If ArbCom would be damaged by people opening [[WP:DICK]] labeling cases, it certainly wouldn't be helped by people opening facepalming cases.
Be it namecalling or implication of rude gestures, these are both civil issues and both need attention.
At the same time, I feel the {{facepalm}} template can be (as I often see) used effectively without directing it at another individual, usually as in "oh I can't believe I just said/did that".
And re: the Star Trek stuff, I think the most credit we can give Star Trek (if even this) is coining the phrase (if they in fact did). It's found throughout common American culture predating Star Trek.
Bob
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Scott MacDonald <doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com
wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l- bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Risker Sent: 04 October 2011 18:25 To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
So perhaps a better focus of discussion would be "how to deal with editors who are unable to or unwilling to understand project guidelines and policies". It seems that the primary use of this template is by editors expressing frustration at the inability, despite their best efforts, to address this issue.
Risker/Anne
But 'facepalming' them in (even legitimate) frustration at their evident obtuseness is, like calling someone a WP:DICK, unlikely to improve their behaviour, whilst it encourages people to use the same facepalm in situations where the recipient is a good faith editor, and the inference that they are being obtuse is unhelpful and uncivil/inflammatory.
Anyway, templates are always poor substitutes for actual communication, particularly in situations where tempers are apt to fray, and miscommunications are more than likely.
Scott
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l