This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Editors who are heavily involved with the editing of a particular article may have a vested interest in the outcomes of decisions relating to that article, such as merge or deletion requests. This does not mean that such editors' arguments should be dismissed as arising from a conflict of interest.
Beware of using the argument of "vested interest" in content disputes: Discuss the issue, not the editor; and never suggest a view is invalid simply because of who its proponent is.
Editors who spend a particularly large amount of effort on specific pages on Wikipedia may have an emotional attachment to the work they have done. This may result in a bias towards one side or the other in debates concerning those pages.
Editors with vested interests should certainly not be excluded from such debates: the perspective of the editors involved in an article is one that ought to be allowed, and indeed should probably be represented in most debates. (This is why, for instance, deletion tags must be placed on pages listed for deletion, so that the editors of those pages can see them).
It is not generally considered important for an editor to disclose a possible vested interest when participating in a debate. If another editor believes that a vested interest of another user should be considered, they should be careful to:
This is an
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Editors who are heavily involved with the editing of a particular article may have a vested interest in the outcomes of decisions relating to that article, such as merge or deletion requests. This does not mean that such editors' arguments should be dismissed as arising from a conflict of interest.
Beware of using the argument of "vested interest" in content disputes: Discuss the issue, not the editor; and never suggest a view is invalid simply because of who its proponent is.
Editors who spend a particularly large amount of effort on specific pages on Wikipedia may have an emotional attachment to the work they have done. This may result in a bias towards one side or the other in debates concerning those pages.
Editors with vested interests should certainly not be excluded from such debates: the perspective of the editors involved in an article is one that ought to be allowed, and indeed should probably be represented in most debates. (This is why, for instance, deletion tags must be placed on pages listed for deletion, so that the editors of those pages can see them).
It is not generally considered important for an editor to disclose a possible vested interest when participating in a debate. If another editor believes that a vested interest of another user should be considered, they should be careful to: