Jump to content

Wikipedia:Wikilawyering: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jon Awbrey (talk | contribs)
m revert defamatory language
(No difference)

Revision as of 18:56, 28 August 2006

WikiCaviling refers to the frowned upon practices of:

  1. Using formal legal terms inappropriately regarding Wikipedia policy.
  2. Asserting that technical interpretation of Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines should override the principles they express.
  3. Hiding behind misinterpretations or technicalities of policy to justify inappropriate edits.

Wikipedia policies and procedures should be interpreted in a commonsense way to achieve the purpose of the policy or help dispute resolution. Typically wikicaviling raises procedural or evidentiary points in a manner analogous to formal legal proceedings, often using legal reasoning — under the false assumption that Wikipedia administrators or the Arbitration Committee are obligated to follow the same rules of procedure as a court of law. Occasionally wikicaviling may raise legitimate questions, including fairness, but often it serves to evade an issue or obstruct the crafting of a workable solution.

For example, while it is often impossible to definitely establish the actual user behind a set of sockpuppets, it is not a defense that all the sockpuppets which emerge were not named in the complaint.

See [1] for an actual example of conflation of judicial proceedings and Wikipedia arbitration procedures (It is possible the poster intended this to be satire in an attempt to make a point about a particular editing dispute).

Some wikipedia users allege that the charge of wikicaviling is used, particularly by wikipedians more powerful than them, to avoid giving careful attention to their claims. It can also be maintained newer users tend to believe nuanced complex policy (particularly WP:NPOV) conforms to their point of view, and will repeatedly refer to policy rather than providing a rationale for their edits.

Utilization of the word "Wikicaviling" typically has negative connotations, much like the term "meatpuppet"; those utilizing the term should take care that it can be backed up and isn't frivolous.

See also