WikiIslam:Assume Good Faith: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "Assuming good faith is a fundamental principle on WikiIslam. It is the assumption that editors' edits and comments are made in good faith. Most people try to help the project,...") |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 23:24, 18 February 2014
Assuming good faith is a fundamental principle on WikiIslam. It is the assumption that editors' edits and comments are made in good faith. Most people try to help the project, not hurt it. This guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of obvious evidence to the contrary (vandalism). Assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism. Rather, editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice.
When disagreement occurs, try to the best of your ability to explain and resolve the problem, not cause more conflict, and so give others the opportunity to reply in kind. Consider whether a dispute stems from different perspectives, and look for ways to reach consensus.
When doubt is cast on good faith, continue to assume good faith yourself where you can. Be civil rather than attacking editors or edit-warring with them. If you wish to express doubts about the conduct of fellow editors, please substantiate those doubts with specific diffs and other relevant evidence, so that people can understand the basis for your concerns. Although bad conduct may seem to be due to bad faith, it is usually best to address the conduct without mentioning motives, which might exacerbate resentments all around.
Dealing with Bad Faith
Even if bad faith is evident, do not act uncivilly yourself in return, attack others, or lose your cool over it. It is ultimately much easier for others to resolve a dispute and see who is breaching policies, if one side is clearly acting appropriately throughout.
WikiIslam administrators and other experienced editors involved in dispute resolution will usually be glad to help, and are very capable of identifying policy-breaching conduct if their attention is drawn to clear and specific evidence.