User:TenOfAllTrades/RD thoughts

This page is divided up as follows.

• Major sections (second-level '=='-enclosed headings) describe guiding principles for the Desk.
  • Subsections (third-level '==='-enclosed headings) represent guidelines that I think follow from those principles.
    • A description, any clarification, and rationale for each guideline is provided as body text.

Obviously in its current format it's unsuitable for direct placement on the Ref Desk. Further discussion is needed and welcomed about how these guidelines should be incorporated into our existing framework, and what changes or additions are needed.

I'm keeping this in my userspace for now because I'm trying to keep a lid on any potential edit warring over this content. By all means direct brickbats, kudos, and suggestions to the talk page, and we'll see if we can synthesize something useful.

The purpose of this page is to present what I think is a reasonable (and close-to-consensus) view of the purpose and philosophy of the Reference Desk, as well as some guidelines for users and contributors that I think fall naturally from that philosophy. Note that I am not addressing enforcement mechanisms at the moment.

The Reference Desk is here to provide information to people who need help answering their questions

Responses to posts should always attempt to answer a question

Answering questions is the very heart of what any Reference Desk (physical or electronic) aims to do. If you're looking to shoot the breeze or tell jokes, those things are best shared among friends on user talk pages. Similarly, 'metadiscussions' about other editors' behaviour or Ref Desk policy belong on talk pages, not on the Desk itself. Before clicking 'Save', ask yourself—'Does this edit help to answer the question?' Responses will almost always fall into one of three categories: direct answers, clarifications of other answers and requests for clarification.

Sources and citations are a Good Thing

Wherever possible, include links to appropriate Wikipedia articles or external sites in your answers. (If you suggest that someone use Google to find an answer, link to an appropriate Google search and verify that Google does lead to a useful result. If you're not just providing a 'pointer' in response to a homework question, it's almost always best to provide direct links to useful results.) If you're writing from personal experience or opinion, make this clear in your answer. If you can provide a source or citation for an unsourced answer, please do so.

Refactor subsequent discussion where necessary

Sometimes one question leads to another. We shouldn't shy away from answering questions asked by people other than the original poster, but we do need to keep our answers useful. Sometimes, it is a good idea to refactor these subsequent questions into their own section or into a third-level subsection to keep their discussions from overwhelming the original question and answers.

...but we can't answer all questions

We do not give professional advice on medical and legal matters. We do not undertake analyses or provide solutions to questioners' health or legal problems. Within our capabilities, we do try to answer scientific, semantic or historical questions, help explain concepts, and point the questioner to possible sources for solutions.

We do not do your homework for you. The work of homework is yours, but we will give assistance with interpreting questions, help with ideas and concepts, and attempt to point to other resources that might help you to solve your tasks.

We don't know who created the Universe, or why Martians conspired with Enron and the Illuminati to conceal a plot to clone Elvis. While we're glad to direct you to relevant discussions – in Wikipedia and elsewhere – of theories of theology, epistemology, cosmology, or conspiracy, it is almost impossible to conclusively address these types of questions. Beyond supplying a questioner with links to appropriate resources, it's generally not productive to rehash the debate about Creation, evolution, or the Apollo moon landing hoax in its entirety on the Ref Desk.

Please don't ask questions just to start a conversation

There are better venues for chatting. See also 'Take pity on the dial-up user' and 'Have a sensible sense of humour', below.

The Reference Desk should be a useful part of Wikipedia

Link to Wikipedia articles where appropriate

Link to Wikipedia articles which answer the question. If a Wikipedia article doesn't answer a question – but should – make this clear; you don't want to send a questioner on a wild goose chase, and you do want to let other editors know that the article needs improvement.

Use external links from answers as sources to improve our articles

The Ref Desk is a service to the encyclopedia, and not just a service provided by the encyclopedia. If people ask questions that our articles don't answer, use the Ref Desk's answers to improve our articles.

Remember that you're an ambassador for the community

...whether you want to be or not. A lot of people have their first Wikipedia experience asking a question at the Reference Desk. By putting our best foot forward here, we build goodwill which in turn builds the community and the encyclopedia. If people have a bad first experience here, they may never come back.

The Reference Desk must maintain a friendly, open, welcoming environment

Strive to maintain the highest standards of courtesy

While Wikipedia policy demands only that we be civil, we should in all cases strive to exceed that minimum standard. If you're not here to help, then you're in the wrong place.

Note that this expectation applies to people who ask questions and not just those who answer them. We're volunteers here, and we deserve to be treated reasonably. (Don't confuse poor English with rudeness, however.)

Have a sensible sense of humour

First and foremost, we're here to answer questions. Having a bit of humour in your answer is almost always a good thing; we're not a stuffy buttoned-down shirt and tie sort of environment. Please don't start adding jokes just for the sake of adding jokes, however. We're not a chat room, and the page is painful enough for dial-up users as it is.

Try to keep the coarser impulses of your sense of humour in check. Kids ask questions here and your mother might as well. We're a very public part of the encyclopedia. (Penis jokes don't belong in questions about fashion—nor, probably, anywhere on the Desk.) Humour that denigrates and insults people or groups is almost always not funny enough to be worth the ill will it can generate. Remember that stuff that's appropriate among friends on individual user talk pages may not be well suited to the very broad audience of the Reference Desk.

Remember that young people and people for whom English is not their first language may not 'get' a lot of jokes; too much joking around can be very confusing, and make it difficult for these users to find the answers that they're looking for. 'In jokes' (say, about seagulls, or bagels, or other such silliness) can make outsiders feel confused or unwelcome; be aware that such jokes are only funny to those on the inside.

Don't edit a question

...except to fix formatting errors that screw up readability (like a leading space or unclosed markup tags). 'Correcting' spelling or presumed typos may lead to additional errors, or change the meaning of the question. Adding wikilinks to a question may inadvertently suggest to responders that the original poster is aware of the Wikipedia articles; the original poster may fail to realized that their question has been 'answered' through the new link.

If you're not sure about the meaning of a question, by all means ask for clarification; if you think you understand the question, feel free to state your assumptions and take a stab at an answer.

Don't poke fun at a poorly-written question

Remember, "on the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog". You don't know who's at the keyboard on the other end. If a question is badly written, it may be because the asker is lazy or drunk. It could be an eight-year-old. It could be an arthritic eighty-year-old with bad eyesight. (It might be your grandmother.) It could be a scholar for whom English happens to be his fifth language.

Asking a user to 'suitly emphazi' (or whatever the flavour-of-the-month term might be) his question and giggling into your sleeve is childish and rude.

Take pity on the dial-up user

Something like half of people in the United States still go online using a dial-up modem. This fraction is lower in Western Europe and Canada, and higher in many other places. Please be sparing in your use of inline images on the page (consider linking them, instead) and limit off-topic discussion. The Reference Desk is a pretty big page, and we all need to do our part to keep it accessible to as many people as possible.

Please sign and indent your replies

Complex technical questions and questions of a more subjective nature may prompt substantial discussion involving many parties. Please remember to sign your responses (with ~~~~) and indent threaded discussions (using colons) to make clear who is responding to whom. If you forget to sign or indent, helpful editors are encouraged to assist you. Signing your replies adds a 'personal touch'. It also allows questioners to follow up responses privately, for in-depth discussions or debates that may not be appropriate for the Ref Desk itself.