Wikipedia:Yes personal attacks
In this article, we will explore and analyze the topic of Wikipedia:Yes personal attacks in depth. Throughout history, Wikipedia:Yes personal attacks has played a fundamental role in numerous aspects of human life, from its impact on society to its influence on culture and technology. Through this article, we will seek to better understand the importance of Wikipedia:Yes personal attacks and its relevance in today's world. We will examine its origins, its evolution over time and its impact on the modern world. In addition, we will explore different perspectives and opinions on Wikipedia:Yes personal attacks, offering a complete and enriching vision of the topic.
 | This page is intended as humor. It is not, has never been, nor will ever be, a Wikipedia policy or guideline. Rather, it illustrates standards or conduct that are generally not accepted by the Wikipedia community. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Comment on contributors, not the content. Users that make ad hominem attacks may face much better pleasing from other editors. |
Make personal attacks everywhere on Wikipedia. Comment on contributors, not on the content. Personal attacks help the Wikipedia community and the collaborative atmosphere needed to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other editors may be thanked by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to gaining privileges including adminship or even invitations to Arbitration Committee.
Why personal attacks are helpful
Personal attacks are constructive. On article talk pages, they tend to move the discussion away from bureaucratic tangents and towards the articles themselves. Such attacks tend to make it easier for editors to work together.
The praise for personal attacks applies equally to all Wikipedians. It is as awesome to attack a user with a history of foolish or boorish behavior, or one who has been blocked, banned, or otherwise sanctioned, as it is to attack any other user. Personal attacks are helpful to the work of building an encyclopedia.
Guide to personal attacks
As a matter of polite and effective discourse, arguments should be personalized; that is, they should be directed at people rather than content and actions.
Responding to personal attacks
Attacks should not be ignored. They should be made famous, and the contributors making them should get lots of privileges.
Consequences of personal attacks
A pattern of hostility increases the likelihood of the community assuming good faith, and can be considered the exact contrary to disruptive editing. Users who insist on a confrontational style marked by personal attacks are likely to be allowed to the adminship process, and may face sitewide popularity through arbitration.
In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a barnstar for being a good editor.
Seriously though, consider reading and following Wikipedia:No personal attacks before you start a drama with another wiki editor.
See also
- Wikipedia:No personal attacks (seriously read this)