MarioWiki:Courtesy

The Super Mario Wiki is a collaboration between hundreds of users, all of whom are expected to exercise common courtesy when editing and interacting with other members of the community. Rude, intrusive or disruptive behaviour makes editing unpleasant for other users and will not be tolerated.

Dealing with Discourtesy
Unlike the offences listed on Warning Policy and other policy infringements, discourteous behaviour is not serious enough to warrant an official right off the bat. Instead, if you witness someone behaving inconsiderately, you should simply write the user a message on their talk page, explaining why they should not be acting that way and asking them to stop now that they know it is against our courtesy policy. The user probably does not know they are being impolite, and in many cases, they may have even been trying to help. However, if the behaviour persists after they have been asked to stop, a can be issued, since they are now willfully acting discourteous to their fellow users.

Different users may have different ideas about what is or isn't impolite, so to ensure everyone abides by the same set of standards, a list of behaviour that should be avoided is provided below. Some of these offences overlap with those listed on Warning Policy, and both pages should be consulted when dealing with questionable behaviour on the wiki. If you are unsure whether another user's behaviour should be addressed with a Warning/Reminder template or an off-the-record comment, feel free to contact a Sysop or a Patroller for help or advice.

If you were given a Warning/Reminder for discourteous behaviour that you feel should have only merited an unofficial notice as outlined above, you can appeal to have the template removed. However, keep in mind that excessive impolite or disruptive behaviour may earn you a Warning right off the bat; if the administrators feel that you should have known better than to act the way you did even without an unofficial request to stop, your warning will not be removed.

Discourteous Behaviour
The list of behaviours that are considered discourteous and unacceptable on this wiki are as follows. While some offences are straightforward, others require lengthy explanation. Similar or related offences are usually clustered together. If you have witnessed behaviour that is not listed here or on Warning Policy that you feel is rude, invasive or disruptive, please contact a Sysop or a Patroller before proceeding with any punitive action.


 * Users should not...
 * participate in other users' editing projects without asking them first.
 * While you may be trying to help out, some users honestly want to do the work themselves and may grow frustrated when their projects are taken away from them. "Sniping" edits is a good way to earn other users' resentment, so unless you are sure a user missed something and is not coming back to fix it, do not step in to finish what they started. When in doubt, ask for permission or simply do something else. Editing projects can be anything ranging from systematic maintenance work, splits and merges, the section-by-section rewriting of a page, or entire overhauls of groups of articles.
 * give someone a hard time for undoing their edits.
 * If someone reverted a bunch of your edits, they're doing it because they felt there was a problem with your changes, not because they are maliciously stalking you. If they did not explain themselves in any of their edit summaries, you can contact them and ask why they reverted your edits, but don't be defensive or hostile about it. Instead, discuss the matter civilly and come to an agreement on the talk pages, be that to restore your edits, leave their reversions or make a compromise of some sort. Do not simply restore your edits and expect the other user to leave them alone this time, as that can easily spiral into an edit war, which is a warnable offence.
 * undo good faith edits without explaining why in the edit summary, especially if the user is new to the wiki.
 * Except for vandals, people do not add bad content on purpose, and telling them why there is a problem with what they wrote will help them avoid making the same mistake in the future. This is especially true for new users, who may not be familiar with wiki policy and quality standards yet, and who may be discouraged from editing altogether if they see everything they try to contribute being removed with no rhyme or reason. Edit summaries can also help to avoid misunderstandings and edit wars, and they are useful when other users review a page's edit history. Overall, it's simply a good idea to clearly and concisely document your changes as much as possible when editing the wiki.
 * make derogatory edit summaries.
 * There is no need to be nasty when you undo an edit or clean up someone else's work. For example, if you're fixing someone's bad grammar, just say "fixing grammar" or "bad grammar", but don't make snide remarks like "what the heck are you trying to say?" or "learn to write better". Insulting, ridiculing or otherwise antagonizing other users with your edit summaries is almost as inappropriate as flaming them directly. Don't do it.


 * swear at other users or otherwise use excessive amounts of profanity.
 * Swearing at other people is flaming and is unacceptable. The occasional use of profanity is allowed as long as it is not directed at another user, but it should generally be avoided. Similarly, if a user specifically requests that no profanity is used on their talk page, their wishes should be respected. You are free to use profanity in moderation in your own userspace, but if it is decided that you have overstepped the boundaries of good taste, you may be asked to tone it down.


 * speak unkindly of other users, either behind their backs or to their faces.
 * Don't make fun of someone's editing abilities, idiosyncrasies, interests or people skills. Don't ream off every last mistake they've made or otherwise pick at their flaws. Don't incite others in joining you with the hatedom. We don't want bullies on our wiki.
 * make fun of a user's writing ability.
 * Bad writing may be annoying to undo or rewrite, but keep in mind that we have a lot of young users and users who speak English as a second or third language; for all you know, they could be trying to write to the best of their abilities, so be nice.
 * act condescendingly towards new users.
 * They may be new to the wiki, but that doesn't give you free reign over them. Lots of new users are competent editors right out of the gates, and even the ones that stumble at first have the potential to become valued contributors once they have a chance to learn the ropes. You don't have to take every new user under your wing, but don't write them off as dispensable "n00bs" either. Just remember, you were a newbie once too.
 * ignore other users.
 * You are not obligated to keep up casual conversations with anyone, but you do have to heed any wiki-related messages given to you. If a user gives you a warning or unofficially tells you that you are breaking any rules or writing policies, you must alter your behaviour accordingly. Removing warnings will earn you another warning, and you should not remove unofficial notices either.
 * alter or remove conversations.
 * The only comments you are allowed to remove are flames and acts of vandalism, and the only times you can alter another user's comment is to fix broken coding or replace a custom signature with . Altering the actual content of a comment, even if you're just fixing typos, is a warnable offence. This is not limited to mainspace: even on your own talk page, you shouldn't delete a conversation. It is also inappropriate to go back and alter or remove your own comments from talk pages; if you no longer stand by something you said earlier, slash it out using, but be sure to leave it up for the record. In proposals and FA nominations, if no one has "per"d your vote or addressed it in the comments, you may remove it; however, if someone has referred to your vote, you must slash it out and ensure that it is no longer counted in the tally by affixing it to the preceding line through use of.
 * pursue a conversation with someone even after they've implied/stated that they don't want to chat anymore.
 * Talking and making friends is fine, but sometimes a user simply wants to edit, and they should be left to it.
 * falsely claim to be someone's friend.
 * Making friends is good, but don't go claiming to be someone's friend unless there's actually grounds for it, because this will only get them mad at you. Unless you have someone's permission, don't add their friend userbox to your userbox tower or create a fake box on their behalf. Writing about someone behind their back on your userpage is also considered rude, and lying to others about your status as a certain user's friend is another good way to get yourself in hot water. Don't speak on others' behalf or claim that you have friends in high places that will support you in an argument: if anything, this will make admins unwilling to side with you at all.
 * ask other users for personal information.
 * While some users freely share details about things like their name, age and where they live, others are more private. It is considered bad form to ask others about what they look like or fish for other information that could be used to identify them offline. While casual conversations often involve chatting about real life matters, if someone implies they do not want to talk about something, drop the subject.


 * solicit votes from other users.
 * Do not ask other users to vote for anything, period. While this is mainly directed at proposals, it applies to FAs, elections and any other voting that takes place on the Super Mario Wiki. Even if you don't explicitly ask your friends to support your cause (or to join you in opposing something), simply contacting them makes it look like you're fishing for votes in your favour. The only time you can draw someone's attention to a vote is when a proposal concerns a subject that is important to them. Far from an act of discourtesy, giving them a heads-up about some possible changes being made to that subject would be a very considerate thing to do. Furthermore, if the validity or rationale behind someone's vote is being questioned, you can contact the voter and ask them to check back in on the matter, which may result in them changing their vote.


 * give out warnings for incidents that occurred months or years ago and are no longer a problem.
 * hold old offences against an otherwise good user.
 * If it's ancient history, don't bring it up again: the user has moved on, and so should you. While a user's record should not be forgotten, how they act now is more important than what they were like a few years ago, and focusing on problems they have since outgrown does no one any good.


 * insert themselves into disciplinary measures being taken by the admins.
 * If an admin has issued a warning or reminder, don't jump in with your own commentary, jeering or posturing: being ganged up on may simply make the offender feel victimized and unwilling to obey the admin's warning. Similarly, if a user is blocked, don't mock them or celebrate their defeat, because this just adds motivation for them to sockpuppet and get some payback on the community that treated them so poorly. Getting yourself involved when the admins have it covered just makes their jobs harder: if they're on the scene, stay out of it.


 * fish for compliments, especially from admins.
 * kiss up to the admins.
 * ask for a promotion.
 * Rather than praise and appreciation, the above three self-serving behaviours will earn you contempt from the admins and your fellow users alike. Users should edit because they want to improve the wiki, not because they want recognition and rewards. Taking pride in your work is fine, but being boastful is not. See also: MarioWiki:FAQ#How do I become an admin?


 * give an admin a Warning/Reminder or imply that they deserve one.
 * critique an admin's performance behind their back.
 * incite other users against the administration.
 * tell admins what to do.
 * All of this is considered to be undermining admin authority, and as well as being incredibly rude to the people who are supposed to be trusted with maintaining the wiki, doing this might get you in real trouble if the admins feel you are becoming more trouble than you're worth as an editor. It makes it harder for the administrators to maintain the peace and quality of the wiki if they have to worry about users second guessing and rebelling against their decisions, so it is in everyone's best interests to simply treat them with deference. While Sysops and Patrollers aren't infallible, they have earned their positions through their hard work and dedication, and they do not need to be told how to edit or do their jobs. Any problems that do arise with an admin will be dealt with internally by the other Sysops and Patrollers. Just as it is not your place to pick at the shortcomings of other users, so too should you keep your opinions about the performance of the administrators to yourself.


 * forgo the usage of proper grammar, punctuation, spelling and capitalization when communicating with other users.
 * If you're chatting with your buddies, you can be as lazy with your writing conventions as you want, but when you participate in proposals or talk page discussions, or when you ask someone (especially an admin) a wiki-related question on their talk page, you must use proper English (although short-forms and common slang are fine). Users should not be forced to decipher what is being said to them in order to follow important talk page discussions or proposals. Non-native English speakers should be given more leniency with grammar and wording, although they are expected to be able to use basic punctuation and capitalization.