User:EverSince/Policy bullying

This page is NOT a Wikipedia article or policy. It is a personal page created by User:EverSince

A Wikipedia Policy bully is an editor who uses or cites Wikipedia policies in order to get their own way, against the spirit of Wikipedia. They may unnecessarily and excessively cite policies, giving an impression of being an authority on policy regardless of whether policies do actually support their position. They may have a habit of putting others down and/or boosting themselves through negative edits or comments relating to some Wikipedia policy. They may be intimidating, patronizing or demeaning. They may not actually be very knowledgeable on the subject of the article but may nevertheless act as if they are. They may use policies and procedures to avoid having to actually address issues openly and fairly by consensus with other editors involved with a page. These kinds of activities can be described as "misuse of process", indirect or social bullying or camouflaged aggression.

What a policy bully is not

Implementing and enforcing Wikipedia policies, and informing others of those policies, is a valued and sometimes difficult function that is not considered bullying. It is when these actions are undertaken inappropriately or excessively, in order for a person to get their way regardless of the spirit of Wikipedia or what is best for Wikipedia, that it could be seen as bullying.

A policy bully could be a WikiTroll, but not necessarily. In fact, a policy bully could do a lot of useful work on Wikipedia and may even be an administrator or trying to become one.

A WikiGnome or a WikiFairy may make a lot of policy-related changes to articles, but they do so in neutral and helpful ways, and are considered friendly.

Responding to policy bullying

Keep to the spirit of Wikipedia, by focusing on improving the article through consensus and being civil. Assume good faith barring clear evidence to the contrary. Try not to let the person wind you up or make you appear to be someone who does indeed not know or respect policy. If they are unnecessarily or excessively citing policies, you could ask them to explain simply any policy they are referring to and exactly how they think it applies. It may help to bear in mind that they may be unaware of being obfuscating or insulting, whether due to zealousness, defensiveness or limited social skills. It they ignore you or do not clarify, or they do clarify but you then still think they are in the wrong, you can access Wikipedia help resources for resolving a dispute. This could include requesting informal voluntary help from an advocate or mediator to help you put across your point of view or bring in more neutral knowledge of Wikipedia policies. You could also engage in more official procedures.

Examples of policy bully behaviors

• Citing whole policies as if others aren't aware of them or aren't following them (without justification), rather than dealing with the actual issues being raised and perhaps specific policy issues if necessary.

• Acting as if they understand all policy perfectly and must automatically be following it.

• Not listening to others views, only respecting policy citations.

• Excessive use of article tags or policy citations to over-emphasise issues and then rushing changes through in a way that doesn't allow a reasonable time for response or for consensus to develop

• Using procedures to avoid engaging with the other editors involved with a page, for example by referring to discussions with other editors elsewhere, or by triggering a peer review without warning or agreement

• Making critical edit comments or talk page comments that highlight the wrong actions of others while unnecessarily highlighting their own work and superior standards

• Once having disagreed with an editor, going to other pages to which that editor has contributed and finding and highlighting policy mistakes or violations

• Making falsely exaggerated suggestions that policies are in support of their position, or against someone else's. These may be phrased in such a way that, if challenged on them, the person can vaguely deny that is what they meant (Plausible deniability) while also trying to make it look like the other person was just being critical or personal (perhaps citing policies against this), and only then adopting a more reasonable position - until the next chance to try to use a policy to get their way.

Should Wikipedia have an anti-bullying policy?

No policy or procedure is a substitute for a culture of trust and openness. However a good policy or procedure may initiate or enhance such a culture if it is deployed judiciously. But people who bully can make counter-claims of bullying against complainants, or even get their 'complaint' in first.[1]