 | This is anessay oncivility. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one ofWikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not beenthoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: You have no obligation to respond to other editors. |
If an editor has addressed you with a query or comment, you should not feel an obligation to answer. Never forget thatyou have a right to remain silent. That's often the best option, especially when things are getting hot in a content discussion.
It's well known thatresponding to trolls and vandals is a bad idea, and that editors should be carefulnot to fall victim to baiting. But not all undesirable talk page behavior falls into either of these categories. Sometimes editors acting in perfectly good faith can be problematic and responding to them is unproductive.
Not responding is a good idea when answering a talk page post or query will be stressful for you and unproductive for people following the discussion. Perhaps an editor is misconstruing what you've just said, innocently orotherwise. But that's not the only situation in which simply letting the matter rest is a good idea.
Somerules of thumb:
Indeed:
Keep the reader of the talk page in mind in such situations. By enlarging a fruitless or redundant discussion in which all essential points have already been made, you detract from understanding. You do not add to it. If you've cited a particular policy or guideline and don'twish to go into more detail, don't.
If you later realize that you have to add something you hadn't thought of earlier, by all means do so. But don't turn it into an argument with another editor. And never proclaim that you are leaving a discussion or refusing to respond to another editor. It isn't necessary and usually will be counterproductive.
Remember, however, that in some circumstances,communication is required.