![]() | The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic. |
![]() | To report other users making personal attacks, please go to Wikipedia:AN/I. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Is there really no line that if crossed allows editors to dismiss etc their views? Doug Weller talk 18:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
Today I accidentally assumed a user to be a bot, judging by their swift answer (~100 words + a revert just under 2 minutes). I think the guideline could use a section on that as well. In fact, users with Twinkie or other tools to watch over fresh edits in Wikipedia can give a scare to a keyboard-only editor like myself. Not that I am proud of asking Adakiko if the swift revert was a "some kind of prank?" - I just hope there will be a guideline specially for non-savvy editors surprised by the speed of such reverts. 81.89.66.133 ( talk) 10:33, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Loafiewa. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Talk:Mosin-Nagant have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Loafiewa ( talk) 09:22, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
My reply was:
:That was a chat-like quick reply. Suspicious... 81.89.66.133 ( talk) 09:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Back then, I was not aware there are tools that allow to both revert and leave template-based messages simultaneously. Hope this will help in the future. 81.89.66.133 ( talk) 10:38, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
quote: "Comparing editors to Nazis, communists, terrorists, dictators, or other infamous persons. (See also Godwin's law.)
I propose to remove the word communists for the following reasons:
-- Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 15:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons, so it would seem uncontroversial. -- Otr500 ( talk) 17:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
On the
Talk:Donald Trump page, an IP user
said this:
My God, California could fall into the sea tomorrow and you people would oppose adding "submerged" to the opening sentence because "recency" and "undue weight" and "California's more notable for other things than being underwater" and "Wikipedia isn't a newspaper". It's obnoxious. Stop it. You're embarrassing yourselves.
In my mind, this is simply a thinly-veiled personal attack, disguised as an indictment on a larger group. But I'm not sure.
Thanks. Cessaune [talk] 01:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic. |
![]() | To report other users making personal attacks, please go to Wikipedia:AN/I. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Is there really no line that if crossed allows editors to dismiss etc their views? Doug Weller talk 18:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
Today I accidentally assumed a user to be a bot, judging by their swift answer (~100 words + a revert just under 2 minutes). I think the guideline could use a section on that as well. In fact, users with Twinkie or other tools to watch over fresh edits in Wikipedia can give a scare to a keyboard-only editor like myself. Not that I am proud of asking Adakiko if the swift revert was a "some kind of prank?" - I just hope there will be a guideline specially for non-savvy editors surprised by the speed of such reverts. 81.89.66.133 ( talk) 10:33, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Loafiewa. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Talk:Mosin-Nagant have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Loafiewa ( talk) 09:22, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
My reply was:
:That was a chat-like quick reply. Suspicious... 81.89.66.133 ( talk) 09:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Back then, I was not aware there are tools that allow to both revert and leave template-based messages simultaneously. Hope this will help in the future. 81.89.66.133 ( talk) 10:38, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
quote: "Comparing editors to Nazis, communists, terrorists, dictators, or other infamous persons. (See also Godwin's law.)
I propose to remove the word communists for the following reasons:
-- Maxim Masiutin ( talk) 15:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons, so it would seem uncontroversial. -- Otr500 ( talk) 17:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
On the
Talk:Donald Trump page, an IP user
said this:
My God, California could fall into the sea tomorrow and you people would oppose adding "submerged" to the opening sentence because "recency" and "undue weight" and "California's more notable for other things than being underwater" and "Wikipedia isn't a newspaper". It's obnoxious. Stop it. You're embarrassing yourselves.
In my mind, this is simply a thinly-veiled personal attack, disguised as an indictment on a larger group. But I'm not sure.
Thanks. Cessaune [talk] 01:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)