| Revision as of 04:54, 8 October 2012 editDoc9871 (talk | contribs)23,298 edits →Dealing with divas: +← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:39, 9 October 2012 edit undoDoc9871 (talk | contribs)23,298 edits Merge and expand. Needs work.Next edit → | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| ; Argumentative in petty disputes: There is no issue too small for a diva; disputes are more about getting their way than getting it right. | ; Argumentative in petty disputes: There is no issue too small for a diva; disputes are more about getting their way than getting it right. | ||
| ; Frequent citation of personal perceived "rewards" in disputes: Divas want others to think they are indispensable to the project, therefore they will frequently promote their own value to the project via their ], ], ] or ]. In citing their own value, they are implicitly denigrating their opponent's value, which is a form of validation. | ; Frequent citation of personal perceived "rewards" in disputes: Divas want others to think they are indispensable to the project, therefore they will frequently promote their own value to the project via their ], ], ] or ]. Divas often have elaborate user pages which tout their contributions. In citing their own value, they are implicitly denigrating their opponent's value, which is a form of validation. | ||
| ; Consensus is flawed: Divas tend to feel that ''community'' consensus is far less important than their ''own'' consensus: that of themselves and their wikibuddies. IAR is often touted as the justification for not listening to the community, but other policies often fall far by the wayside with the diva. | |||
| ; Excessive self-promotion: Divas often have elaborate user pages which tout their contributions. | |||
| ; Frequent threats to leave: This is the diva's primary weapon, and they use it often. They retire often, but never stay away for more than a few days. | ; Frequent threats to leave: This is the diva's primary weapon, and they use it often. They retire often, but never stay away for more than a few days. | ||
| ; An Entourage: A truly successful diva has a loyal following. Editors that question a diva's behavior often find themselves attacked by fervent supporters. Administrator pals are most valued to the diva, and threats to block those that step on a diva's toes are effective tools in the enabling process. | ; An Entourage: A truly successful diva has a loyal following. Editors that question a diva's behavior often find themselves attacked by fervent supporters. Administrator pals are most valued to the diva, and threats to block those that step on a diva's toes are effective tools in the enabling process. | ||
Revision as of 04:39, 9 October 2012
Essay on editing Misplaced Pages | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. | Shortcut |
 | This page in a nutshell: Divas often storm off the project when they don't get their way. Let them go. |
A Misplaced Pages diva is a long-time user who believes he or she is more important than other editors, and who requires regular validation of that belief. Validation is obtained by storming off the project in a huff—a "retirement" or "Wikibreak"—accompanied by a long diatribe against whatever petty issue drove them away this time.
Invariably, this diatribe attracts a flood of "please don't go" messages, along with plenty of support for the diva's side of the dispute that triggered the latest "retirement". The end result is that the diva gets exactly what he or she craves—validation and support—and returns to the project triumphant, at least until the next petty conflict.
Spotting divas
The following are tell-tale signs that you are dealing with a Misplaced Pages diva:
- Argumentative in petty disputes
- There is no issue too small for a diva; disputes are more about getting their way than getting it right.
- Frequent citation of personal perceived "rewards" in disputes
- Divas want others to think they are indispensable to the project, therefore they will frequently promote their own value to the project via their edit count, Did you knows, Good articles or Featured articles. Divas often have elaborate user pages which tout their contributions. In citing their own value, they are implicitly denigrating their opponent's value, which is a form of validation.
- Consensus is flawed
- Divas tend to feel that community consensus is far less important than their own consensus: that of themselves and their wikibuddies. IAR is often touted as the justification for not listening to the community, but other policies often fall far by the wayside with the diva.
- Frequent threats to leave
- This is the diva's primary weapon, and they use it often. They retire often, but never stay away for more than a few days.
- An Entourage
- A truly successful diva has a loyal following. Editors that question a diva's behavior often find themselves attacked by fervent supporters. Administrator pals are most valued to the diva, and threats to block those that step on a diva's toes are effective tools in the enabling process.
- Long memory
- Repeatedly brings up "grievances" from the past. Doesn't let go of grudges. Nothing is too old to bring up repeatedly.
- Hypocrisy
- A diva rarely, if ever, admits to engaging in edit-warring, assuming bad faith, disruptive editing, making personal attacks or ownership; it is only their opponents who do this, and they do it constantly. A diva is so rarely wrong that their extraordinary "specialness" means that no fault could possibly lie with them in a dispute.
Dealing with divas
Like trolls, divas crave attention, but whereas a troll is primarily destructive, divas appear to be productive contributors to the project—at least during times when they aren't storming off in a huff.
But unlike other productive contributors, divas use their productive contribution history as a weapon against other editors and are prone to gaming the system for their own glory. For divas, positive contribution is not an end unto itself, but rather a means of gaining clout and power. This clout becomes like a currency in content disputes: they can trade in some of their stored clout to get their way in disputes with lesser editors. This clout also gains them much needed validation during their frequent "retirements".
The best way to deal with divas is to ignore their tantrums. When divas storm off, let them go. If you beg them to stay, you perpetuate the cycle, guaranteeing that they will storm off again in a few months.
If you simply wish Divas well and let them leave, they will almost certainly come back, but with a better attitude. The diva who doesn't get validation will quickly realize that he or she is not more important than any other editor; that one single editor cannot break a project of such magnitude.
In some cases, the diva will stay retired, but the loss will be quickly filled by other editors who are not so high maintenance—editors for whom the goal is not self promotion and validation, but rather improvement of the project. Most final good byes from Misplaced Pages happen without much ado.
See also
- meatball:GoodBye
- Misplaced Pages:No vested contributors
- Misplaced Pages:What is a troll?
- Misplaced Pages:Retiring
- Misplaced Pages:You don't own Misplaced Pages
- Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages does not need you
- Misplaced Pages:You are not irreplaceable
- Misplaced Pages:Don't throw your toys out of the pram
- Narcissism
- {{Considering retirement}}
External links
- How I deal with flouncing
- Farhad Manjoo on the laws of the web: "People always...threaten to quit. They're bluffing."