This is anessay on theconduct policy. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or aWikipedia policy, as it has not beenreviewed by the community.

Shortcuts WP:BNTVWP:BNTV WP:DNIVWP:DNIV

This page in a nutshell: How to better deal with vandals: revert and ignore.

Do not insult the vandals. Most "vandals" fall into one of two categories:newbies whodo not know any better, and truevandals ortrolls. Getting angry and insulting, deriding, or verbally assaulting them is usually what trollswant from you, so as to play up into aflame war, and will potentially alienate newbies who could become useful future contributors. Insulting vandals can also be consideredharassment.

Another way of saying this is: render good for evil. (That might sound familiar.)

It is important to note that in dealing firmly with a conscious vandal you may be doing what is necessary, but most often paying any attention to them other thanwarnings and reverting their vandalism is calledfeeding the trolls. Vandals and vandalism should be corrected by blocking and reverting or protecting. The key is to not do these in a way that is more harsh than need be. For example, after a string of vandalism and warnings, blocking a user with a summary of "GO AWAY" is likely to make the vandal try again and see if they can get another strong reaction. Remember:Revert, block, ignore.

Many userskeep their cool by using predefined templates to warn vandals. These, while not suitable for every instance of vandalism, help by being terse and to-the-point with no added emotions: "You're vandalizing, stop or you'll be blocked". Likewise, many users use short and effective block summaries when dealing with obviously vandalous, trollish accounts ("user...", "{{UsernameBlock}}").

The reasons for this are simple:

• The vandalism label is often too readily applied. Vandalism "patrollers" have to deal with the flood of recent changes, vandalism or not, and make quick calls on edits. Frequently they make incorrect ones. Anyone who has been a user, especially abold one, for some time has probably had at least one legitimate edit of theirs reverted as "vandalism". Incorrectly accusing someone may bebiting a newcomer or annoying an established user. By insulting them at the same time, the damage is made much more severe.
• Insulting vandals is the surest way to increase vandalism. If someone is doing something they know is wrong, insulting them over it is likely to make them vandalize more, just to get that reaction. If someone does not know what they are doing is wrong, then insulting them is likely to create disruption unnecessarily. This is similar totrolling.
• Keeping back from insulting vandals is a way to keep vandalism from happening, not only because an argument requires two sides but also because your restraint, being exactly the opposite of what a vandal expects, might stir up remorse and even repentance.
• All but the most hardened, dedicated vandals can do an about-face (maybe not immediately). Try to approach some of the borderline cases with a suggestion before jumping right to{{uw-vandalism4im}}, and the possibility exists they will decide to contribute helpfully.
• Being nice is a nice way to be! Remember the motto:It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice.

• Wikipedia behavioral essays
• Wikipedia culture
• Wikipedia essays about civility
• Wikipedia essays about vandalism

• Wikipedia semi-protected project pages