Star Wars Fanon:Assume good faith
The Star Wars wiki of fan invention.
This policy in a nutshell:Assume good faith. Most users are just trying to help a project even if they make mistakes.
To assume good faith is a fundamental principle on Star Wars Fanon. Because anyone is allowed to edit, it naturally follows that we should assume that most people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it.
Contents |
Errors
When you can reasonably assume that something is a well-intentioned error, correct it without just reverting it or labeling it as vandalism. In addition to assuming good faith, it is also important to assume the user does not yet know what they are doing while also assuming that they are making the edit in the hopes of helping the project. When you disagree with someone, remember that they probably believe that they are helping the project. Consider using talk pages to explain yourself and give others the opportunity to do the same. This can avoid misunderstandings and prevent problems from escalating. Especially, remember to be patient with newcomers who will be unfamiliar with the wiki's culture and rules.
With that said, it is important to note that good faith is not all that is required to edit a wiki. While it is acceptable to make mistakes that do not necessarily help the project when a user is new and to assume that said user is acting on good faith, competence is still required to edit any wiki. If users show continued signs of making errors and masking it under good faith, administrators may begin to uphold the wiki's policies.
Behavior
A newcomer's behavior probably seems appropriate to them, and a problem usually indicates unawareness or misunderstanding of a wiki's culture. It is not uncommon for a newcomer to believe that an unfamiliar policy should be changed to match their experiences elsewhere. Similarly, many newcomers bring with them experience or expertise for which they expect immediate respect. Behaviors arising from these perspectives are not necessarily malicious.
Correcting someone's error, even if you think it was deliberate and/or malicious, is better than accusing them of lying or making a bad faith edit because the person is more likely to take your correction in a good-natured fashion. Correcting a newly added sentence that you know to be wrong is also much better than simply deleting it. Your mature behavior in dealing with the errors will inspire mature behavior in others.
Intentions
To assume good faith is about intentions, not actions. Well-meaning people make mistakes, and you should correct them when they do. You should not act like their mistakes are deliberate. Correct them, but don't scold them. There will be people on Star Wars Fanon with whom you disagree. Even if they're wrong, that does not mean they are trying to hurt the project. There will be some people with whom you find it hard to work. That does not mean they are trying to hurt the project either. However, if it means they annoy you, it is never necessary that we attribute an editor's actions to bad faith, even if bad faith seems obvious, as all our countermeasures (i.e. reverting, blocking) can be performed on the basis of actions and behavior rather than intent.
On the other hand, users sometimes assume the assumption of bad faith. If one user tells another user to be careful with how they edit because it could be considered nonconstructive, a third party user may interpret that user's comments as being an assumption of bad faith on the part of the user who made the mistake. This may not necessarily be true. It is important to assume the assumption of good faith.
When edit wars take place, it is easy to forget to assume good faith. It is important to remember that just because you disagree with someone does not mean that the person is acting in bad faith. Discussions, not arguments, are the preferred method of dealing with this type of situation.
Continued assumptions
This policy does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of evidence to the contrary. Actions inconsistent with good faith include vandalism, sockpuppetry, and lying. Assuming good faith also does not mean that no action by editors should be criticized, but instead that criticism should not be attributed to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice. Accusing the other side in a conflict of not assuming good faith, without showing reasonable supporting evidence, is another form of failing to assume good faith. Furthermore, continued errors may result in administrative action.
