Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Dealing with disputes: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Ritchie333 (talk | contribs) |
m →Things to avoid: hyphen fix |
||
Line 237:
* '''Don't issue blocks without warning.''' It is extremely rare that a problem is so urgent, that a user needs to be blocked without "a warning shot across the bow." Most people, if they know a block is imminent, ''will'' voluntarily moderate their own behavior. And even if an editor is doing things in a rapid-fire manner, such as changing templates or moving articles, a quick talkpage message, "Hey, hold up!" may be just as effective as a block, as it will post the "new message" banner to the editor. Never use blocks as punishment, use them as a last resort. The best way to offer a warning is to politely explain the problematic behavior, to clearly state what may happen if they do not change, and further, for you to explain how they can contribute better if they do change their behavior. See [[WP:BLOCK#Education and warnings]]. Where possible, try to end on a positive note.
* '''Don't issue blocks unevenly.''' If two people have been yelling at each other and you only block one, the other one should probably at least get a warning at their talkpage. On the other hand, don't feel compelled to block multiple editors when only one is acting problematically; treating [[apples and oranges]] identically is uneven as well.
* '''Don't lose your neutrality.''' Do everything possible to avoid any perception that you are agreeing with one side or the other. Because as soon as you do, the other side may stop listening to you. Don't give up ''their'' perception of ''your''
* '''Avoid issuing opinions on content''', except in blatant cases. Stick to the user conduct. As soon as you become involved in the content wars, you become more of a participant. If you ''do'' feel it necessary to issue an opinion on content, keep it very very well-grounded in policy and consensus. Link policies, give diffs to proof of consensus. Portray yourself as a judge of existing consensus, not as someone who is enforcing your own opinion over everyone else's.
* '''Don't pounce on new editors'''. Be careful about censuring a new editor who wanders into the dispute unaware. Even if an article is under strict ArbCom restrictions, always give the new editor the benefit of the doubt. Follow [[WP:BITE]], explain things first, and [[WP:AGF]].
| |||