User:wctaiwan/Thoughts

Some thoughts on Wikipedia:

Whatever the policies and guidelines, the main goal here is to build and improve the encyclopedia. That's the spirit of WP:IAR. For people like me, we should be constantly reminded that the rules are only there to aid in the quest to build the encyclopedia, and we should avoid overly literal interpretations if they are not helpful. And yet the rules are necessary—they ensure that bad-faith users are kept away, and that disputes among good-faith editors can be settled in a manner agreed upon by consensus.

We shouldn't template any good-faith editor or bombard them with a list of rules, regardless of experience, if we can help it. That is cold and impersonal regardless of the audience.

Being nice and helpful (rather than the bare minimum required by the civility guidelines) is paramount. To get good edits, we need to recruit and retain good editors. It takes time, but it's essential in a collaborative environment.

As a reminder to myself, the goal on Wikipedia is to build the encyclopedia. That means I should spend less time on frivolous things, and focus more on improving the content and helping others improve the content. 12:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

If we disagree with a comment in a discussion, we should consider whether it is actually helpful to reply in opposition. In many cases, it really doesn't matter so much, either because the comment is unlikely to gain support, or because it isn't significantly harmful even if it does gain support. 05:04, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Snarking and other potentially offensive remarks, whether intended as humour or not, should be reserved for one's own friends. In particular, admins should speak with utter formality when talking about disruptive users and activities, issuing warnings, and enacting blocks. 03:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Being bold does not extend to presenting major changes as faits accomplis. When a change is controversial, the previous version should take precedence until a clear consensus emerges. 16:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Incidents often spark policy debates. These debates are usually detrimental, because tempers run high, and the debates themselves are often driven by reactions to the specific incidents, consequently failing to adequately consider different factors. 09:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

The administrators are not a homogenous group, and often hold different views and standards for enforcing policies and guidelines. That different actions are taken for similar violations is not an indication that there is hypocrisy in policy enforcement (though there probably is—only that this isn't a symptom). 02:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Read an essay before linking to it in a discussion. 20:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)