Template talk:Personal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Proposed changes

I support the implementation of such a warning message, but I believe that it's in need of substantial revision (relating primarily to the issue cited by Raul654 in his deletion proposal):

No personal attacks

This article pertains to a highly controversial topic. It is very difficult to write neutrally about it, and insults and personal comments do not assist in improving its factuality, verifiability or neutrality. In the interest of civility and productivity, it has been decided that this message shall serve as irrefutable notification of our policy against personal attacks. Anyone who posts a comment on this talk page that is deemed a violation by an administrator will be blocked for a short period of time. A notice of the administrative block will be placed on the Wikipedia Administrators' notice board. The absence of this message is not to be construed as an invitation to engage in personal attacks, which are prohibited throughout the Wikipedia site.

Any thoughts? —Lifeisunfair 03:09, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agree 100%, and most definitely support this modification. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:40, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disagree with rewrite, misses several key points

I have reverted the rewrite done at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Personal&diff=15466992&oldid=15438496. It does not mention that the article in contention is highly controversial and difficult to write under normal circumstances. It does not explain the purpose of this message box. I have therefore reverted. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:39, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

No offense, but the first line "Though this article pertains to a highly controversial topic" makes clear mention 'that the article in contention is highly controversial'. As to 'It does not explain the purpose of this message box.' I felt that "This is that warning." was adequate explanation. I feel that this revert was a bad idea, and that the reworded version could and should have been edited to address any problems. -- Ec5618 00:30, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

No offense taken (no offense was meant by the revert!). The problem is that the there is no mention of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability and, most importantly of all, Wikipedia:No personal attacks — the entire reason this message box was created in the first place! Also, the text on the bottom of the article was specifically crafted to address an issue that Raul654 raised WP:TFD. This is why I reverted. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:25, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The template is headed 'No personal attacks', which led me to understand that the point of the template was to warn primarily against personal attacks. I 'trimmed' the other warnings off, to reduce the size of the template. See the reworded template below:

	‹ The template below (Personal) is being considered for deletion. See templates for deletion to help reach a consensus. › No personal attacks
	Though this article pertains to a highly controversial topic, please note that personal attacks are prohibited throughout the Wikipedia site. Please respect Wikiquette, Civility and Wikipedia:Verifiability. All articles should be written from a neutral point of view. Failure to respect the rules is cause for blocking, after a single warning. This is that warning.

-- Ec5618 08:20, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] tfd

This template was nominated for deletion, but consensus was to keep it. See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Not deleted/June 2005 for details. During the discussion, it was suggested that the template be reworded to make it less bureaucratese. Radiant_>|< 09:29, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed it. I probably would have voted to delete, or more probably would have just removed it if I saw someone using it. WP:NPA applies across Wikipedia so the template is superfluous and could only tend to inflame (it could be interpreted as a slight, or a comment on someone else's behavior in a discussion). I usually practise remove personal attacks but that is a very difficult technique to use and not recommended for everybody. It's got a bit of a zen thing, you need to have a lot of personal kudos and be a good judge of the situation (neither of which can be said apply to me in all situations). --Tony Sidaway|Talk 9 July 2005 13:05 (UTC)