Wikipedia:Rude

This is an essay on civility. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community.

Wikipedia aims for collegiality; and yet, good faith editors appear to be rude. In the speech freedom or civil disobedience in dichotomy, rude may be rudimentary, where an editor has a narrow project view. NPOV applies to content and as well as editorializing. We must get along politely to have the !votes to achieve powerful respect. Dos and don't can help guide you; well except when every do has a don't.

Wikipedia is archaic, in that editors many punch or peck their keys to communicate, while others dance along effortlessly in prosaic text production. Please transfer your key stokes to gentle and effective words to other editors to benefit the project.

In any communication situation be aware of:

1. Content ... the actual language message words or symbols, combined into phrases that make grammatical sense. Importantly, we all interpret the word meanings differently, so even simple messages can be misunderstood. Words can have different meanings in relation to context. This can cause apparent conflicts between sources.
2. Process ... the message delivery methods - Wikipedia editors miss nonverbal elements in speech such as voice tone, the look in the sender’s eyes, body language, hand gestures and emotions (anger, fear, jealously, uncertainty, confidence, etc.) that can be detected in person. Wikipedia non-verbals can cause misunderstood messages to be as what we believe rather than as what was intended to befit the project.. Indeed, readers may trust their believed nonverbal behaviors accuracy over written verbal behaviors.
3. Context ... the situation or environment in which your message is delivered. Important contextual factors that can subtly influence the message effectiveness factors other editors in which other editors unaware; like their physical environment , cultural factors and developmental factors such as editor experience. Best to keep context focused on the sources.