Article on other languages:
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
Furl |
 |
|
 |
Rojo |
| Add to OnlyWire |
 |
This is an essay, a page containing the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints, and they may be heeded or not based upon your judgement and discretion. |
 |
This page in a nutshell: It's okay to call a spade a spade — to speak plainly — but remember to remain civil, and to stay focused on improving the encyclopedia. |
.jpg)
To call a spade a spade is to clearly and directly describe something. Rather than using oblique and obfuscating language, just "tell it like it is."
Users too often cite policies, like our policy against personal attacks and our policy against incivility, not to protect themselves from personal attacks, but to protect their edits from review.
Although editors who consistently engage in disruptive editing are disruptive editors, and editors who consistently vandalize are vandals, there is still a requirement for editors to be reasonably civil to each other. But being civil should not be confused with being friendly or courteous, let alone charitable.
It's OK to let others know when you think they're acting inappropriately, but a bit of politeness and tact while doing so will get them to listen more readily. One can be honest and direct about another editor's behaviour or edits without resorting to name-calling or attacks. Discuss problematic edits, in reasonable terms, on that article's discussion page. If the behaviour of a user remains problematic, use the dispute resolution process. When referring to a particular bad edit, it is always best to include a diff.
The duck test
The duck test - If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck... suggests that a person can figure out the true nature of an unknown subject by observing this subject's readily identifiable traits.
