Mediating Conflicts

From Planipedia

As an open community dialogue, there may be instances on Planipedia pages where users disagree and argue over a subject. As an administrator, you should judge which arguments are of an academic and objective nature, and which are insubstantiated and harmful disputes. All conflicts should follow the Planipedia Rules of being objective and neutral, not causing personal offense, and not looking to cause upset.

Giving a Third Opinion

The most simple step towards dispute resolution is offering a valid third opinion on the subject. Broadening the base of unbias opinions o the discussion page will clarify the meaning and information that should be offered on the main page. The discussion tab should be watched to ensure that the dispute does not continue, and the main content offers valuable and objective information to Planipedia users. Citing Planipedia Rules in your discussion will always be a helpful tip.

Warning Users

In a situation where the discussion has strayed from a strictly objective debate, administrators should warn users of the potentially harmful consequences of their contributions. Referencing the Planipedia Rules and measures for Punishing Malicious Users may provide the persons in discussion with a guide to contributing valuable content and redirect the debate. The discussion should be monitored to ensure that it does not degrade into a more serious conflict, and after repeated warnings, users should be temporarily blocked from Planipedia.

Delete Offensive Content

If an argument has escalated to the point where personal accusations and offensive statements are being made, the dispute should be immediately deleted and the users punished accordingly. In its stead you can reference the Planipedia Rules and encourage an revival of the discussion at an academic level.