It expresses the opinions and ideas of some Wikimedians but may not have wide support. This is not policy on Meta, but it may be a policy or guideline on other Wikimedia projects. Feel free to update this page as needed, or use the discussion page to propose major changes. Note that some behavior listed here has been taken as disruption of Wikipedia in Arbitration Committee decisions. Trolling is any deliberate and intentional attempt to disrupt the usability of Wikipedia for its editors, administrators, developers, and other people who work to create content for and help run Wikipedia. Trolls are one of the more unique, though not very intelligent, races of Gielinor. Whilst the main population exists within the mountainous troll country known as. Para combater trolls de forma eficiente, aos usu In Internet slang, a troll (/ Trolling is a violation of the implicit rules of Internet social spaces and is often done to inflame or invite conflict. It necessarily involves a value judgment made by one user about the value of another's contribution. Trolls in the internet sense of the word are not to be confused with large warty monsters thought to dwell under bridges, in caves, etc. Trolling is not necessarily the same as vandalism (although vandalism may be used by trolls). A vandal may just enjoy defacing a webpage, insulting random users, or spreading some personal views in an inappropriate way. A troll deliberately exploits tendencies of human nature or of an online community to upset people. There are many types of disruptive users that are not trolls. Reversion warriors, POV warriors, cranks, impolite users, and vocal critics of Wikipedia structures and processes are not necessarily trolls. The basic mindset of a troll is that they are far more interested in how others react to their edits than in the usual concerns of Wikipedians: accuracy, veracity, comprehensiveness, and overall quality. If a troll gets no response to their spurious edits, then they can hardly be considered a troll at all. Rule 1. 4 of the internet also states . The nature of trolls is to slip from any definition intended to constrain their actions and to find new and innovative ways to annoy. What follows are some comments that point generally in the direction of what a troll is and what trolls do. But it is not possible to identify everything someone might do to deliberately try to wreak havoc on Wikipedia. For this reason, no enforcement whatsoever has been set up against trolls.
Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the editing of Wikipedia. Ignorance is not trolling. Genuine dissent is not trolling. Biased editing, even if defended aggressively, is in itself not trolling. By themselves, misguided nominations, votes, and proposed policy are not trolling. They are only trolling when they are motivated by a program of malice rather than ignorance or bias. This requires a judgment of the personal motivation for another's action. Such a judgment can never be made with anything approaching certainty. This fact should always be kept in mind when one is tempted to label someone a troll. When you try to decide if someone is a troll, strive to assume they are not. Explain errors politely and reasonably; point them towards policies, the manual of style and relevant past discussions. Do not conclude they are a troll until they have shown complete inability or unwillingness to listen to reason or to moderate their position based upon the input of others. Even in that case, it is likely better to remain silent and let others conclude the obvious instead of calling someone a troll and creating even more mayhem. It is better to humor a troll for too long than to drive away a sincere but misguided user. Remember and apply the principles laid out at w: Wikipedia: Don't bite the newcomers. Types of trolling. It does not follow from this that all, most, or any given person engaged in these behaviors is a troll. It also does not follow that a person who has not engaged in these behaviors is not a troll. An important part of the definition of . Inflammatory edits usually come from users who have a minority or controversial opinion and who sincerely believe that this view is inadequately represented by Wikipedia, and therefore will seek reasonable ways to properly represent their views; trolls, however, will generally not seek consensus but will instead insist on a position without any regard for compromise. Not all edit war trolls will choose subject matter that is obviously controversial. The defining characteristic of a troll in this case is not the content of the edit, but the behavior in discussing the edit, and the refusal to consider evidence and citations or to accept consensus or compromise. People who passionately believe in what they are writing also sometimes behave in a way that may make them appear to be a troll. Many non- trolls refuse to compromise, and, at times, compromise may not even be the best solution. Uploading inappropriate content. In such cases as copies from w: shock sites, this is more appropriately treated as vandalism. However, if an article with clearly inappropriate content is aggressively defended pretending that it is a genuinely encyclopedic article, this may qualify as trolling. Misuse of process. Examples include continual nomination of articles for w: Wikipedia: Articles for deletion that are obviously encyclopedic, nomination of stubs for w: Wikipedia: Featured article candidates, baseless listing of users at w: Wikipedia: Requests for comment, nomination of users who obviously do not fulfill the minimum requirements at w: Wikipedia: Requests for adminship, . When we say that something is . Beware that sometimes, something may seem obvious to you but quite non- obvious to others. Characterizing someone as a troll who simply disagrees with you can cause disputes which can be very damaging both to Wikipedia and to your own credibility. Usually, even if the behavior clearly breaks policy, this is just someone unaware of policy. Look at the user's response to being pointed towards the relevant policy. If they accept the policy, or seek to change the policy at the appropriate location, they might not be a troll. If they declare the policy . It is sometimes very difficult for a new Wikipedian to understand the complicated system of authority which Wikipedia uses, and these systems are not really detailed anywhere (or even set, to some extent). If a user challenges that an alleged policy really is a policy, perhaps it's best to utilize the help of other users. Encourage the newcomer to use the village pump, and point them to the IRC channel, where experienced users may be able to help get the newcomer acquainted with the system. Pestering. Of course, sometimes what is obvious to one person is obscure to another. If a user seems to be asking stupid questions, try to give them the resources to help themselves. You can also send them to the help desk. If they persist, politely explain that you would love to help but you are rather busy. If they continue asking the question even after you have clearly answered it, or begin complaining that you will not help them, there is a chance of them being trolls. Or they could just be lazy or confused. Of all the kinds of trolling, this is the most important kind not to get bent out of shape about. Remember: Wikipedia is a source of knowledge. Be friendly about providing knowledge to people. That said, in extreme cases, this can be a method of trolling, and it is not inappropriate to ask someone to leave you alone once you have made a reasonable attempt to answer their questions. Misplaced criticism. Often, this criticism comes in the form of accusations of cabals, ilks, or campaigns that are typically invested in a particular POV, invested in maligning a specific user, and other similar claims. Often, racist trolls, when confronted, will accuse Wikipedia of Marxism or political correctness. Criticism of the project, made constructively, is welcome from contributors when shared in an appropriate place. It is unwelcome when cross posted to a wide variety of places (cf. Meat. Ball: Forest. Fire), or clearly inappropriate locations, such as article pages and established policy pages. This is very similar to posting any controversial issue. If it's done with malice and in bad faith, it can be a problem. Of course, a new user who gets treated roughly can easily interpret that as Cabalism, especially if there seems to be no appropriate forum for these complaints. What criticism is 'constructive' is very much in the eye of the beholder. Creative trolling. No matter how great your definition of trolling may be, a dedicated troll will find something you have not thought of yet. This, then, is something of a catch- all category. When a user, in a conflict of any sort, insists on the letter of a rule while grossly violating its spirit, this is often a sign of trolling. In these borderline cases, however, it is more important than ever to try to assume good faith, and to seek consensus not only in your opposition to whatever you think is being trolled about but on the issue of whether or not someone is a troll. A good start when you are faced with creative trolling is to come to this page and propose an amendment to the types of trolling section. If people agree that it is trolling, then you can go back to the conflict with this on your side. Failing specific additions to this page, however, the arbitration committee should be the only ones to ban users for . Not fanning the fire will, at the very least, not make the situation worse. If the behavior escalates to abuse or vandalism, it is easy to deal with those things. Dealing with edit war trolls. In these cases, err on the side of improving Wikipedia, but always remember the principle of w: Wikipedia: Staying cool when the editing gets hot and do not hesitate to appeal to the w: Wikipedia: Dispute resolution process. Remember the three revert rule. If someone is trolling an article you will get support from others in restoring the article. Eventually, the troll may give up or a consensus may form for dealing with them more firmly. Dealing with inappropriate content. Even if you ignore it, it remains in the database and is visible from the Internet.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |