Wikipedia:Responding to incivility

The best way to approach someone on Wikipedia in regards to civility and their recent behavior (assuming that they've been responding and commenting uncivilly) is to do so in a peaceful and encouraging manner, and with words that the editor will interpret as being an attempt to provide them a friendly and informal warning about their behavior, and an offer to help them out if they need it.

Identifying incivility
Examples of incivility:


 * Bad-faith comments or the assumption of bad faith
 * General rudeness, deliberate mocking, personal attacks, and/or disrespect
 * Casting aspersions or making unfounded accusations
 * POV-pushing (except civil POV-pushing)

Examples of comments that are civil, but are often mistaken for incivility:


 * Any comments that assume good faith
 * Calling a spade a spade or blunt honesty
 * Controversial discussion

Before you respond
There are a few very important things that you need to know and understand before you decide to approach anyone about their recent incivility or personal attacks made toward others. First and foremost, you need to understand that uncivil editors are likely to be very upset, extremely frustrated, and in a very confrontational and in-your-face kind of mood. Because of that, they will likely misinterpret any words that you use toward them–and that have even a tiny remote possibility of being negative, threatening, or confrontational–as being such, and they will quite likely respond to you with the same level of unpleasantness that they believe that you made toward them (see Don't call the kettle black). That's why it's important to pay very close attention and be very selective with the words that you use in your message to them. Be clear with your reason for reaching out to them, how you feel, what you're trying to do, your desired outcome from approaching them, and your expectations.

How to respond
A good approach to others about civility is filling the role of a "concerned editor who just wants to help." It has proven successful as far as receiving civil replies in return.

Here's an example of an excellent response to incivility:

"'Hi [Username of editor]! I hope you're doing well and that your day has been pleasant. I just wanted to leave you a message in order to talk to you about some concerns that I have regarding some of your recent comments and responses toward other editors in some discussions. For example, the comment you made [here - provide a diff link pointing them toward their uncivil edits], and [here - list additional diffs as necessary]. These comments are uncivil, and they directly conflict with one of Wikipedia's founding principle's. It's a real bummer to see a discussion turn into something like this, and I just don't want to see you get blocked or finding yourself in hot water with the community because of how you've recently behaved toward others here. I just want to quietly and informally give you a nudge on the shoulder about Wikipedia's civility policy so that you can correct this behavior before it leads you into any trouble. If you need help with anything, have questions, or just need someone to talk to, please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'll be more than happy to help you with anything that you need. I wish you well, and I hope that you'll take this as an opportunity to self-evaluate how you respond and communicate with others, and that you'll do what you need to do in order to keep calm, remain civil, and keep discussions positive and focused toward our primary goal of building an encyclopedia. Thank you for taking the time to read this message, and I hope you have a great rest of your day. [signature].'"

Leave a message similar to this with someone who needs to be talked to about their recent lack of civility, and there's a good chance of it turning out well. It doesn't need to be this lengthy, but just make sure you're being understood and coming off as an empathetic, concerned editor. As long as you come across with that genuine sentiment, you're off to a good start.

Poor reactions
Another important thing to understand, expect to have happen, and be prepared for, is the fact that the user that you're approaching is highly likely to respond to your discussion negatively, uncivilly, and in a confrontational and battleground-like manner toward you. If this happens, don't take it personally–they're just upset with the situation, and they're upset that someone is now talking to them about their behavior. Consider this to be the typical and expected outcome of your discussion with them, and be prepared for this emotionally. When this happens, don't make any further responses or replies to the discussion. Just walk away and consider the matter closed; you've told them about their behavior, pointed them toward relevant policies and guidelines, and were civil and offered to help them.

The goal
The most important objective with approaching someone about their behavior is that you've informed them and that you've warned them. If anything, they now understand that they're violating one of Wikipedia's founding principles, and they can't come back to us later and use the "I didn't know" or the "I wasn't told" or "I wasn't warned" excuse if their repeated behavior results in sanctions or editing restrictions. Your ultimate goal, and the desired outcome that you're aiming for, is to receive a response from the editor that isn't unpleasant and full of uncivil personal attacks. If that happens, consider it a bonus and a huge win towards you and how you handled things with them. Ultimately though, a negative and uncivil response to your message to them about their incivility should be expected. Just don't let it get to you emotionally, and walk away when that happens. You did your job.

Done well, a response to incivility can improve civility on Wikipedia.