Wikipedia:Non fagas ataques persoais: Diferenzas entre revisións
Contido eliminado Contido engadido
Sen resumo de edición |
|||
Liña 10:
* Comentarios racistas, sexistas, homofóbicos, transfóbicos, discriminatorios por idade, relixión, etnia, nacionalidade, opinión política ou discapacidade, dirixidos a un colaborador ou grupo de colaboradores.
* Usar as afiliacións ou ideoloxías de alguén como medio ''[[ad hominem]]'' de desacreditar ou rexeitar a súa opinión.
* Acusacións de mal comportamento persoal sen achegar unha evidencia. As acusacións serias requiren unha evidencia seria, habitualmente en forma de ''[[Axuda:Diff|Diffs]]'', [[Axuda:Historial|historiais]] e ligazóns presentadas na wiki.
*Insultos dirixidos contra outro editor.
*Ameazas legais.
Liña 17:
*Ameazas de revelación non autorizada de aspectos da vida privada doutro editor non divulgados por dito editor.
==Que non se debe considerar un ataque persoal==
==Consecuencias==▼
Os debates entre galipedistas son unha parte esencial da cultura da Galipedia. Sé [[Wikipedia:Civismo|cívico]] e mantente fiel á [[Wikipedia:Normas de conduta|etiqueta]] cando indiques desacordos, para evitar personalizalos, e tenta reducir ao mínimo comentarios contrarios innecesarios. Os desacordos con outros editores poden ser discutidos sen usar o recurso do ataque persoal. É importante non personalizar os comentarios que se dirixen ao contido e accións,
*Desacordos sobre a veracidade dunha afirmación feita por un usuario nunha conversa, cando esta non está apoiada por unha [[Wikipedia:Fonte fiable|fonte fiable]], do tipo "a afirmación sobre ''x'' é falsa" ou "a afirmación X é un punto de vista, non un feito", e cando se aportan referencias que demostren dita falta de veracidade, non se consideran ataques persoais.
*O uso de linguaxe cívico e apoiado por ''[[Axuda:Diff|Diffs]]'' ou [[Axuda:Historial|historiais]] para describir determinadas accións dun editor non se deben interpretar como ataques persoais en si mesmas.
*Un comentario no resumo de edición como "reverter vandalismo" non é un ataque persoal. Non obstante, é importante [[Wikipedia:Asuma a boa fe|
As a matter of polite and effective discourse, arguments should not be personalized. That is, they should be directed at content and actions rather than people.
Os diferentes editores poden non estar de acordo cun artigo. Os membros de comunidades opostas desexan, razoablemente, expresar as súas opinións. A síntese destas opinións no artigo crea un artigo mellor, máis [[WP:PVN|neutral]] para todos. Recorda que todos formamos parte da mesma comunidade de igual modo que somos todos galipedistas.▼
▲Os diferentes editores poden non estar de acordo cun contido particular nun artigo
▲==Exemplos que non son ataques persoais==
▲Os debates entre galipedistas son unha parte esencial da cultura da Galipedia. Sé [[Wikipedia:Civismo|cívico]] e mantente fiel á [[Wikipedia:Normas de conduta|etiqueta]] cando indiques desacordos, para evitar personalizalos, e tenta reducir ao mínimo comentarios contrarios innecesarios. Os desacordos con outros editores poden ser discutidos sen usar o recurso do ataque persoal. É importante non personalizar os comentarios que se dirixen ao contido e accións, pero es igualmente importante non interpretar tales comentarios como ataques persoais. Exemplos específicos de comentarios que non son, pero non están limitados, ataques persoais:
Editors should be [[WP:CIVIL|civil]] and adhere to good [[WP:EQ|wiki etiquette]] when describing disagreements. The appropriate response to an inflammatory statement is to address the issues of content rather than to accuse the other person of violating this policy. Accusing someone of making personal attacks without providing a [[#accusations|justification]] for your accusation is also considered a form of personal attack.
==Como responder ante un ataque persoal==
Often the best way to respond to an isolated personal attack is to simply [[Wikipedia:Ignore personal attacks|ignore it]]. Sometimes personal attacks are not meant as attacks at all, and during heated and [[m:Wikistress|stressful]] debates editors tend to overreact. Additionally, because Wikipedia discussions are in a text-only medium, nuances and emotions are conveyed poorly which can easily lead to misunderstanding. While personal attacks ''are not excused'' because of these factors, editors are encouraged to disregard angry and ill-mannered postings of others when it is reasonable to do so, and to continue to focus their efforts on improving and developing the encyclopedia.
If you feel that a response is necessary and desirable, you can leave a polite message on the other user's talk page. Avoid responding on a talk page of an article, as this tends to escalate matters. Likewise, it is important to avoid becoming hostile and confrontational yourself, [[WP:KETTLE|even in the face of abuse]]. Although templates have been used at times for this purpose, a customized message relating to the specific situation is [[WP:Don't template the regulars|often better received]]. When possible, try to find compromise or common ground regarding the underlying issues of content, rather than argue about behavior.
▲*Un comentario no resumo de edición como "reverter vandalismo" non é un ataque persoal. Non obstante, é importante [[Wikipedia:Asuma a boa fe|presumir boa fe]] cando se fai ese tipo de comentario: se a edición que foi revertida podería ser interpretada como unha edición de boa fe, non a marque coma vandalismo.
Attacks that are particularly offensive or disruptive (such as physical threats, legal threats, or blatantly racist or sexist insults) should not be ignored. Extraordinary situations that require immediate intervention are rare, but may be reported on the [[WP:ANI|administrators' noticeboard]].
Discussion of behavior in an appropriate forum, (e.g. user's talk page or Wikipedia noticeboard) does not in itself constitute a personal attack.
===Ataques recurrentes===
Recurring, non-disruptive personal attacks that do not stop after reasoned requests to cease can be resolved through [[WP:dispute resolution|dispute resolution]]. In most circumstances, problems with personal attacks can be resolved if editors work together and focus on content, and immediate administrator action is not required.
▲==Consecuencias dos ataques persoais==
Although editors are encouraged to ignore or respond politely to isolated personal attacks, that should not imply that they are acceptable. A pattern of hostility reduces the likelihood of the community [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assuming good faith]], and can be considered [[WP:DE|disruptive editing]]. Users who insist on a confrontational style marked by personal attacks are likely to become involved in the [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] process, and may face serious consequences through [[bloqueo]].
In extreme cases, even isolated personal attacks may lead to a [[WP:BLOCK|block]] for disruption. Death threats and issues of similar severity may result in a block ''without warning''. Lesser personal attacks often result in a warning, and a request to [[Wikipedia:Refactoring talk pages|refactor]]. If a pattern of lesser personal attacks continues despite the warning, escalating blocks may follow. However, administrators are cautioned that other resolutions are preferable to blocking for less-severe situations when it is unclear if the conduct severely disrupts the project. Recurring attacks are proportionally more likely to be considered disruptive. Blocking for personal attacks should only be done for prevention, not punishment. A block may be warranted if it seems likely that the user will continue using personal attacks.
== Véxase tamén ==
| |||