উইকিপিডিয়া:ভদ্রতা

উইকিপিডিয়া, মুক্ত বিশ্বকোষ থেকে

ভদ্রতা উইকিপিডিয়ার একটি প্রধান মূলনীতি। অনুগ্রহ পূর্বক এখানে সম্পাদনা করার সময় ভদ্রতা বজায় রাখবেন। এখানে কোন বিষয় নিয়ে লেখার সময় অন্য কারো সাথে মতপার্থক্য হতেই পারে। তাই বলে অভদ্র আচরণ করা মোটেও উচিত নয়। ভদ্রতা উইকিশিষ্টাচার এর একটি অংশ এবং উইকিপিডিয়ার পঞ্চস্তম্ভের একটি। ভদ্রতানীতি সবার জন্য কিছু নিয়ম যেগুলো মনে উইকিপিডিয়ার অবদানকারীরারা একে অপরের সাথে যোগাযোগ করেন। অবদানকারীদের একজন আরেকজনকে সম্মান করা উচিত। এমনকি উত্তপ্ত বিতর্কের সময়ও অবদানকারীদের ভদ্র,শান্ত আচরণ করা উচিত যাতে উইকিপিডিয়ার উন্নয়নের প্রতি নজর রাখা সম্ভব হয় এবং একটি বন্ধুত্ত্বপূর্ণ পরিবেশ বজায় থাকে।

এই পাতায় ব্যবহারকারীদের একে অন্যের সাথে ব্যবহার কেমন হওয়া উচিত এবং কিভাবে কোন সমস্যা হলে সেটা নিয়ে কাজ করা উচিত তার বর্ণনা আছে। এগুলো উইকিপিডিয়াতে সকল প্রকার যোগাযোগের ক্ষেত্রে প্রযোজ্য,যেমন প্রবন্ধের আলাপ পাতা বা ব্যবহারকারীর আলাপ পাতা।

অভদ্রতা[সম্পাদনা]

অভদ্র আচরণের মধ্যে আছে ব্যক্তিগত আক্রমণ,রুঢ় আচরণ এবং আগ্রাসী মনোভাব যা কলহ সৃষ্টি করে এবং কাজের ব্যাঘাত ঘটায়। সম্পাদকরাও মানুষ তাই এধরণের ছোটখাট ঘটনা তেমন গুরুত্বপূর্ণ নয়, তবে মাত্রা ছাড়িয়ে গেলে উইকিপিডিয়া থেকে বহিস্কার করা হতে পারে। খারাপ ভাবে অন্য সম্পাদককে গালাগালি বা হুমকি দেয়ার মতো ঘটনা ঘটলে সতর্কীকরণ ছাড়াই কাওকে বহিস্কার করা হতে পারে।

In general, be understanding and non-retaliatory in dealing with incivility. If others are uncivil, be understanding (people do say things when they get upset) rather than judgemental, and do not respond in kind. If necessary, point out gently that you think the comment might be considered uncivil, and make it clear that you want to move on and focus on the content issue. Bear in mind that the editor may not have considered it uncivil - Wikipedia is edited by people from many different backgrounds, and standards vary. Consider too the option of ignoring isolated examples of incivility, and simply moving forward with the content issue. Only take things to dispute resolution (see below) if there is an ongoing problem you can't resolve.

This policy is not a weapon to use against other contributors. To insist that an editor be sanctioned for an isolated, minor offense, or to treat constructive criticism as an attack, is itself potentially disruptive, and may result in warnings or even blocks if repeated.

সহযোগিতা এবং ভদ্রতা[সম্পাদনা]

Differences of opinion are inevitable in a collaborative project. When discussing these differences some editors, in trying to be forthright, can seem unnecessarily harsh. Other editors can seem oversensitive when their views are challenged. Silent and faceless words on talk pages and in edit summaries do not transmit fully the nuances of verbal conversation, sometimes leading to misinterpretation of an editor's comments. An uncivil remark can escalate spirited discussion into a personal argument that no longer focuses objectively on the problem at hand. Such exchanges waste our efforts and undermine a positive, productive working environment. Resolve differences of opinion through civil discussion; disagree without being disagreeable. Discussion of other editors should be limited to polite discourse about their actions.

Editors are expected to be reasonably cooperative, to refrain from making personal attacks, to work within the scope of policies, and to be responsive to good-faith questions. Try to treat your fellow editors as respected colleagues with whom you are working on an important project. Be especially welcoming and patient towards new users. Welcome other people to edit the articles but do discourage non constructive edits.

অভদ্রতা এড়ানো[সম্পাদনা]

Incivility – or the appearance of incivility – typically arises from heated content disputes.

  • Be careful with edit summaries. Edit summaries are relatively short comments (so potentially subject to misinterpretation, or to oversimplification), cannot be changed after pressing Save, and often written in haste, particularly if there is an edit war brewing or in progress. Especially when things are getting heated, remember to explain your edit, avoid personal comments about any editors you have disputes with, and consider using the talk page to further explain your view of the situation.
  • Explain yourself. Not sufficiently explaining edits can be perceived as uncivil, whether that's the editor's intention or not. Use good edit summaries, and use the talk page if the edit summary doesn't provide enough space or if a more substantive debate is likely to be needed.
  • Be careful with user warning templates. Be careful about issuing templated messages to editors you're currently involved in a dispute with (see Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars) and exercise caution when using templated messages for newcomers (see Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers). Consider using a personal message instead of, or at least in addition to, the templated message.

কোনো ব্যক্তিগত আক্রমন নয়[সম্পাদনা]

Editors are expected to avoid personal attacks and harassment of other Wikipedians. This applies equally to all Wikipedians: It is as unacceptable to attack a user with a history of foolish or boorish behavior, or even one who has been subject to disciplinary action by the Arbitration Committee, as it is to attack any other user. Wikipedia encourages a positive online community: people make mistakes, but they are encouraged to learn from them and change their ways. Personal attacks and harassment are contrary to this spirit, damaging to the work of building an encyclopedia, and may result in blocks.

অভদ্রতা চিহ্নিতকরণ[সম্পাদনা]

অনেক সময় কোন ব্যবহারকে অভদ্রতা বলা যাবে সেটা নির্ধারণ করা কঠিন হয়। সেটা নির্ধারণ করতে এই বিষয়গুলো দেখা যেতে পারেঃ (১) ভাষার শালীনতা (২) এরকম ব্যবহার বারবার করা হচ্ছে নাকি (৩) এরূপ ব্যবহার বন্ধ করতে সাম্প্রতিক সময়ে অনুরোধ করা হয়েছে নাকি (৪) এরূপ ব্যবহার করতে কেও উষ্কানী প্রদান করেছে নাকি (৫) অন্যরা কিরূপ ব্যবহার করছে।

নিচের ব্যবহারগুলোকে অভদ্রতা ধরা হয়ে থাকেঃ


1. Direct rudeness

  • (a) Rudeness, insults, name-calling, gross profanity or indecent suggestions;
  • (b) personal attacks, including racial, ethnic, sexual and religious slurs, and derogatory references to groups such as social classes or nationalities;
  • (c) ill-considered accusations of impropriety;
  • (d) belittling a fellow editor, including the use of judgmental edit summaries or talk-page posts (e.g. "snipped rambling crap", "that is the stupidest thing I have ever seen");

2. Other uncivil behaviors

  • (a) Taunting or baiting: deliberately pushing others to the point of breaching civility even if not seeming to commit such a breach themselves;
  • (b) harassment, including Wikihounding, personal or legal threats, posting of personal information, repeated email or user space postings;
  • (c) lying to mislead, including deliberately asserting false information;
  • (d) quoting another editor out of context to give the impression they hold views they do not hold, or to malign them.

In addition, lack of care when applying other policies can lead to conflict and stress. For instance, referring to a user's good-faith edits as vandalism may lead to their feeling unfairly attacked. Use your best judgement, and be ready to apologize if you turn out to be wrong.

আস্থা রাখুন[সম্পাদনা]

সাধারণত উইকিপিডিয়াতে যারা কাজ করেন তারা সকলে প্রকল্পটির উন্নয়নের চেষ্টা করেন,ক্ষতি করার না। প্রত্যেকেই ভুল করে এবং সেটা সংশোধন করে দেয়াই বেশিভাগ সময় যথেষ্ট হয়। তবে যখন মতভেদ তৈরি হয় তখন এমনও হতে পারে যে কোন একজনের খারাপ কোনো উদ্দেশ্য আছে।

Assume good faith as much as possible. The Assume Good Faith guideline does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of obvious contrary evidence; however, do not assume any more intentional wrongdoing than the evidence clearly supports, and given equally plausible interpretations of the evidence, choose the most positive one. Attempting to believe the best of your fellow Wikipedians, and they of you, helps to eliminate some of the problems that arise when we communicate only in text, and cannot use all the verbal and visual cues used in talking face-to-face.

Dealing with incivility[সম্পাদনা]

Dispute resolution[সম্পাদনা]

In a case of ongoing incivility, first decide if anything needs to be done. Confronting someone over a minor incident – particularly if it turns out that you misinterpreted what they meant – may produce more stress and drama than the incident itself. Consider your own behaviour, and, if you find you have been uncivil, apologize to him or her instead.

In escalating order of seriousness, here are the venues you may use for dispute resolution if the relevant page's talk page is insufficient:

  • User talk page. If some action is necessary, first consider discussing it on that user's talk page. Be careful not to escalate the situation, and politely explain your objection. You may also wish to include a diff of the specific uncivil statement. If you are in active dispute with the user, consider offering an olive branch to them instead.
  • Wikiquette alerts. This is a non-binding noticeboard where users can report impolite, uncivil or other difficult communications with editors, and seek perspective, advice, informal mediation, or a referral to a more appropriate forum.
  • Request for Comment on user conduct. If previous attempts to solve the situation have failed, a user conduct RfC can be opened. RfCs are intended to discuss a specific user who has violated Wikipedia policies and guidelines persistently, or in a major way. During an RfC, scrutiny may be applied to all editors involved. The last step – only when other avenues, including RfC, have been tried and failed – is the Arbitration Committee, who will scrutinise all sides involved in the dispute, and create binding resolutions.
  • Administrator's Noticeboard Incidents page. For death threats, racist attacks, threats of violence, legal threats, and other cases where immediate action is required, use the Administrator's Noticeboard Incidents page to contact the site's admins.

Removing uncivil comments[সম্পাদনা]

Where the uncivil comment is yours, any of these options will help to reduce the impact:

  • Where someone is taking offense at your comment where none was intended, calmly explain what you meant.
  • Strike it out (using <s>HTML strikeout tags</s>), to show, publicly, that you withdraw the comment.
  • Quietly remove it, or rewrite the comment to be more civil – Usually only a good idea if you think better of it before anyone took offense to it. If someone has taken offense already, you should acknowledge the change in a quick comment after the changed text, for instance, Comment removed by author.
  • Simply apologize. This option never hurts, and can be combined well with any of the others. Even if you feel the thrust of your words is true, or that they are misunderstanding what you meant, you can still apologize for the offense caused.

In the event of rudeness or incivility on the part of another editor, it is usually appropriate to discuss the offending words with that editor, and to request that editor to change that specific wording. Some care is necessary, however, so as not to further inflame the situation. It is not normally appropriate to edit or remove another editor's comment. Exceptions include to remove obvious trolling or vandalism, or if the comment is on your own user talk page.

A special case is outing, that is, revealing information about another editor that they have not revealed themselves and probably do not want known, such as their name (if not revealed by the editor in question), phone number, or address. These should be immediately reverted, then an oversighter should be contacted to remove the information from the edit history, so that it cannot be found by anyone else later. This applies whether or not the information is correct, as to confirm the information is incorrect by treating it any differently gives the outer useful information. Wikipedia:Outing has full information.

Apologizing[সম্পাদনা]

Disputes, and even misunderstandings, can lead to situations in which one party feels injured by the other. The apology is a form of ritual exchange between both parties, where words are said that allow reconciliation.

For some people, it may be crucial to receive an apology from those who have offended them. Demanding an apology is almost never helpful and often inflames the situation further, though a polite, good faith request for an apology may be acceptable. Offering an apology is even better, and can be a key to resolving conflict. An apology provides the opportunity for a fresh start, and can clear the air when one person's perceived incivility has offended another.

Blocking for incivility[সম্পাদনা]

Editors are generally not blocked for minor incivility. Civility is a goal rather than an objective standard. Wikipedia editors from around the world may have different cultural standards of civility, so a certain amount of tolerance is required. When incivility rises to the level of disruption, personal attacks, harassment or outing, blocks may be employed, as explained in those policies.

See also[সম্পাদনা]

Policies[সম্পাদনা]

Essays and other information[সম্পাদনা]

Further reading[সম্পাদনা]