Wikipedia talk:Don't assume

Comment
This ought to be policy... -- Ludwigs 2 03:06, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

These are things that are happening to me you may see this comment it may be from the this I don't know what to call it but perhaps been hacking my life for u so u guys do the math and pay close attention I'm using a Android phone don't have a computer nor a Mac iPhone either I live in Louisville KY not California nor new York Mouneak (talk) 07:10, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

And have been targeted abuse for 6 months hacked for two yrs everything across the news I alerts the world but no one will Listen Mouneak (talk) 07:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia Essays
Is this the shortest of all "Essays"? :) 124.168.14.42 (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes...KnowledgeHegemonyPart2 09:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Misses point?
This misses the point of the policy, I feel. The purpose of an assumption is to offer guidance where two explanations could both account for the same set of facts; or, to put it differently, the AGF policy suggests that a relatively high degree of persuasion and evidence should be required before concluding that someone is acting in bad faith. If neither good faith or bad faith are assumed, people would presumably be as likely to conclude that an act was taken in bad faith as to conclude that it was taken in good faith. The goal of assuming good faith is to create a community where people are reluctant to accuse another of acting in bad faith, and that, so long as it is feasible, they will give them the benefit of assuming their actions were taken in good faith. LewisNiet (talk) 05:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC) LewisNiet


 * On the other hand, if we assume neither good nor bad faith then we do not run the risk of exacerbating the situation and everyone can go about their business. Eg, if someone inserts POV statements into an article, they may or may not be acting in good faith; simply correct or remove said statements and give clear reasons in the edit summary and/or talkpage: situation resolved.  In this case no "assumptions" were made, we merely noticed unhelpful editing and corrected it.  Of course, the original editor may complain but then we merely point them to our stated reasons for the change and never have to assume anything.  Move on... Jubilee♫ clipman  14:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Aside:This talk page is longer than the article... LOL! Jubilee♫ clipman  14:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)