Wikipedia:文明：修订间差异

以互动方式浏览历史

←上一版本下一版本→

删除的内容添加的内容

可视化wikitext

行内

2021年9月17日 (五) 15:40的版本

本頁是中文維基百科的方針，經社群商議並採納。
使用者通常應該遵守此方針。
任何對此方針的編輯都必須反映社群共識，否則請先於討論頁或互助客棧發起討論。

快捷方式

本观念对中文维基百科十分重要，是中文維基百科運作的基石，具有悠久的歷史及深遠的意義。

本頁簡而言之：

以尊重且体谅的方式参与讨论。
不要忽略其他维基人的立场与结论。
进行干练有条理的论证，不进行人身攻击；并鼓励别人遵循一样的准则。

維基百科，如同維基標幟所載明的，是一個「自由的百科全書」。創始人吉米·威爾斯（Jimbo）說，維基的使命是將世上全部知識用當地語言傳給這個星球的每一個人；而維基社群的唯一目的，就是通力協作，創作這部無償、自由、具備最高品質的百科全書。因著這些使命與目標，維基人對於維基社群的文明有高度的要求與基準，維基人需要彼此尊重、坦誠、溝通、友愛，來創設這個多元、自由、寬容、正直的維基社群與百科全書。

討論方式

快捷方式

WP:投票不能取代討論

吉米·威爾斯始終強調，所有的爭議應當通過討論得到共識解決，而不是什麼事情都可以付諸投票。少數強勢決議，是顯而易見的錯誤；然而多數決議，卻有迷惑性。在存有相當爭議的情況下，多數人同意並不是真正的民主，而是變相的暴力。「多數暴力」非但不能解決問題，反而給人暫時假象、滋生更多的問題、影響維基人的創作。

最常見的討論方式，是在條目的對話頁討論。如果需要更為廣泛的參與，則可以在互助客栈提出。而如果某個問題需要維基社群的普遍了解、參與，並且需嚴謹、有序的討論過程，可以利用討論。具體的規則和程序可以參見上述頁面的說明。

杜絕不文明行為

維基人需要彼此尊重、友愛，每個人都有權利要求對方這樣做。不文明行为包括：

粗魯無禮

無禮、侮辱、謾罵中傷、髒話或下流（尤指猥褻）暗示
人身攻擊，包括種族、族群、殘疾相關、性相關、性別相關（包括性別認同、性傾向、性別表現等）及宗教相關負面稱號、以及提述諸如國籍或社會階層等群眾特徵時作出貶損
輕率魯莽地指控他人行為不當
輕蔑其他編輯，包括在編輯摘要或討論頁留言惡意批評他人（諸如：「這是我見過最愚蠢的東西」、「清理廢話」）

其他不文明行為

譏諷他人或誘使他人作出不文明行為：故意促使他人作出不文明行為，即使其行為本身未必屬於不文明。編者均必須為其行為負責，此情況同樣如此；是故，用戶如果選擇以攻擊作回應，則不會因受譏諷或誘使而免責，用戶如果譏諷或誘使他人作出不文明行為，則亦不會因為誘使失敗而免責。
騷擾，包括維基跟蹤、欺凌、人身或法律威脅、張貼個人資料、頻繁地發電郵或於用戶空間留言
性騷擾
說謊或欺詐
援引他人留言並斷章取義，以令他人誤以為發言者抱持某觀點而其實際並無持有，或達到中傷之效

另外，不慎或不當引用其他方針可能會引起其他編者緊張，甚至衝突。譬如︰用戶作出善意編輯，卻被指為破壞，則可能會令其覺得不公及受攻擊。請使用最佳判斷，以及隨時準備好出錯時道歉。

失禮發生的例子

你正安靜地創建新頁面的時候，一個用戶來講話：「如果你非要寫一篇毫無價值的東西，起碼要注意不要弄得錯字連篇。」而衝突的升級發生在，你回答說：關你屁事。
你創建的內容被回退或提交刪除，雖然你有合理理由去保留你所作的編輯，但卻只在回退人的對話頁或刪除請求中發表這樣的回應：理由是……，這樣的刪除/回退真的很霸道。

後果

這類互動嚇跑其他的貢獻者，分散其他維基人本來可以去做更重要事情的精力，從而削弱整個維基社群。這樣的失禮行為使人平生怨氣，心灰意冷，甚至離開；或者激怒對方，導致衝突升級。同時，大家失去相互的真誠與信任，會更沒有能力去解決現有或者將來的爭執。如果懂禮貌都不守就更加激怒對方。

避免衝突升級的方法

不要進行編輯戰，可以跟該用戶討論，或者設立維基專題探討群體規則
保護頁面，這樣大家可以冷靜一會，仔細想想，同時避免衝突進一步升級
讚揚那些沒有「以惡制惡」的人
請參與失禮行為的所有當事人暫時或長期離開維基百科
解決爭端的根源——尋找妥協的解決方案
創制並施行一定的規則
用緩和及建設性的評論回應失禮
不對失禮做任何答覆，原諒並忘掉他們

客觀的編輯態度

維基百科是供全人類利用的無償、自由的百科全書，秉持客觀、公正、如實的編輯態度。

維基不為政治、個別團體或某個個人服務，因而不是政治論壇、亦非個人網誌。維基只記述事實，這包括：事物的歷史、現狀、以及人們對此的見解、計畫等，但是維基自身不持有立場，也不支持、暗示、預測、或同情任何的未來可能。維基人在編寫條目時，要注意不要受限於自己的立場，而應致力於留下客觀、符合事實的描述。

中文維基是所有中文用戶共同的百科全書，而中文用戶不僅分布於中國大陸、香港、澳門、台灣、新加坡、馬來西亞等地，更是遍佈世界各地。中文維基得以保持目前的完整統一，仰賴諸多前提要件：

簡繁之間，人數居多的簡體（规范汉字）用戶不會侵害繁體（正體）用戶的應有權益，繁體用戶也不會僅僅因為人少而覺得受到無形擠壓；
兩岸之間，人數居多的中國大陸用戶不會侵害台灣用戶的應有權益，台灣用戶也不會僅僅因為人少而覺得受到無形擠壓；
擴展地講，任何人數居多的群體都保證不會侵害其他的個體——維基人謹慎地避免諸如中國中心、漢族中心、男性中心、異性戀中心等等的各種傾向；同時任何人數佔劣勢的群體都保證不會無故懷有受迫害的心理，也不應該要求額外的權利——中國海外人士、少數民族、女性和同性戀人士等等不會僅僅因為人少而覺得受到排擠和歧視。

注：根據2014年1月至2014年3月數據，來自香港和台灣的編輯來源佔總數約47%，來自中國大陸的則上升至約43%。

模板

{{Comment_withdraw}}：認為自己需要收回自己不當的意見或評論的時候用。

參見

外部連結

@@ 第86行： / 第86行： @@
 * [[:meta:Don't be a jerk|Don't be a jerk]]
 * [[:meta:Incivility|Incivility]]
-<!--'''Civility''' is a rule here on Wikipedia. Whereas ''incivility'' is defined here as ''behavior that causes an atmosphere of animosity, disrespect, [[m:source of conflict|conflict]] and [[m:wikistress|stress]],'' the '''Civility rule''' states that ''people must act with civility toward one another.''
-Our [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedia Community]] has by experience developed an informal hierarchy of [[m:Wikimedia principles|core principles]] &mdash; the first being [[NPOV|neutral point of view]]. The second is a demand for a reasonable degree of '''civility''' towards others. Even if "[[civility]]" is just an informal rule, it's the only term that can apply, and it's the only reasonable way to delimit acceptable conduct from the unacceptable. We can't always expect people to [[wikilove|love]], honor, obey, or even '''respect''' another. But we have every right to demand '''civility'''.
-== The problem ==
-Wikipedia as a whole is not especially respectful of other contributors.  This directly affects the quality of the community experience at Wikipedia.  By hurting the community, the quality of articles is affected as well.  This creates a cycle of incivility that reinforces itself, and in some cases conflicts between contributors over one article can expand to involve additional people and additional articles.
-== Examples ==
-'''Petty examples''' that contribute to an uncivil environment:
-* use of rudeness
-* judgmental tone in edit comments ("fixed sloppy spelling", "snipped rambling crap")
-* belittling contributors because of their language skills or word choice
-* ill-considered accusations of impropriety of one kind or another
-More '''serious examples''' include:
-* [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal attacks]]
-** racial, ethnic, and religious slurs
-** profanity directed at another contributor
-* lies
-* defacing user pages
-* calling for bans and blocks
-* starting a comment: "Not to make this personal, but..."
-Incivility happens for example when you are quietly creating a new page, and another user tells you, ''If you're going to write a pointless page, could you spell-check it?''.<br>
-Escalation occurs when you reply, ''Mind your own business''.
-This style of interaction between Wikipedians drives away contributors, distracts others from more important matters, and weakens the entire community.
-==When and why does it happen?==
-*During an edit war, when people have different opinions, or when there is a conflict over sharing power
-*When the community grows larger. Each editor does not know all the others and may not perceive the importance of each individual to the project -- so they don't worry about maintaining relationships that don't exist. Reputation does not count as much as in a smaller community.
-*Sometimes, a particularly impolite user joins the project. This can also aggravate other editors into being impolite themselves.
-Most of the time, insults are used in the heat of the moment during a longer conflict. They are essentially a way to end the discussion. Often the person who made the insult regrets having used such words afterwards. This in itself is a good reason to remove (or [[Wikipedia:Refactoring|refactor]]) the offending words.
-In other cases, the offender is doing it on purpose: either to distract the "opponent(s)" from the issue, or simply to drive them away from working on the article or even from the project, or to push them to commit an even greater breach in civility, which might result in ostracism or banning. In those cases, it is far less likely that the offender will have any regrets and apologize.
-It should be noted that some editors deliberately push others to the point of breaching civility, without committing such a breach themselves.
-==Why is it bad?==
-*Because it makes people unhappy, resulting in discouragement and departure
-*Because it makes people angry, resulting in non-constructive or even uncivil behavior themselves, further escalating the level of incivility
-*Because people lose good faith, resulting in even less ability to resolve the current conflict -- or the next one
-== General suggestions ==
-===Preventing incivility within Wikipedia===
-*Prevent edit wars and conflict between individuals (''constraints on editing are set by the project -- essentially a community answer'')
-*Restrict access to Wikipedia for some classes of people more likely to be offensive (''reducing openness'')
-*Force delays between answers to give time to editors to calm down and recover and to avoid further escalation of a conflict (''protecting pages, or temporary blocks of editors in case of conflict'')
-*Use positive feedback (''praising those who do not respond to incivility with incivility'')
-*Use negative feedback (''suggesting that an editor involved in conflict should leave Wikipedia or simply allowing the editor to leave -- whether or not that person was the offender or the one guilty of the offenses -- in order to reduce the level of conflict'')
-*Apply peer pressure (''voicing displeasure each time rudeness or incivility happens'')
-*Solve the root of the conflict between the offender and the other editor(s) or the community -- or finding a compromise.
-*Block certain users from editing specific pages that often trigger incivility
-*Create and enforce a new rule -- based on use of certain words -- that will allow temporary blocking or banning an editor using them more than a certain number of times.
-*Request the use of real names to force editors to take responsibility for their behavior (''although this is generally considered not desirable on Wikipedia'')
-*Filter emails by the offender, or filter mail based on certain keywords and reject emails to the Wikipedia mailing list with those words
-*Decide that incivility and rudeness can't be avoided in such a project, and accepting their existence.
-===Reducing the impact===
-*Balance each uncivil comment by providing a soothing or constructive comment
-*'''Do not''' answer offensive comments. Forget about them. Forgive the editor. Do not escalate the conflict. (''an individual approach'')
-*Ignore incivility. Operate as if the offender does not exist. Set up a "wall" between the offender and the community.
-*Revert edits with a veil of invisibility (&bot=1) to reduce the impact of the offensive words used in edit summaries (the comment box)
-*Decide that incivility and rudeness can't be avoided in such a project, and accept their existence.
-===Removing uncivil comments===
-*Strike offensive words or replace them with milder ones on talk pages (''this is often seen as controversial, as is refactoring other people's words'')
-*Remove offensive comments on talk pages (''since they remain in the page history, anyone can find them again or refer to them later on'')
-*Revert an edit with &bot=1, so that the edit made by the offender appears invisible in Recent Changes (''do-able on ip contributions, requires technical help for logged-in user'')
-*Delete (entirely and permanently) an edit made by the offender (''requires technical help'')
-*Permanently delete an offensive comment made on the mailing lists (''requires technical help'')
-*Replace a comment made in an edit summary by another less offensive comment (''requires technical help'')
-== Management of incivility during the mediation process ==
-Parties sometimes attempt to negotiate an agreement while one party is not ready to negotiate. For example, if the source of the conflict is a specific point in an article, [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]] may be impaired if discussion is still clouded by an uncivil exchange between both parties. It is best to clear up that issue as soon as possible, so disputants can regain their balance and clarity when editing.
-===Explain incivility===
-Some editors are badly shaken by uncivil words directed towards them, and can't focus on the source of the conflict itself. It may help to point out to them why unpleasant words were used, and acknowledge that while incivility is wrong, the ideas behind the comment may be valid.
-The offended person may realize that the words were not always meant literally, and could decide to forgive and forget them.
-It can be helpful to point out breaches of civility even when done on purpose to hurt, as it might help the disputant to refocus on the issue (''controversial'').
-===Rephrasing disputants comments===
-During the [[mediation]] process, a third neutral party is in contact with both disputants, ensuring communication between them.
-The role of the mediator is to promote reasonable discussion between the two disputants. Therefore it is helpful to remove incivility voiced by User A, in rephrasing comments to User B.
-:For example, if User A and User B are flaming each other by e-mail through a mediator, it might be best if the intermediary turns "''I refuse to allow Neo-Nazi apologetics to infest the Wikipedia''" to "''User A is concerned that you may be giving too much prominence to a certain view.''"
-===Rephrasing flames publicly exchanged before or during the mediation process===
-At the end of the mediation process, the mediator may suggest that the disputants agree to remove uncivil comments that have remained on user and article talk pages. The editors might agree to delete a page created specifically to abuse or flame the one another, and/or to remove all flaming content not relevant to the article discussion, and/or to refactor a discussion. This may allow disputants to forgive and forget offenses more quickly.
-Similarly, the disputants might agree to apologize to each other.
-=== Suggest apologizing ===
-[[Mediation]] regularly involves disputes in which one party feels injured by the other. The apology is an act that is neither about problem-solving and negotiation, nor is it about arbitration. Rather, it is a form of ritual exchange between both parties, where words are said that allow reconciliation. In [[transformative mediation]], the apology represents an opportunity for acknowledgement that may transform relations.
-For some people, it may be crucial to receive an [[meta:apology|apology]] from those who have offended them. For this reason, a sincere apology is often the key to the resolution of a conflict: an apology is a symbol of forgiveness. An apology is very much recommended when one person's perceived incivility has offended another.
-''See also:'' [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette]]
-==External link==
-*[[m:incivility|User:Anthere's original article on this topic at meta.wikipedia.org]] (''originally called "uncivility";)''-->
-<!--[[zh:Wikipedia:文明]]-->
 {{Rules}}
 [[Category:维基社群]]
 [[Category:維基百科行為方針]]
+[[Category:维基百科文明]]
-[[is:Wikipedia:Kurteisi]]