Wikipedia:Assume good faith
Assume good faith is a fundamental principle to any wiki, including Wikipedia. Since we allow anyone to edit, we have to assume that most people will use the ability well. At very least, we assume that most people who edit are trying to help the project, not hurt it. If our confidence were not justified— on the whole— the Wikipedia project would have failed long ago.
If you can reasonably assume that something is a well-intentioned error, then correct it without simply reverting it or labelling it as vandalism. Use talk pages to explain yourself. When you disagree with someone, remember that they probably believe they are helping the project. Keeping this in mind can avoid misunderstandings and prevent problems from escalating. Especially, remember to be patient with newcomers, who won't be familiar with Wikipedia's culture and rules.
We want people to assume good faith from the outset, but of course we all learn from experience. There is a difference between assuming good faith and ignoring obvious bad faith. This page is in no way intended to excuse poor behavior from those who should know better, nor is it intended to suggest that the community should ignore such behavior.
When edit wars get hot, it's easy to forget to assume good faith.
If you assume bad faith then several things will happen:
- You might make a personal attack. Once you've made a personal attack on someone, they are likely to stop assuming good faith in you. The edit war will get even uglier. People, like elephants, rarely forget.
- You might lose sight of the NPOV policy. The ideal is to make articles acceptable to everyone. Every time you revert (rather than change) a biased edit it is a defeat for NPOV, no matter how outrageous the edit was. Consider figuring out why the other person felt the article was biased. Then, if possible, try to integrate their point, but in terms you consider neutral. If every side continues to do this they will eventually meet at NPOV — or a rough semblance of it.
- If you correct someone's error (even if you really secretly think it was deliberate) the person is likely to take it better than if you outright accuse them of lying.