ৱিকিপিডিয়া:মতবিৰোধ সমাধান - অসমীয়া ৱিকিপিডিয়া
সমললৈ যাওক
অসমীয়া ৱিকিপিডিয়াৰ পৰা
এই ৱিকিপিডিয়া পৃষ্ঠাটো বা ইয়াৰ অংশবিশেষ অসমীয়া ভাষাত লিখা হোৱা নাই। সেয়ে ইয়াক অসমীয়ালৈ অনুবাদ কৰি
অসমীয়া ৱিকিপিডিয়াৰ
ভেটি সুদৃঢ় কৰাত
সহায় কৰক
WP:DR
redirects here. You may also be looking for
Wikipedia:Deletion review
Wikipedia:Deny recognition
Wikipedia:Double redirects
or
Wikipedia:Database reports
For dispute resolution requests, see
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests
. For the dispute resolution noticeboard, see
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard
. For dispute resolution involving the
Open-source Ticket Request System
("OTRS"), see our
volunteer response team
This page documents a
procedural policy
of Wikipedia.
চমুপথবোৰ
WP:DR
WP:DISPUTE
সংক্ষেপে এই পৃষ্ঠাখন:
Resolve disputes calmly, through civil discussion and
consensus
-building on relevant discussion pages. There are several available options to request opinions from editors outside the dispute: other dispute resolution mechanisms include
requests for comments
mediation
or, after all other methods have been tried,
arbitration
Dispute resolution
Tips for dispute resolution
Use etiquette
Assume good faith
Be civilised in discussions
Be open to compromise
Ask for editor assistance
Negotiation
Discuss on talk pages
Get a third opinion
Request comments
Dispute resolution noticeboard
Wikiquette assistance
Request informal mediation
Formal
Mediation
Request formal mediation
Guide to formal mediation
Mediation Committee
Formal mediation policy
Arbitration
Request arbitration
Arbitration Committee
Remedies
Administrator assistance
Arbitration enforcement
Editing restrictions
General sanctions
This policy describes what to do when you have a dispute with another editor. See
Wikipedia:Wikiquette
and the essay
Staying cool when the editing gets hot
for more tips. Also please remember that
Wikipedia is not about winning
The "dispute resolution" sidebar (right) has direct links to filing requests for many of the dispute resolution levels, but requesting dispute resolution involves different guidelines and application processes for each level.
Dispute resolution requests
can help familiarize you with each of them.
Avoiding disputes
উৎস সম্পাদনা
চমুপথ
WP:Discussion
A variety of methods exist for helping to positively resolve disputes, before using formal processes or third-party intervention. Disputes or grievances should always be reacted to in the first instance by approaching, in good faith, the editor or editors concerned and explaining what you find objectionable and why you think so. This can be done on the talk page of the article or on the user page.
Focus on content
উৎস সম্পাদনা
চমুপথ
WP:FOC
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Editing policy
The most important first step is to focus on content, and not on editors. Wikipedia is built upon the principle of collaboration and assuming that the efforts of others are in good faith is important to any community.
When you find a passage in an article that you find is biased or inaccurate, improve it if you can. If that is not easily possible, and you disagree with a point of view expressed in an article, don't just delete it. Rather, balance it with what you think is neutral. Note that unreferenced text may be tagged or removed because of our policy on
Verifiability
To help other editors understand the reasoning behind your edits, always explain your changes in the edit summary. If an edit is potentially contentious, explain why you made the change and how it improves the article. If your reasoning is complex, add a section to the
talk page
of the article to explain it and refer to that section in the edit summary. If your edit gets reverted, you can discuss the reversion with other editors on the talk page.
In summary: Don't take others' actions personally. Explain to them what you're doing, and always be prepared to change your mind.
Stay cool
উৎস সম্পাদনা
নীতিৰ
সংক্ষিপ্ত
WP:DISENGAGE
Most situations are not urgent. Please give both yourself and the other party some time. Often it helps to just take a deep breath and sleep on it. Don't worry! You can always fix the problem later. (You can go back to the
page history
of an article
at any time
, to find the version of the article that you last worked on, and compare that to the current version to see whether there are still things that you'd like put in or taken out.)
Take a long term view. In due course you will probably be able to return and carry on editing it, when the previous problems no longer exist and the editor you were in dispute with might themselves move on. In the meantime the disputed article will evolve, other editors may become interested and they will have different perspectives if the issue comes up again.
This is particularly helpful when disputing with
new users
as it gives them a chance to familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's policy and culture. Focus your contributions on another article where you can make constructive progress.
Discuss with the other party
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Stay in the top three sections of this pyramid.
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Negotiation
When discussing an issue, remember to
stay cool
. If you encounter rude or inappropriate behavior, don't respond likewise. Take the other editor's perspective into account.
Assume that an editor is acting in good faith
until it's absolutely clear that they're not. It's at that point where you should consider dispute resolution processes that involve third parties.
Talking to other parties is not a formality; it's an
imperative
to the smooth running of any community. Not discussing will make people less sympathetic to your position and may prevent you from effectively using later stages in dispute resolution. In contrast, sustained discussion and serious
negotiation
between the parties, even if not immediately (or even remotely) successful, shows that you are trying to find a solution.
Also consider negotiating a
truce
or
compromise
. This is also important if you intend to solicit outside opinions because it allows others to consider the issue fairly without the confusion of constant ongoing edits.
Seeking preliminary advice and feedback to resolve the dispute
উৎস সম্পাদনা
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Requesting dispute resolution
If the previous steps fail to resolve the dispute, try one of the following methods. Which ones you choose and in what order depends on the nature of the dispute and the preferences of people involved.
Seek some general advice
উৎস সম্পাদনা
The
Dispute resolution noticeboard
can help diffuse small content and conduct issues, and assist in pointing people to the best forum for resolving larger issues. The noticeboard is a good first point of call for disputes where the nature of the dispute is unclear and in need of clarification. It can also assist if the dispute needs raising at another venue. This noticeboard is not designed to
retake existing disputes
; the need to discuss issues in a calm and civilised manner is important.
The noticeboard is monitored by users experienced in resolving disputes, so they are able to assist you in resolving the matter at hand.
Editor assistance
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Editor assistance
helps editors find someone experienced to provide you one-on-one advice and feedback. While not a required part of dispute resolution, it is designed to help you understand how to clearly and civilly express your views and work toward consensus. You may request an assistant's help at any time, whether you're involved in dispute resolution or not. Assistants can also help you find the best way to resolve your dispute or issue.
Wikiquette assistance
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Turn to
Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance
for impolite, uncivil or other difficult communications with editors. First, however, consider
ignoring incivility
– you can often get much more accomplished by rising above uncivil comments and staying focused on the task at hand.
RfCN
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Requests for comment on usernames
is the main avenue for bringing attention to usernames which may be inappropriate.
Resolving content disputes
উৎস সম্পাদনা
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Requesting dispute resolution
If the previous steps fail to resolve the dispute, but the dispute has been identified as a content dispute, any of the following methods can be tried. Such disputes often involve questions over whether particular content in an article (or proposed content for an article) are in compliance with site policies (such as
WP:V
WP:RS
WP:NPOV
, and so on).
Ask for a third opinion
উৎস সম্পাদনা
If you need neutral outside opinions in a dispute involving
only two
editors, turn to
Wikipedia:Third opinion
Ask about the subject
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Ask at a subject-specific
Wikipedia:WikiProject
talk page. Usually, such projects are listed on top of the article talk page.
Ask for help at a relevant noticeboard
উৎস সম্পাদনা
নীতিৰ
সংক্ষিপ্ত
WP:SEEKHELP
If your dispute is related to one of the following topics, you may wish to post about it in one of the below locations, to get the opinions of other editors familiar with similar disputes. There is also a new noticeboard that can help direct you to the best noticeboard for your questions or issues that need to be addressed, it is called the
Dispute resolution noticeboard
. It can also be used for resolving simple disputes regarding conduct or content, but isn't necessarily the best forum to take complex issues. It can help point you in the right direction for these matters, however.
Specialised content issues
Biographies of Living Persons noticeboard
– to raise questions and alerts about possible problems with a living person's biography
Conflict of Interest (COI) noticeboard
– to ask about possible COI
Ethnic and cultural conflicts noticeboard
– for issues related to national, religious, ethnic, or other cultural conflicts
Sockpuppet investigations
– for help in tracking down
sockpuppets
General content issues
External links noticeboard
– to raise questions and alerts about
external links
(including those that are
not
being used to verify article content)
Fringe theories noticeboard
– to report theories that may be being given
undue weight
in articles
Neutrality noticeboard
– for discussion of whether or not parts of an article are meeting
WP:NPOV
and
WP:UNDUE
No Original Research noticeboard
– to raise questions and alerts about material that might be
original research
or
original synthesis
Notability noticeboard
– for discussion of whether or not a subject is
notable
Reliable Sources noticeboard
– for discussion of whether or not a source is
reliable
Informal mediation
উৎস সম্পাদনা
If things are getting a bit tricky, it might be useful to ask some cool heads to look in and help out. Sometimes editors who provide third opinions or respond to requests for comments may be willing to help mediate a dispute, if it is requested. The
Mediation Cabal
also assists in settling disputes without turning to formal mediation, and is a good place to learn dispute resolution techniques.
Formal mediation
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Request formal mediation
of the dispute from the
Mediation Committee
Mediation
is a voluntary process in which a neutral person works with the parties to a dispute. The mediator helps guide the parties into reaching an agreement that can be acceptable to everyone. When requesting formal mediation, be prepared to show that you tried to resolve the dispute using the steps listed above, and that all parties to the dispute are in agreement to mediate. Mediation cannot take place if all parties are not willing to take part. Mediation is only for disputes about Article Content, not for complaints about user conduct.
See
Wikipedia:Requests for mediation#File
and
Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Guide
for guidance in filing a request.
RfC through article talk pages
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Requests for comment through article talk pages
is the remaining avenue for requesting outside input on article content or proposed article content. Unlike mediation, RfC through article talk pages can still proceed even if a party is unwilling to participate.
Resolving user conduct disputes
উৎস সম্পাদনা
If the dispute has been identified as a dispute which involves user conduct, one of the following methods can be tried. Such disputes often involve complaints concerning the actions of an user (such as how an editor edits or the comments that editor makes during talk page discussions).
Sensitive issues and functionary actions
উৎস সম্পাদনা
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee
Wikipedia:CheckUser
Wikipedia:Oversight
Wikipedia:Harassment
, আৰু
Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team
A small number of disputes involve sensitive or non-public information. These include issues where an
Arbitrator
Checkuser
or
Oversighter
has stated a privacy issue exists in the case, and disputes where there is a concern of a sensitive or private nature. Examples:
Non-public details
- Issues where details and evidence are not accessible to all participants or to the community as a whole. This can also happen due to copyright or privacy reasons,
BLP
, or when the material is on an unsuitable
external link
"Outing" concerns
- When discussion may in effect mean "
outing
", for example if there is a concern that a user is editing with a secret conflict of interest and the evidence would tend to identify them;
Serious matters
- The issue involves legal concerns, harassment, or allegations that are very serious or perhaps defamatory;
Advice on divisive and sensitive issues
- The issue may potentially be very divisive and advice is needed on how best to handle it. (
sock-puppetry by an administrator
is one example)
Disputes or issues of this kind should usually be referred to the
functionaries mailing list
or
Arbitration Committee
. In some cases it may be possible to seek advice from an uninvolved trusted administrator by IRC, email or other private means.
Actions tagged as CheckUser, Oversight, OTRS or Arbitration Committee
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Where an action is marked as CheckUser, Oversight, OTRS or Arbitration Committee, that action should
not
be reverted without checking beforehand. The presumption is that they have a good reason, and those aware of the reason may need time to recheck, consult, and respond. Sometimes the relevant talk page or other wiki pages will have more details and these are always a good first place to check.
Such actions, if disputed, should initially be raised (by email if necessary) with the agent or functionary concerned. Where a dispute about OTRS actions cannot be resolved in this manner, it should be referred to the
OTRS administrators
. Where a dispute about CheckUser and Oversighter actions cannot be resolved in this manner, it should be referred to the
functionaries mailing list
or the
Audit Subcommittee
where appropriate. Disputes about ArbCom actions should be referred to the
Arbitration Committee
RfC/U
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Requests for comment on user conduct
is the main avenue for disputes about user conduct. Requests for comment on user conduct have
minimum requirements
that need to be satisfied: at least two users must have tried (and failed) to resolve the problem with the user on the user's talk page.
Last resort: Arbitration
উৎস সম্পাদনা
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee
Wikipedia:Arbitration policy
, and
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration
অতিৰিক্ত তথ্য:
Wikipedia:Arbitration guide
If you have taken all other reasonable steps to resolve the dispute,
and the dispute is not over the content of an article
, you can
request arbitration
. Be prepared to show that you tried to resolve the dispute by other means. Arbitration differs from mediation in that the
Arbitration Committee
will consider the case and issue a decision, instead of merely assisting the parties in reaching an agreement. If the issue is decided by arbitration, you will be expected to abide by the result. If the case involves serious user misconduct, arbitration may result in a number of serious consequences up to totally banning someone from editing, as laid out in the
arbitration policy
. Note that arbitration is normally for disputes about user conduct, while mediation is normally for disputes about article content.
For urgent situations
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Some situations can be sufficiently urgent or serious that dispute resolution steps are not equipped to resolve the issue. Such situations can be forwarded to the appropriate venue.
To request permanent
deletion
of personal information
Wikipedia:Requests for oversight
To request an unblock (if you are
blocked
): place the code:
{{unblock|
your reason for unblock
}}
on your talk page. You may also contact the blocking admin via email (navigate to their userpage or user talk page and click "E-mail this user").
To report
vandalism
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
To report blatantly inappropriate
usernames
, such as usernames that are obscene or inflammatory:
Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention
To report suspected
sockpuppetry
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations
To report
urgent
violations of Wikipedia's policies on
Personal Attacks
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
To report
edit warring
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR
To report a user's conduct which needs other urgent attention from an administrator:
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard
The Administrators' Noticeboards are not the place to raise disputes over content, or reports of abusive behaviour.
Reports that do not belong at these noticeboards will be closed, and discussions will need to be re-posted at an appropriate forum, including the new
dispute resolution noticeboard
Administrators
are not referees, and have limited authority to deal with abusive editors.
Words of caution
উৎস সম্পাদনা
Dispute resolution is sometimes used by editors to try to
game the system
. This generally backfires badly. Remember that dispute resolution mechanisms are ultimately there to enable editors to collaboratively write an encyclopedia – not to win personal or political battles.
See also
উৎস সম্পাদনা
en:Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute
en:Wikipedia:Candor
en:Wikipedia:Disruptive editing
en:Wikipedia:Don't be a fanatic
en:Wikipedia:Edit war
en:Wikipedia:Etiquette
en:Wikipedia:Mea culpa
en:Wikipedia:Navigating conflict
en:Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Situations and handling
en:Wikipedia:No angry mastodons
en:Wikipedia:NPOV dispute
en:Wikipedia:Precedents
en:Wikipedia:WikiWar
en:MeatBall:ConflictResolution
en:Help:Talkspace draft
প্ৰ
মূল ৱিকিপিডিয়া নীতি আৰু পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
আলোকপাত
পাঁচটা স্তম্ভ
ৱিকিপিডিয়া নীতি আৰু পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
ৱিকিপিডিয়া নীতি আৰু পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহৰ তালিকা
নীতিসমূহৰ সাৰাংশ তালিকা
পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহৰ সাৰাংশ তালিকা
প্ৰকল্প নীতিসমূহ
ৱিকিপিডিয়া কি নহয়
সম্পাদনা নীতি
ঐকমত্য
মতবিৰোধ সমাধান
সকলো বিধি উপেক্ষা কৰক
মূল বিষয়বস্তু নীতি
নিৰপেক্ষ দৃষ্টিভংগী
মৌলিক গৱেষণাৰহিত লেখা
বিশ্বাসযোগ্যতা
আন বিষয়বস্তু নীতিসমূহ
প্ৰবন্ধৰ শিৰোনাম
জীৱিত ব্যক্তিৰ জীৱনী
বিলোপন নীতি
বিষয়বস্তু পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
উৎসৰ উল্লেখ
দ্ব্যৰ্থতা দূৰীকৰণ
উৰাবাতৰিৰ সৃষ্টি নকৰিব
মূল উৎসৰ নকল সন্নিৱিষ্ট নকৰিব
ৱিকিপিডিয়া:বিশ্বাসযোগ্য উৎসৰ চিনাক্তকৰণ
আৰম্ভণিৰ অংশ
উল্লেখযোগ্যতা
মানচিত্ৰ ৰীতি
অৰ্থহীন কথা
আচৰণ নীতি
শিশু সুৰক্ষা
শিষ্টাচাৰ
সম্পাদনা দ্বন্দ্ব
আইনী ভাবুকি এৰাই চলক
ব্যক্তিগত আক্ৰমণ নকৰিব
প্ৰবন্ধৰ অধিকাৰিতা
একাধিক একাউণ্টৰ ব্যৱহাৰ নকৰিব
ব্যৱহাৰিক পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
ভাল ভাৱ ৰাখক
আদৰ্শৰ বিবাদ
এটা বক্তব্য স্পষ্ট কৰিবলৈ ৱিকিপিডিয়া বিশৃংখল নকৰিব
শিষ্টাচাৰ
প্ৰণালীৰ ভুল ব্যৱহাৰ
অনুগ্ৰহ কৰি নতুন সদস্যক বেয়া ব্যৱহাৰ নকৰিব
সম্পাদনা পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
প্ৰবন্ধৰ আকাৰ
সাহসী হওক
উৰ্দ্ধটীকা
স্বাক্ষৰ
আলোচনা পৃষ্ঠা পথনিৰ্দেশিকা
উপপৃষ্ঠা
সদস্য পৃষ্ঠা
শৈলীৰ পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
ৰচনাশৈলীৰ হাতপুথি
ৰচনাশৈলীৰ হাতপুথি (অধিগম্যতা)
ৰচনাশৈলীৰ হাতপুথি (তাৰিখ আৰু সংখ্যা)
ৰচনাশৈলীৰ হাতপুথি (সজ্জা)
ৰচনাশৈলীৰ হাতপুথি (তালিকা)
ৰচনাশৈলীৰ হাতপুথি (সংযোগ)
শ্ৰেণীবিভাজন পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
শ্ৰেণী, তালিকা, আৰু দিক্দৰ্শন সাঁচ
শ্ৰেণীকৰণ
সাঁচ নামস্থান
নীতিসমূহ
পথনিৰ্দেশিকাসমূহ
প্ৰ
Essays on
Wikipedia
civility
The basics
How to be civil
Compromise
Accepting other users
Duty
Enjoy yourself
Honor system
Thank you
Apology
Truce
Forgive and forget
No vested contributors
Staying cool when the editing gets hot
Overzealous deletion
Content removal
Divisiveness
Philosophy
An uncivil environment is a poor environment
How many legs does a horse have?
You can't squeeze blood from a turnip
Wikipedia is not about winning
The Last Word
The grey zone
You are probably not a lexicologist or a lexicographer
Writing for the opponent
There is no common sense
Not everyone who disagrees with you is a vandal
Walls of text
Nobody cares
Witchhunt
Shadowless Fists of Death!
You don't own Wikipedia
Dos
Adopt a quiet role
Assume good faith
Assume the assumption of good faith
Assume no clue
Assume clue
Avoid personal remarks
Avoid rancor
Avoid the word "vandal"
Award barnstars
Call a spade a spade
Candor
Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass
Deny recognition
Encourage full discussions
In praise of 1RR
Revert only when necessary
Get over it
How to lose
Mind your own business
Discussing cruft
Keep it down to earth
Revert, block, ignore
Don'ts
Arguments to avoid in edit wars
Don't be inconsiderate
Please do not bite the newcomers
Don't call a spade a spade
Don't call the kettle black
Don't take the bait
Do not insult the vandals
Just drop it
Don't edit war over the colour of templates
Don't be ashamed
Don't drink the consensus Kool-Aid
Don't feed the divas
Don't stuff beans up your nose
Don't spite your face
Don't revert due to "no consensus"
Don't call things cruft
No angry mastodons
Don't be an ostrich
Don't template the regulars
Don't be a fanatic
Don't accuse someone of a personal attack for accusing of a personal attack
Don't fight fire with fire
Don't be prejudiced
Don't remind others of past misdeeds
Wiki relations
WikiLove
WikiHate
WikiCrime
WikiBullying
WikiPeace
WikiLawyering
WikiHarassment
We live in Wikiville
About essays
The value of essays
The difference between policies, guidelines and essays
Essays are not policy
Don't cite essays as if they were policy
Quote your own essay
Category:ৱিকিপিডিয়া ৰচনা
"ৰ পৰা অনা হৈছে
শ্ৰেণীসমূহ
ৱিকিপিডিয়াৰ অনুবাদ বিচৰা প্ৰবন্ধসমূহ
ৱিকিপিডিয়া নীতি
Wikipedia civility essays
ৱিকিপিডিয়া মতবিৰোধ সমাধান
অদৃশ্য শ্ৰেণীসমূহ:
Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls
ৱিকিপিডিয়া সংযোগহীন চমুপথ
Wikipedia shortcut box first parameter needs fixing
ৱিকিপিডিয়া
মতবিৰোধ সমাধান
বিষয় যোগ কৰক
US