Wikipedia:Assume good faith

From Wikipedia, a free encyclopedia written in simple English for easy reading.

This page is a guideline on Wikipedia. Many editors agree with acting this way. It is a good idea to follow it, but it is not policy. Feel free to change the page as needed, but please use the talk page to suggest any major changes.
Shortcut:
WP:FAITH


To assume good faith is an important part on Wikipedia. In letting anyone to edit, we must believe that most people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. If this weren't true, a project like Wikipedia would not work. When you can believe that a mistake someone made was a attempt to further the goals of the project, correct it without being mean to the editor. When you do not agree with someone, remember that they believe that they are helping. Think about using talk pages to explain, and give others the chance to do the same. This can avoid conflict and prevent problems from getting worse.

Be patient with newcomers. Newcomers may not know of Wikipedia's unique culture and how Wikipedia editing works often make mistakes or do not respect community norms. It is not uncommon for a newcomer to believe that a new policy should be changed to match their experience somewhere else. Also, many newcomers bring with them experience or expertise for which they expect much respect. Behavior coming from these views are not bad.

Assuming 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 mistake was meant to be vandalism. Correct, but don't be mean. There will be people on Wikipedia with whom you disagree. Even if they're wrong, that doesn't mean they're trying to make the project worse. There will be some people with whom you find it hard to work. That doesn't mean they're trying to make the project worse either. It is never necessary that we assume an editor's actions are in bad faith, even if bad faith seems clear, as all our user measures (i.e. reverting, blocking) can be performed on the basis of behavior rather than intent.

Assuming good faith also does not mean that no action by editors should be mean to, but instead that actions should not be needlessly attributed to badness.

Saying that the other side in a conflict is failing to assuming good faith can be a form of failing to assume good faith.

This policy does not require that editors continue to assume good faith when there is evidence that they have bad faith. Actions not consistant 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 badness unless there is specific evidence of badness.