백:여기 情報
 | 要約:
위키百科人들은 中立的이고 適切하게 引用된 百科事典을 만들기 위해 이곳에 있습니다. 이러한 目的을 가지지 않은 것으로 보이는 使用者는
遮斷
,
制限
, 或은
追放
當할 수 있습니다.
| |
위키百科의
原則
中 하나는 編輯者가 純粹하기 百科事典을 짓기 위해 參與한다는 것입니다. 卽, 使用者의 주된 目的은 百科事典의 콘텐츠를 채우는 데 寄與하고, 프로젝트의 質을 높이기 위한 生産的인 討論에 參與하고, 위키百科의
目的을 理解하고
,
政策과 指針
을 遵守하며, 위키百科의 使命에 함께하는 것입니다. 위키百科는
協同을 基盤으로 하는
共同體
이므로, 위키百科의 目的에 反하는 目的을 갖고 있거나, 그를 行하는 使用者는 使用者의 編輯 權限이 遮斷되는 危險을 甘受하는 것입니다.
"위키百科에 寄與하는 目的"은 英語 위키百科에서 오랫동안 生産的인 使用者와 非生産的인 使用者와 그들이 만든 文書를 區分하기 위해 使用된 基準입니다. 이러한 基準은
위키百科의 다섯 原則
等에 여러 方式으로 性文化되어 왔습니다.
위키百科에 寄與하기 위해 오는 사람들
[
編輯
]
위키百科에 寄與하기 위해 오는 사람들은 大體로 다음 傾向을 보입니다:
- 純粹한 目的과 發展
- 위키百科의 項目 (文書, 寫眞)을 발전시키고자 하는 純粹한 目的을 가진 使用者들입니다. 이러한 使用者들의 類型은 大體로 많은 關心事, 實質的인 寄與 或은 다른 活動 (예: 코딩,
새 文書 巡察
等)을 통해 드러납니다. 이러한 使用者들 中 一部는 直接的으로 文書에 寄與하지 않더라도 文書 寄與 方式을 발전시키는 政策과 指針 關聯 討論 等에 參與하거나 위키百科에 寄與하는 데 否定的인 要素를 除去하기도 합니다.)
- 위키百科의 政策과 指針을 尊重
- 使用者의 行動은 編輯에 關한 政策과 指針을 遵守합니다.
- 위키百科의 發展에 集中
- 百科事典에 關聯되지 않는 寄與는 最小限으로 維持하면서, 編輯 節次와 關聯된 肯定的인 寄與를 많이 합니다.
- 自身의 틀린 點을 認定하고, 그로부터 敎訓을 얻는 것
- 失手에는 敎訓이 있습니다. 이러한 使用者들은 失手에서 얻은 敎訓을 重要하게 생각하고, 그들의 編輯 習慣을 改善해 나갑니다.
Not being here to build an encyclopedia
[
編輯
]
Indications that a user may not be here to build an encyclopedia include:
- Narrow self interest and/or promotion
- Narrow self-interested or promotional activity in article writing (see
WP:SPA
).
- Focusing on Wikipedia as a social networking site
- A primary focus on Wikipedia as a social networking space (resumes, social media type pages, etc.) (see
WP:NOTSOCIALNETWORK
).
- General pattern of disruptive behavior
- A long-term history of disruptive behavior with little or no sign of other intentions.
- Treating editing as a battleground
- Excessive
soapboxing
,
importing or exporting of disputes
,
repeated hostile aggressiveness
, and the like, may suggest a user is here to fight rather than here to build an encyclopedia. If a user has a dispute, then they are expected to place the benefit of the project at a high priority and seek
dispute resolution
. A user whose anger causes them to obsess may find the fight has become their focus, not encyclopedia writing.
- Dishonest and gaming behaviors
- Gaming the system
,
socking
, and other forms of editorial dishonesty. Wikipedia broadly works on a basis of trust, and such activities undermine that trust and suggest other motives such as "lulz" (amusement at destructiveness or
schadenfreude
) or a complete lack of interest in good editing conduct practices.
- Little or no interest in working collaboratively
- Extreme lack of interest in working constructively and in a cooperative manner with the community where the views of other users may differ; extreme lack of interest in heeding others' legitimate concerns; interest in furthering rather than mitigating conflict.
- Major or irreconcilable conflict of attitude or intention
- Major conflicts of attitude, concerning Wikipedia-related activity. A user may have extreme or even criminal views or lifestyle in some areas, or be repugnant to other users, and yet be here to "build an encyclopedia". However some activities are by nature inconsistent with editing access, such as legal threats against other users, harassment, or actions off-site that suggest a grossly divergent intention or gross undermining of the project as a whole. Editors must be able to relax collegially together. There is a level of divergence of fundamental attitudes, whether in editing or to the project as a whole, at which this may not be reasonable to expect.
- Long-term agenda Inconsistent with building an encyclopedia
- Users who, based on substantial Wikipedia-related evidence, seem to want editing rights only to legitimize a soapbox or other personal stance (i.e. engage in some basic editing not so much to "build an encyclopedia" as to be able to assert a claim to be a "productive editor"... when their words or actions indicate a longer-term motive inconsistent with "here to build an encyclopedia").
- Having a long-term or "extreme" history that suggests a marked lack of value for the project's actual aims and methods
- This may include repeated chances and warnings, all of which were flouted upon return, or promises to change that proved insincere, were gamed, or otherwise the word or spirit was not actually kept.
- Interest in gaining as many rights or "flags" as possible (or overly focusing on rights in general)
- User wants to gain as many flags as possible or focuses a lot of attention on gaining those rights. While having flags is not negative overall, focusing on the flags as a right and not a privilege is distracting and not the goal of userrights.
What "not here to build an encyclopedia" is not
[
編輯
]
Some users may be interested in building an encyclopedia in accordance with Wikipedia's principles, but with different areas of focus or approach to some other users' goals or emphases. Differences that arise where both users are in
good faith
hoping to improve the project should not be mistaken for "not being here to build an encyclopedia".
- Focusing on niche topic areas
- A user may have an interest in a topic that other users find trivial or post contents that are difficult to comprehend. Diversity in interests and inputs from specialists in many fields help us function as a comprehensive encyclopedia.
- Focusing on particular processes
- A user may have an interest in creating stubs, tagging articles for cleanup, improving article compliance with the
Manual of Style
, or nominating articles for deletion. These are essential activities that improve the encyclopedia in indirect ways. Many "behind the scenes" processes and activities are essential to allow tens of thousands of users to edit collectively. Some articles do not belong in Wikipedia, others should be improved, and new articles are often appropriately created in an unfinished state.
- Advocating amendments to policies or guidelines
- The community encompasses a very wide range of views. A user may believe a communal norm is too narrow or poorly approaches an issue, and take actions internally consistent with that viewpoint, such as advocating particular positions in discussions. Provided the user does so in an honest attempt to improve the encyclopedia, in a constructive manner, and assuming the user's actions are not themselves disruptive, such conversations form the genesis for improvement to Wikipedia.
- Difficulty, in good faith, with conduct norms
- A number of users wish to edit, but find it overly hard to adapt to conduct norms such as collaborative editing, avoiding personal attacks, or even some content policies such as
not adding their own opinions
in their edits. While these can lead to warnings, blocks or even bans in some cases, failure to adapt to a norm is not, by itself, evidence that a user is not
trying
to contribute productively.
- Expressing unpopular opinions ? even extremely unpopular opinions ? in a non-disruptive manner
- Merely advocating changes to Wikipedia articles or policies, even if those changes are incompatible with Wikipedia's principles, is not the same as not being here to build an encyclopedia. The dissenting editor should take care to not violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines such as
WP:SOAPBOX
,
WP:IDHT
, and
WP:CIVIL
in the course of expressing unpopular opinions.
Review behavior as a whole
[
編輯
]
A number of disruptive users may at times post constructive edits, in order to avoid being blocked, or may attempt to give
tendentious editing
the surface appearance of positive edits. In addition, a constructive user may at times make the occasional error, and a genuine newcomer
may need considerable time
to acclimatize their conduct to the community's ways and norms.
Being "here to build an encyclopedia" is about a user's overall purpose and behavior in editing Wikipedia. In considering whether or not a user is here to build an encyclopedia, the user's overall pattern of editing and behavior, as well as the clarity of past warnings or guidance and their attempts at improvement, should be reviewed as a whole.
Other content
[
編輯
]
Because Wikipedia is a community as well as an encyclopedia, the community tolerates a reasonable degree of non-encyclopedic content. Examples include certain humor pages, userboxes, and a wide range of user page designs.
However, pages that stray too far outside this are frequently deleted under community processes. This is especially the case if it appears to the community that their primary author is not mainly here to write an encyclopedia. Examples include social network pages and promotional material in user-space, negative pages about other users, "laundry lists" of complaints, cliques and self-selecting or "restricted membership" user-created bodies felt by the wider community not to serve the encyclopedia, and non-project material likely to prove overly disruptive or divisive.
See also
[
編輯
]
Purpose of Wikipedia:
Editorial actions on Wikipedia:
Unregistered contributor participation:
Page content: