CZ:Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
This page will introduce some "dos and don'ts" of the ''Citizendium'' that Wikipedians in particular may have to bear in mind. You should also read about the [[CZ:We aren't Wikipedia|really big differences]] between the ''Citizendium'' and Wikipedia, and also about [[CZ:how to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles|how to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles]]. | This page will introduce some "dos and don'ts" of the ''Citizendium'' that Wikipedians in particular may have to bear in mind. You should also read about the [[CZ:We aren't Wikipedia|really big differences]] between the ''Citizendium'' and Wikipedia, and also about [[CZ:how to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles|how to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles]]. | ||
== Behavior == | |||
Behave in a professional manner; we actually take our [[CZ:Professionalism|Professionalism]] policy seriously. This means, among other things, that personal attacks are not allowed here. Such attacks may be replaced with our <nowiki>{{civil}}</nowiki> template, which reads: | Behave in a professional manner; we actually take our [[CZ:Professionalism|Professionalism]] policy seriously. This means, among other things, that personal attacks are not allowed here. Such attacks may be replaced with our <nowiki>{{civil}}</nowiki> template, which reads: | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Notice that we aren't putting contributor-oriented templates, such as Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutrality_templates neutrality templates.] | Notice that we aren't putting contributor-oriented templates, such as Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutrality_templates neutrality templates.] | ||
Wikipedia has a three-revert rule--we don't. We have a no-unexplained-revert rule--justify any reversion on the talk page. Reverting, or simply undoing someone else's work, is a very upsetting behavior to other people, and understandably so. So it definitely requires explanation. But we simply ''will not'' have edit warring here. If you disagree with another participant, the first step is to discuss the matter on the talk page; if no satisfactory compromise can be reached, the next step is to ask an editor in the relevant area and with the relevant expertise to adjudicate. Eventually, we'll have a more sophisticated dispute resolution process, but so far we haven't needed one, simply because we've been pretty good at actually collaborating and compromising. | |||
Revision as of 10:43, 30 March 2007
Welcome, Wikipedians and ex-Wikipedians!
This page will introduce some "dos and don'ts" of the Citizendium that Wikipedians in particular may have to bear in mind. You should also read about the really big differences between the Citizendium and Wikipedia, and also about how to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles.
Behavior
Behave in a professional manner; we actually take our Professionalism policy seriously. This means, among other things, that personal attacks are not allowed here. Such attacks may be replaced with our {{civil}} template, which reads:
Text here was removed by the Constabulary on grounds of civility. (The author may replace this template with an edited version of the original remarks.)
Moreover, if you have any complaints to make about other users, no matter how well justified, please don't make them on the wiki. They will (or should, anyway) be removed by constables and replaced with the {{nocomplaints}} template, which reads:
A comment here was deleted by The Constabulary on grounds of making complaints about fellow Citizens. If you have a complaint about the behavior of another Citizen, e-mail [email protected]. It is contrary to Citizendium policy to air your complaints on the wiki. See also CZ:Professionalism.
Notice that we aren't putting contributor-oriented templates, such as Wikipedia's neutrality templates.
Wikipedia has a three-revert rule--we don't. We have a no-unexplained-revert rule--justify any reversion on the talk page. Reverting, or simply undoing someone else's work, is a very upsetting behavior to other people, and understandably so. So it definitely requires explanation. But we simply will not have edit warring here. If you disagree with another participant, the first step is to discuss the matter on the talk page; if no satisfactory compromise can be reached, the next step is to ask an editor in the relevant area and with the relevant expertise to adjudicate. Eventually, we'll have a more sophisticated dispute resolution process, but so far we haven't needed one, simply because we've been pretty good at actually collaborating and compromising.