User:Pudeo/Wikipedia is not a thought police
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Assume good faith: even if you hold opposite views on a contentious topic with someone, the chances are they're still here to build an encyclopedia. There is no policy-based rationale for sanctioning personal views. |
Wikipedia is not a thought police. It is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Everyone has the right to privacy, and their personal life or opinions should not matter. No one should be discriminated based on their presumed or stated views either.
Wikipedians do categorize each other based on past behavior and assumptions ("previously he supported the view X, so he must be Y"). Some even ask litmus test type of questions in requests for adminship. Perhaps this is a socialization process we can't avoid, but we should not let it turn into a battleground. Sometimes the villagers approach a heretic with pitchforks at dramaboards like WP:AN/I and we simply vote who will be sent into exile. No mercy. It is hard trying to be the better person in this kind of an environment.
Blocking someone indefinitely per WP:NOTHERE is an extraordinary measure. The bar should be very high, and it's not enough that we simply dislike their point-of-view and consider their editing counterproductive just to the encyclopedia of our point-of-view. Additionally, WP:NOTHERE is not a policy, it's an explanatory supplement page. There is no policy which states that certain views are too reprehensible or "incorrect" that they should lead to sanctions. This is also an important principle in itself to avoid opening the Pandora's box.
Even if you hold views that can be characterized "extreme", you are free to contribute as long as you abide to WP:RS and WP:V and other policies. It is also worth noting that the English Wikipedia has a global userbase with a diverse base of users. What constitutes as "politically incorrect" or even morally wrong varies, as the Overton window is not the same everywhere.
Nevertheless, it's also important to remember that Wikipedia is not a forum. It is a good idea to discuss politics at other more suited platforms and not use talk pages to make pointy political comments. However, as many Wikipedia content disputes are in fact political or ideological, it is understandable one might have an occasion where they get carried away. Think twice whether continuing discussing a controversial topic here has any benefit, before you decide to reply.
See also
edit- Wikipedia:Assume good faith
- WP:NPA § What is considered to be a personal attack?: "Using someone's affiliations as an ad hominem means of dismissing or discrediting their views—regardless of whether said affiliations are mainstream."
- Wikipedia:NOTNOTHERE: "Merely advocating and implementing changes to Wikipedia articles or policies with reliable sources is allowed and even if these changes made are incompatible with certain Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, it is not the same as not being here to build an encyclopedia."
- Wikipedia:Room101