Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers

This page documents an English Wikipedia behavioral guideline.

Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on this guideline's talk page.

Shortcuts

This page in a nutshell: Don’t be hostile toward fellow editors; newcomers in particular. Assume good faith and respond to problematic edits in a clear and polite manner.

Wikipedia is improved through the work of both regular editors and newcomers. All of us were new editors once, and in some areas, even the most experienced are still newcomers. Treat newcomers with kindness and patience—nothing scares valuable contributors away faster than hostility.

The first edits of many now-experienced editors were test edits, or unsourced and unencyclopedic additions. It is unlikely for a new editor to be familiar with Wikipedia's markup language and its policies, guidelines, and community standards. Not having a clue is a normal stage in the editor lifecycle. We want editors to survive this process.

Initial interactions sets the expectation for the entire community. A welcoming atmosphere invites new editors to learn and grow. A harsh one fosters an idea that Wikipedia is unkind and rigid.

So next time you feel frustrated with a newcomer’s mistake, see it as an opportunity to nurture future contributors. Wikipedia needs a constant stream of new information, experience, and ideas.^[a] Guide newcomers patiently and thoroughly: kindness and patience is a necessity for Wikipedia's survival.

Understanding newcomers

Our motto and our invitation to the newcomer is to be bold. We have a set of principles, best practices, and traditions, but they must not be applied in such a way as to thwart the efforts of newcomers who take that invitation at face value. A newcomer brings a wealth of ideas, creativity, and experience from other areas that, current rules aside, have the potential to better our community and Wikipedia as a whole. Any new domain of concentrated, special-purpose human activity has its own specialized structures, which take time to learn (and which benefit from periodic re-examination and revision). Perhaps what the newcomer is doing "wrong" may ultimately improve Wikipedia. Before concluding they are simply "wrong", it is sometimes better to observe for a while and, if necessary, ask the newcomer what they are trying to achieve.

It is a given that newcomers make mistakes. A new editor engaging with content is a promise. A new editor engaging in communication is a treasure. Understand your responsibility as a more experienced editor. Don't squander the opportunity for Wikipedia to get a valuable contributor down the line by getting off to a bad start with the newcomer because of their "big mistake"; the opportunity is not yours to waste because you are exasperated by how people who have never written an encyclopedia before do not have encyclopedia-writing skills—the opportunity belongs to the entire community, so respect it. By doing so, you show respect to the community. By failing to do so you have maybe made yourself feel good for a second, but you have shown bits of hubris and carelessness that are a sign of disregard for the project's best interest. The newcomer's mistake that you've recognized does not have an impact in the scheme of things. They have to make the mistake. What really matters is that the editor is or becomes communicative, shows signs of getting it and gradually starts improving.

So teach by example and correct the mistake yourself. A note to the newcomer explaining what you have done and the relevant Wikipedia standard that they should follow in the future will prove more useful than slamming them. Communicate gently and respectfully to also immediately set an example for how to address other editors' mistakes and behave collegially. Tone down the rhetoric a few notches from the usual Wikipedia norm. Begin by introducing yourself with a greeting on the user's talk page to let them know that they are welcomed. Make the newcomer feel genuinely welcome, not as though they must win your approval in order to be granted membership into an exclusive club. If possible, point out something they've done correctly or especially well.

Unlike most online communities most people visit, Wikipedia is "mostly negative", because it is a collaborative working environment in which everyone's work overlaps with that of many other people, and good results are achieved by finding imperfections in what someone else did and incrementally improving on it. Expect that newcomers do not understand this and will receive much of the feedback as real negativity. It takes time to adjust to this unusual environment. Do not overwhelm them with too many instructions by sending out a flow of final statements; instead, enable them to engage in a fluid conversation. By creating an opening for them to respond, each point of criticism will come off more naturally.

You too were once a newcomer. Treat others as you were treated (or, probably, wish you had been treated) when you first arrived. Remember: "Do what's right; don't bite. Being a friend is all right!"

How to avoid biting

Improve, don't remove. If something doesn't meet Wikipedia's standards, first try to fix the problem rather than removing them.
As always, assume good faith. You can't blame someone for breaking a rule they weren't aware of. We were all newcomers once.
Avoid intensifiers such as exclamation points (!!!!) and words such as terrible, dumb, stupid, bad, poor, etc.
Explain reverts via edit summary or on their user talk page.
Avoid excessive Wikipedia jargon. When linking to policies or guidelines, do so in whole phrases, not wiki shorthand.
Templated messages may seem unwelcoming. Consider writing a personalised one.
Avoid filling a newly created page with maintenance templates or nominating them for deletion. Wait a few days to see how the page evolves first.
Don't join a pile of people pointing out problems, even when each comment is kindly phrased.^[b]
Remind newcomers that everything is saved. When their pages or edits are deleted, they can request undeletion, or recover them from the page history.
Do not call newcomers disparaging names like "sockpuppet" or "meatpuppet". Point them towards relevant policies instead.

It is okay not to be aware of guidelines

Shortcut

WP:IJME

Ignorance of guidelines can excuse mistakes. To a newcomer, the large number of Wikipedia policies and guidelines can be overwhelming. As all editors are encouraged to be bold, unfamiliarity with the rules is expected, but willfully disregarding them is not.

I have bitten someone — what do I do?

If you believe that you have bitten someone, don't worry about it too much. Mistakes are human nature, and simple steps are available to correct them.

Apologize, explaining what motivated you to bite.^[c]
Guide the newcomer through Wikipedia processes and reflect on what you could have done differently.
Find something of value in the experience, and move on. Extract the wisdom that may have been unintentionally veiled.

Templates

{{this is a new user}}
{{subst:Uw-bite}}
Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates

Notes

^ In an informal 2006 study, the articles Alan Alda and Anaconda (Python distribution) had their user contributions by word count ranked. 6 of the former's top 10 editors had less than 25 edits, and the majority of the latter's text was made by a user who had made "only 100" edits.^[1]
^ Hordes of comments that point out problems nicely is one reason why many find StackOverflow toxic.
^ Harvard Heart Letter has a blog post on effective apologies.

v t e Useful links
Daily pages	CAT:HELP WP:ANI WP:BLPN WP:BOTN WP:COIN WP:DASH WP:FTN WP:HD WP:MCQ WP:NORN WP:NPOVN WP:PUMP (/A /M /P /R /T) WP:RD (/C /E /H /L /M /MA /S) WP:RFC (/MEDIA /BIO /ECON /HIST /LANG /NAME /PAG /PHIL /POLY /SCI /SOC /STYLE) WP:RFF WP:RSN WP:SPI WP:THIRD WP:DRV)
Things to do	CAT:BACKLOG CAT:M CAT:WRI WP:ABUSE WP:AFC WP:ASOF WP:DPWL WP:FAC WP:FAR WP:FPC WP:GAN WP:GAR WP:KIND WP:MISSING WP:PR WP:RD WP:RP WP:SPOKEN WP:UW WP:THQ WP:VITAL WP:WANTED WP:WC BrokenRedirects Disambigs LongPages NewPages OrphanPages TagsPages UncatImages UncatPages
Resources	CAT:HOWTO WP:AWARD WP:CATEGORY WP:CAT-R WP:CITE WP:CITET WP:COPYEDIT WP:CUTPASTE WP:CUV WP:DEPT WP:DFD WP:DISAMBIG WP:EDIT WP:FOOT WP:FORMULA WP:HAT WP:ICT WP:LAYOUT WP:LIBRARY WP:MAGIC WP:MERGE WP:PIFU WP:PRECEDENT WP:REDIRECT WP:STYLE WP:SUMMARY WP:TEMPLATE CatTree PrefixIndex
Policies / Guidelines	WP:3RR WP:ADMIN WP:AP WP:APPEAL WP:ATTACK WP:AUTOBIO WP:BAN WP:BLANK WP:BLOCK WP:BOLD WP:BOTPOL WP:BUILD WP:CANVASS WP:CFORK WP:CIVIL WP:CONFLICT WP:CONSENSUS WP:COPYRIGHT WP:DELETE WP:DISCLAIM WP:DISPUTE WP:DISRUPTIVE WP:DONTBITE WP:DPR WP:EP WP:ETIQ WP:EDITWAR WP:FRINGE WP:GAME WP:GOOGLE WP:HARASS WP:HOAX WP:IGNORE WP:IUP WP:LEAD WP:LEGAL WP:LIBEL WP:LINKS WP:LIST WP:LIVING WP:LOGOS WP:M WP:NAME WP:NONFREE WP:NONSENSE WP:NOT WP:NOTE WP:NPOV WP:NPS WP:OFFICE WP:ORIGINAL WP:OVERSIGHT WP:OWN WP:PACL WP:PD WP:PEACOCK WP:PERFORM WP:POINT WP:POLLING WP:PROD WP:PROTECT WP:RELIABLE WP:SELF WP:SOCK WP:SPAM WP:SPEEDY WP:STUB WP:TALK WP:TP WP:TRIVIA WP:USERBOX WP:USERNAME WP:USERPAGE WP:VANDAL WP:VANISH WP:VERIFY WP:WEASEL WP:WHEEL
Administrators	CAT:AB CAT:CSD CAT:PER CAT:RFU WP:AE WP:AIV WP:AN WP:ANEW WP:ARL WP:CP WP:DGFA WP:NAS WP:OP WP:RFA WP:RFARB WP:RFM WP:RFPP WP:RM WP:RSPAM WP:UAA BlockLog DelLog ProtectLog
External links	Article statistics Edit Counter FIST ISBNdb Link checker Make Reference MissingTopics Is Admin? Wikichecker WikiEN-l archives Wiki ToDo