Wikipedia talk:Ignore personal attacks

Rejected
This was marked briefly as "rejected", which I don't think is right at all. It started as an essay- it was never up for any consideration as a policy. I personally think it would be OK to mark is as a "guideline" but I can see where this might be controversial. Anyway, for anyone who disagrees with ignoring personal attacks, I have a simple question for you: Are you more interested in fighting, or in doing productive work? Friday (talk) 19:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * At no time does any editor have to tolerate a personal attack. Going to ANI or other forums is perfectly reasonable and allowable. Urging editors to ignore personal attacks sends the wrong message. Bstone (talk) 23:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Anyone is free to write Harbor grudges if they want. I'll still be encouraging people not to do that, but your mileage may vary.  Friday (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Going to ANI may be reasonable and allowable, but is it the most productive response? Is it more likely to lead to resolution and progress than some other response? That's the question, and not whether it's "allowable". Everything is "allowable"; it's a free world. That doesn't make everything a good idea. Let's try to do things that are good ideas, not just things that are allowable. -GTBacchus(talk) 00:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * An essay can't be rejected, it is opinion. undefinedUntil  00:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Some...
... personal attacks can't be ignored. But I suspect those are few and far between. No one's perfect, sometimes you lash back but starting from a default position of ignoring them seems like a good personal approach to me. Yes, there is nothing in policy that says you can't go report it if you wish. But in the spirit of ForgiveAndForget (which I suggest as a "see also") this seems an exceedingly sound idea to me. ++Lar: t/c 16:14, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't tend to think ignoring them is necessarily the best. I try to react to personal attacks by being civil and focused in response. We don't want to ignore them, in the sense of being oblivious to them, but rather to learn from them about our interlocutor's mental state, and what de-escalatory steps we should be taking. However, I like this essay. -GTBacchus(talk) 00:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Balance
While this essay, to which I was myself recently referred, makes some excellent points, it's not IMO as helpful as it could be.

As several have commented, it's not always a good thing to ignore personal attacks. It's even hinted on this talk page that it's never a good idea. Be that as it may, this essay is currently giving an unbalanced and extreme view.

I'm going to have a go at improving it in the fullness of time. Comments? Andrewa (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2017 (UTC)