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. |
A single-purpose account (SPA) is a user account that edits either a single article, a group of related articles, or performs edits to a group of unrelated articles in the same manner on Wikipedia. The presence of such clearly defined single-purpose accounts has provoked a strong reaction among the Community. Some editors are concerned that contributions by single-purpose accounts have not aligned with Wikipedia's neutrality or advocacy standards, thus conflicting with what Wikipedia is not. Other editors raise counter-concerns pointing to the need of the Community to attract new and well-informed users knowledgeable in a particular subject, thus being able to cite relevant reliably sourced publications. Identifying and interacting with single-purpose accounts requires both civility and tact.
Contents |
Identifying SPAs
While a new user without an edit history who immediately performs tasks that seemingly requires a post-beginner level of editing skills (such as editing non-mainspace pages, uploading images, or participating in a discussion) may be an illegitimate sock puppet, it remains possible that a new user’s contributions are alternatively the product of a disinterested third party with previous IP editing experience wishing to improve the Wikipedia project. For this reason, statements regarding motives are not generally recommended. The term should be used descriptively and should not be read pejoratively unless a disruptive agenda is clearly established. Users should be informed of relevant policies and content guidelines in a civil and courteous manner, especially if a tag will be applied to their comment.
New users acting in good-faith often will begin to edit topics in which they have a general interest. Such accounts warrant particularly gentle scrutiny before accusing them of any breach of official policies and content guidelines. Specifically, some new users may be unaware that editing a single topic, and in the process adding their own views, may lead to some editors giving less weight to their ideas in article discussions. Some experienced Wikipedia users may be active on a range of articles, and aim to expand the encyclopedia as a whole. Proponents of this aspect of Wikipedia culture expect new users to develop a broader interest.
One can only form opinions of editors as a result of their actions. Over time, they may diversify their contributions. Users who continue to work within a narrow range of articles may find it difficult to build credibility in community discussions, although extended improvement to a specific section of Wikipedia should not disadvantage an expert opinion. As with all Wikipedia articles, users need to cite the relevant verifiably published evidence from reliable sources to support their point of view. Inevitably, some experienced editors might not agree with cited interpretations during content discussions. Please do not be discouraged by such editors. Eventually, they will respect you.
It may be helpful to cite the official policies regarding sock puppets and meat puppets for guidance on such matters, especially if new users have joined Wikipedia specifically to participate in a debate, or if they have joined at the request of another user who wants help in discussions on a particular article.
Handling and advice
- If you are in a discussion with someone who edits as a single purpose account
- Communal standards such as don't bite the newcomers apply to all users. Be courteous. Focus on the subject matter, not the person. If they are given fair treatment, they may also become more involved over time.
- If you are a newcomer or editing as a single purpose account
- Good policy-based editing will gain rapid respect. Ask others for help as you learn. The same policies apply to you as to everyone else, although your reputation as well as your evidence will inevitably be taken into account in discussions by some experienced editors.
- If you create a single-purpose account, don't pick a username related to the topic you're editing about. If you do so, people might assume you are editing with a conflict of interest, causing lots of unnecessary drama. [1] [2]
- If you wish to continue working as a single-pupose editor, capitalize on the strengths of that role, particularly as regards sources. Be willing to buy or borrow books and articles on your chosen subject, and search thoroughly for information on-line. Make notes reminding you where your information comes from, carefully check its reliability and neutrality, and reproduce it in your editing in the form of citations.
- The community's main concern will be that edits by single purpose accounts are often a neutrality or advocacy concern or (in some cases) there may be problems with conflict of interest. Care in these areas will be seen as a sign of good editorship.
- Decision-making tags
- In communal decision-making, single purpose accounts suspected of astroturfing or vote stacking will sometimes have a tag added below their name, as an aid to those discussing or closing the debate. Please do not take this as an attack on your editing, some users just find it easier to discuss issues when it is clear who the new editors are. The format of the tag is:
{{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}.- Before adding such a tag, please keep in mind that it will probably be taken as an insult or an accusation. Use with consideration.
Further information if you have been linked to this page
Please read very carefully the following policy and information pages, if you are new to Wikipedia under these circumstances, since Wikipedia editing and discussion may use criteria that you are not used to:
- Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not — what is acceptable or unacceptable use.
- Wikipedia:Five pillars — what Wikipedia is for
- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view — the core policy that informs how pages are to be approached
- Wikipedia:Sock puppetry — the core policy covering both users with multiple accounts, and multiple users working together on one "viewpoint" in a debate
- Wikipedia:No personal attacks — many may find the accusation of being a single-purpose account as insulting.
- Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers — new members will become new contributors soon enough if they are willing to learn about Wikipedia culture, so welcoming new users does more good than labelling them as new.
