 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Techniques for avoiding conflict or escaping from its clutches:
Sandbox it
editSometimes, a gang of editors all chiming in on a subject can be very unhelpful. To avoid repeated need to remind everyone about WP:TEA or even WP:BOSTON TEA PARTY, try working in a sandbox (I use a subpage of userspace) to hammer out some consensus with a small group, who can then take the final version back to the wider audience for tweaking.
Pretending
editIt's amazing how often a useful way to break out of a vicious circle of bad faith is to give an outlet for everyone to back down without losing face. Try this:
Adam: conflict conflict conflict
Barnie: conflict conflict conflict
Adam: How about we pretend this conversation didn't happen and it began "sweetness sweetness sweetness?" I'd probably reply "sweetness sweetness sweetness". Let's try it.Subject of the contention
editAdam: Thanks for posting about sweetness. Sweetness!
It's very hard for Barnie to reply in any way other than sweetness.
Comment. Until very recently, I would have believed this. I no longer do. I think the best thing to do is simply to say nothing, and to leave the problem article. In some situations, the above advice seems to make things much worse. Barney will become enraged. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)