User:Jaysweet/You are probably not being Wikistalked

On a daily basis, Wikipedia gets a number of reports at various noticeboards such as WP:ANI, WP:WQA, etc., where one user complains that another user is Wikistalking them; in other words, that the "stalker" user is constantly checking the "stalked" users contributions and interfering with them through reversion, edit warring, and filibustering on the relevant talk pages. This is a very serious allegation, as true Wikistalking can make it almost impossible for the "stalked" user to continue to contribute, and has driven many people away from the project in the past.

However, the vast majority of these reports ultimately wind up with no action being taken. Why is that? The bottom line is that in most cases where Wikistalking is alleged, there is no wrongdoing whatsoever, or in some cases it may even be that the allegedly "stalked" party is guilty of wrongdoing. There are a number of things that can give a false impression of Wikistalking; and even when moderate Wikistalking-like behavior is taking place, it is rare that the best way to deal with it is by sanctions against the alleged "stalker".

Benign explanations for apparent "stalking"
If you find the same user popping up over and over again, editing the same pages as you, reverting your changes, tagging your pages/images for deletion, before you cry "Wikistalker!", it is best to consider that there may be a more benign explanation. Below are some of the most common reasons why people think they are being stalked when they really aren't.

Do you an the alleged "stalker" share a common interest?
Very few Wikipedia editors truly have a random distribution of topics among their contribs. Some people are mostly interested in science-related topics, some in historical topics, some are interested in sports, some are interested in politics, some are interested in tedious nationalist debates, and some, believe it or not, are just absolutely fascinated by everything related to U.S. roadways (I don't get it either, but hey, takes all kinds).

If you and another editor share a topic of interest, it is only natural that you will see each other cropping up again and again on the same articles. Normally this is not a problem, but if you also tend to disagree with that editor on a major point, you may find yourselves tangling with each other on a regular basis. This takes a lot of patience and a willingness to compromise, and sometimes even though both parties have the best of intentions, it turns out really nasty in the end. But it is not Wikistalking. The other editor is not following around and arguing with you out of spite, he or she is more likely concerned about the changes you are introducing into a topic which he or she is very interested in.

The Dispute Resolution process can be very helpful here. But please, try not to accuse each other of stalking before the dispute resolution even gets off the ground. That just creates bad blood.

Did you have a recent interaction with the other editor?
Wikipedia allows any user to view any other users contributions, and this is not discouraged. It is not uncommon for an editor to have a brief interaction with someone, whether it be positive or negative, and to become curious about other pages that person has edited. Sometimes, this may result in a brief spurt of editing the same pages.

This sometimes looks or feels like Wikistalking on the surface, because it is true that the alleged "stalker" editor is only editing these articles because he or she found them in the "stalked" editor's contributions. However, the intent here is very different. Wikistalking is a deliberate attempt to disrupt, and it is a pattern that occurs over a long period of time. It is driven by malicious intent. This is very different from a user who is motivated by curiosity to spend a day seeing what articles another editor has worked on.

If the alleged "stalking" has only been going on for two or three days, please try to assume good faith on the part of the other user, and assume they are only checking your contributions out of curiosity. Also, please be sure to check yourself for any ownership issues you may have in regards to your edits or articles you have worked on. Remember, if someone goes through and copyedits all of your contributions for the last few days, there is no need to take offense. We are all trying to make the encyclopedia a better place, and that can require some humility at times.

Is there a legitimate problem with your edits?
This is the hardest thing to admit, because it requires that we admit we made a mistake. But you must ask yourself -- is it possible the alleged "stalker" noticed a persistent problem with some of my contributions, which has necessitated that someone go through and fix them?

Below are some of the most common ongoing problems people have, that an alleged "stalker" may be legitimately trying to clean up.

Image copyright problems
Perhaps you have been uploading a number of images and you don't quite have the licensing/fair use info the way it needs to be. Someone may notice this problem on one of your images, check your contributions, and notice you made the same mistake on a dozen images. The best thing to do in that case, of course, would be to fix the licensing info, but the other user might be busy or might be unsure him/herself of how to do this, and so perhaps they just tag the problems with the image and move on.

If this happens to you, don't take offense -- fix the image! If you check at the help desk, there are a number of friendly users who can assist you with this.

Maybe you notice that the alleged "stalker" only tagged your images, and yet you see lots of other images with the same problem. Well, unfortunately Wikipedia has grown so large that uneven enforcement is inevitable. The other user isn't stalking you; they just noticed you were having a problem and decided to tackle your images first. Again, try not to be offended. The best thing you can do is just fix up the images, and let the other people with image copyright problems worry about their images on their own time.

Non-notable articles
A lot of people have trouble initially understanding the notability guidelines of Wikipedia. You may want to create a lot of new articles about their favorite subject, but you may not understand that not all of these articles belong in Wikipedia.

If another editor sees you have created an article that fails the notability criteria, he or she may wish to check your contributions for other articles you have created, and test those. So you might suddenly see the same user nominated all of your articles for deletion.

Please try not to see this as an attack. It takes awhile to get used to the threshold for inclusion of material in Wikipedia, and this is a common mistake. And don't worry, if the alleged "stalker" is wrong about the notability of your articles, the material will not be lost. Even if it is deleted, administrators are still able to access the deleted content, and some of them will even retrieve it for you so that you can save a personal copy. In cases where an obvious error was made the Deletion Review process can be used to bring an article or image back from the dead.

So if this happens to you, try to be humble, try to understand the concerns of the other editor, and if possible, improve the articles. Don't accuse the other user of attacking or stalking you, because this is unlikely your case.

Misunderstanding of policies or formatting
...