Wikibooks:Assume good faith
From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection
This policy explains, why any Wikibookian should assume good faith, even when the actions of other users may seem to cause trouble or harm. It also explains ways that you can counteract bad actions without assuming bad faith. Actions applicable to user with bad intention are defined in other Policies and guidelines.
Contents |
[edit] Assume Good Faith
To assume good faith is to assume by default that users of Wikibooks have good intentions. Good faith is acting without malice and encompasses using tools and capabilities to advance the aims of the project and not to damage the project. The assumption of good faith is a fundamental principle on any publicly-editable wiki, including Wikibooks. We provide the "edit this page" feature to anyone on the Internet because we assume that most people who contribute at Wikibooks are trying to help it, not hurt it. If this assumption was false, then Wikibooks would be destined to fail.
Assuming good faith does not mean that no actions should be criticized, when someone criticizes your actions, instead of telling other users to "assume good faith", you should also assume that other users are trying in good faith to help you. Wikibookians are not required to continue to assume good faith when clear evidence to the contrary is present, you should attempt to talk to talk it over and if it fails report them.
[edit] Correcting errors
Every Wikibookian should be bold, but try to correct errors instead of reverting all changes. You should use the "Summary" field (above the "Save page" button) or the user's talk page to explain your edit actions if possible, especially if controversial. This helps reduce misunderstandings and avoid escalation of problems. If a user makes the same error repeatedly, discuss the errors on an appropriate talk page, don't engage on a reversion war. However, sometimes it is appropriate to simply revert changes. For example, the blanking of pages and vandalism should both be reverted, and information added to the "Summary".
Here are some examples concerning the correction of errors:
- A user added out-of-scope material. If there is confusion over whether some material belongs in a module, try moving that material to the talk page instead of only deleting it. Or move that material to some other wikibook where it is in scope, mentioning in the edit summary which module it went to.
- A user added several red links. Some users like accidental linking; they put double-square brackets around words for which they want pages, like they would do at Wikipedia, unaware that modules at Wikibooks should belong to some book. You can divert the links to encyclopedia articles at Wikipedia: use the syntax [[w:link|]] or [[Wikipedia:link|]] to quickly make such a link. Or you can mark that page or section with {{wikify}}.
- A user created pages in the wrong place. Some users do not know naming policy; you can read that policy for suggestions on handling badly-named pages.
- A user employs incorrect or substandard syntax. Some users only write in plain text or HTML. You can fix it, for example by replacing <br><br> with blank lines; you can also tell users to read Help:Editing or MetaWikipedia:Help:Editing.
- A user changes the spelling of words, but the old spellings were correct. Wikibooks does not have an official or standardized variant of English. Some users are not familiar with spellings outside their home region and will unnecessarily "correct" them. You can check a dictionary like Wiktionary or dict.org for variant spellings.
[edit] Bad Faith
Actions inconsistent with good faith may not be generally defined as in bad faith. Sometimes bad intentions seem obvious, but even people whom you disagree with or who are hard to work with, may have good intentions. Everyone makes mistakes, and sometimes a mistake can give the impression of bad faith even when there is good intent.
Bad faith actions are covered by the policy and guidelines or generally defined as such by society (ie: lie, cheat, threat), and are handled by Administrators if notified of the problem. When in doubt, it is better to assume good faith and ask the user for clarification. If you remain unsatisfied or the problem is not solved use the decision making process to resolve the issue. Be careful of assuming bad faith, and be prepared to support your side of the dispute.
Administrators can block users from editing Wikibooks on the bases of behavior rather than intent.
Claiming bad faith without reason is in itself an act of bad faith against your fellow Wikibookian, consider examining the Wikibooks policies and guidelines. This policy is not a shield for you to ignore your own bad actions. Instead of telling other users to "assume good faith" when they claim that you cause problems, you should also assume that those other users are trying in good faith to help you.
Policies can't be broken. Guidelines should be followed by default but may be challenged if a good enough reason is given. Don't assume bad faith. Instead, try to get the reason for the disputable action. This is true for all users, especially new contributors. Any Wikibookian has the power to act to prevent or report actions against Policy or Guidelines, but should do so with an open mind as to the good intentions of the other party(s).
