diversity
The bad attitudes between established users is a whole other set of problems. As much as I wish there were a general way to address all the incivility and "polite warfare", I think a cultural shift has to happen a bit at a time. Tackle each problem piece by piece. Improving our dispute resolution would help root out bad behavior among the most influential volunteers. Changing processes, so that they don't empower jackasses, that would help too. Finding ways to reduce newbie-biting, or at least taking away the excuses when people do it, that will help.
Otherwise, I agree with you entirely. The standard for incivility has become bad language, which means that all kinds of other disruptive and toxic behaviors are not just tolerated... they're actually rewarded.
I think you're right, and I think that fact is utterly deplorable, considering that the Orange pillar (4: Code of conduct and etiquette) states: Wikipedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner. Respect and be polite to your fellow Wikipedians, even when you disagree. The way to fix the civility problems is to fall back on this as the yardstick. 1. Is what was said respectful? Is it polite?
This is stated in WP:CIVIL in slightly different language: ...editors should always endeavor to treat each other with consideration and respect. Even during heated debates, editors should behave politely, calmly and reasonably, in order to keep the focus on improving the encyclopedia and to help maintain a pleasant editing environment. So two similar questions: 2. Is a given editor treating another with "consideration and respect"? 3. Is what a given editor is doing/saying helping to "maintain a pleasant editing environment"?
If the answer to any of the questions above is "No" (especially #1 and #2) then it is uncivil and should be dealt with. What will take some doing is getting a group of people together to change Wikipedia culture...but I think I just figured out how to do it.
This will require quite a bit of buy-in, but if we could get a significant number of current administrators to agree to band together to enforce the civility code as written, by measuring communications against the three questions outlined above, they can go out into the talk pages and start to make changes. In the beginning, this is going to require warnings and sanctions, until people start to realize that the expectations and standards have changed.
As everyone knows, I'm a civility apologist, so I'd be happy to coordinate implementation of any sort of project that is agreed upon to further the ends of making Wikipedia a kinder, gentler place to collaborate.
I would love to see it happen. I have my doubts though. I believe that you can make people polite at gunpoint, which is what we have now, but not sure you can make them respectful or pleasant. I also think the culture of terse/rough communication runs deeper than something that we allowed to happen. I think it might be representative of the population we have. I can't think of a geeky webforum that's nicer than Wikipedia. That's why moderators at geeky forums might focus on swear words and flame wars, but they can't stop people from throwing intellectual jabs at each other.
But if you had a proposal, I'd definitely sign on. The key is finding a way to get that "buy-in" that you're talking about... maybe some kind of viral campaign or something.
Inasmuch as there have been some thoughtful responses on an apparent problem in the en.wikipedia community, all of you have missed an important subtlety to my point. (Maybe it's just because I did a poor job of explaining it.) My issue is not that we Wikipedians ought to be more civil to each other (although there are times when the appropriate response is, "Fuck you"), but that many Wikipedians fail to even take a moment to learn the basics about the person she/he is debating with -- which leads to faux pas almost as glaring as an established editor putting a warning template on Jimmy Wales' talk page. (Not that Wales hasn't made edits I've considered stupid, but I wouldn't tell him as much with a template.)
If Wikipedians would first take a quick look at another's user page, associated talk page, & edit history -- all of which could be done in a matter of a couple minutes -- then use that information in how she/he respond to that person, I believe it would be an important step forward. Not only would people come to address one another more intelligently, but they would more likely write persuasive messages. And if enough of them did so on a regular basis, we might reach the point where Noraft's crusade for civility would be worth pursuing.
I'm tempted to ban all or most message templates. They tend to be completely ineffective. New user templates tend to come off as impersonal, robotic, and unwelcoming. And templating the regulars? It's a disaster, for exactly the reasons you mentioned.
It's been a while since I've been on Wikipedia... but I can't remember the last time I saw a template on a user page that was nice.
This reply is about a month late, but I did still want to answer. In response to "I believe that you can make people polite at gunpoint, which is what we have now, but not sure you can make them respectful or pleasant," I'd like to say it really depends on socialization. Most people who would tell you to fuck off on an online forum won't do that in person, because it is unacceptable in a RL social context. Those people also won't do it on Wikipedia, because it is unacceptable in that social context as well. Lawyers arguing in court don't make intellectual jabs at the judge, because they know the consequences. Similarly, if we raise the bar (really raise it, with enforcement; not just say it is raised) and start requiring respectfulness, you'll get it. Just like judges get it in court.
Getting buy in from admins is the harder part, I think, but not impossible.
This reply is about a month late, but I did still want to answer. In response to "I believe that you can make people polite at gunpoint, which is what we have now, but not sure you can make them respectful or pleasant," I'd like to say it really depends on socialization. Most people who would tell you to fuck off on an online forum won't do that in person, because it is unacceptable in a RL social context. Those people also won't do it on Wikipedia, because it is unacceptable in that social context as well. Lawyers arguing in court don't make intellectual jabs at the judge, because they know the consequences. Similarly, if we raise the bar (really raise it, with enforcement; not just say it is raised) and start requiring respectfulness, you'll get it. Just like judges get it in court.
Getting buy in from admins is the harder part, I think, but not impossible.