles may not contain any unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas.
Wikipedia:No personal attacks: There is no excuse for personal attacks on other contributors. Do not make them. It is your responsibility to foster and maintain a positive online community in Wikipedia.
WP:NOT: Wikipedia is first and foremost an online encyclopedia, and as a means to that end, an online community. Please avoid the temptation to use Wikipedia for other purposes, or to treat it as something it is not.
WP:OFFICE: The Wikimedia Foundation receives an increasingly large number of phone calls and emails from people who are upset about various uploads on the site. Sometimes these complaints are valid; more often they are not. However, in most cases, even with the invalid complaints, there is a short-term action which can and should be taken as a courtesy in order to soothe feelings and build a better encyclopedia in the long run.
WP:OWN: You agreed to allow others to modify your work here. So let them.
Wikipedia:Three-revert rule: Do not revert any single page in whole or in part more than three times in 24 hours. (Or else an Administrator may suspend your account.)
Wikipedia:Vandalism: Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change to content made in a deliberate attempt to reduce the quality of the encyclopedia. Vandalism is determined by the judgment of the Wikipedia administrators.
Wikipedia:Verifiability: Information on Wikipedia must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any un-sourced material may be challenged and removed.

Guidelines

Wikipedia:Accountability: As an informal guideline, many Wikipedians prefer that people should log in before making drastic changes to existing articles.
Wikipedia:Assume good faith: To assume good faith is a fundamental principle on any Wiki project, including Wikipedia. As we allow anyone to edit, it follows that we assume that most people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it.
WP:ATK: A Wikipedia article written for the sole purpose of disparaging its subject is an attack page.
Wikipedia:Consensus: Wikipedia works by building consensus. This is done through polite discussion and negotiation, in an attempt to develop a consensus regarding proper application of policies and guidelines such as Neutral point of view. Surveys and the Request for comment process are designed to assist consensus-building when normal talk page communication fails.
Wikipedia:Criticism: Wikipedia must strive for a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Verifiability in general and in regards to criticism of article's topics.
Wikipedia:Divisiveness: Divisiveness on Wikipedia between members of the Wikipedia community is against Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and reason for existing because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and dividing Wikipedia contributors up into seperated camps hinders rather than helps the process of creating and maintaining an encyclopedia.
Wikipedia:Don't be a fanatic: Wikipedia is a communal effort. To make it work, contributors must think from a community perspective as well as a personal one.
Wikipedia:Don't_panic: It's easy to get caught up in an emotionally fired up argument over something that is so important that it must be fixed immediately. Moral outrage over an issue is a common source of panic. Before removing the offending text, perform a sanity check to see if any actual policies are being violated.
Wikipedia:Etiquette: Wikipedia's contributors come from many different countries and cultures. We have different views, perspectives, and backgrounds, sometimes varying widely. Treating others with respect is the key to collaborating effectively in building an encyclopedia.
Wikipedia:NPOV dispute: Neutral Point Of View. An NPOV (neutral, unbiased) article is an article that has been written without showing a stand on the issue at hand. This is especially important for the encyclopedia's treatment of controversial issues, in which very often there is an abundance of differing views and criticisms on the subject. In a neutral representation, the differing points of view are presented as such, not as facts.
WP:POINT: State your point on Wikipedia. Do not attempt to make an example out of anyone/anything to prove the point.
Wikipedia:Profanity: Words and images that would be considered offensive, profane, or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternatives are available. Including information about offensive material is part of Wikipedia's encyclopedic mission; being offensive is not.
Wikipedia:Reliable sources: If you can provide useful information to Wikipedia, please do so, but bear in mind that edits for which no reliable references are provided may be deleted by any editor.
Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages: Sign all your posts on Wikipedia talk pages by typing ~~~~ to be accountable and to help others understand the conversation.
Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines: When writing on a Wikipedia talk page, certain methods of communication are counterproductive, while others help make progress smoother. This guideline is designed to help Wikipedians use talk pages effectively.
Wikipedia:Vanity guidelines: Vanity information is considered to be any information that was placed in any Wikipedia article that might create an apparent conflict of interest, meaning any material that presents the appearance of being intended to in any way promote the personal notoriety of the author, or one of the close family members or associates of the author.