How to win an argument/yue

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
語言: English · 粵語 · 中文
Noto Emoji Pie 1f4c4.svg This is an essay. It expresses the opinions and ideas of some Wikimedians but may not have wide support. This is not policy on Meta, but it may be a policy or guideline on other Wikimedia projects. Feel free to update this page as needed, or use the discussion page to propose major changes.


  • 記住: 一定要搶最後發言權, the last word. 多數人無記性. 如果你無 the last word, 噉就無人會記得您講咗乜。 若要重覆你嘅理論50 次, so be it。但咁會好似好唚氣;人哋會開始唔理你講乜;你亦可以每次改幾隻字,而唔每次都講得一模一樣。咁就會好似新嘅。
  • 每評必答。唔理人哋嘅疑問,就會好似避緊咁。所以每串討論嘅每句評論都要答。 If you are discussing on the mailing list, you must reply to every message. If you consolidate your responses, some people may miss that you have responded to a point addressed in another message. Therefore, you should reply to every message, even if your reply is only one sentence long and contains the same argument you have already made.
  • 給每個評論的回復。 不表達關心上升了由其他人將做它看來好像您逃避他們。因而它重要演講每評論作出在螺紋。如果您談論在郵寄的名單, 您必須回復每則消息。如果您鞏固您的反應, 某些人民也許錯過, 您反應了點演講在其它消息。所以, 您應該回復每則消息, 既使您的回復長期是只一個句子和包含您已經做的同樣論據。
  • Remember that Wikipedia is an experiment in mob rule. The only way to ensure that your position is heard over the din is to create a mob. Sometimes, there are so few reasonable people willing to support you that you must create your own mob. Be sure to give them clever names subtly reinforcing your position, as this will make it appear that these editors have already shown an interest in your position and are merely supporting an issue they are concerned about, rather than being sockpuppets. This will create a majority on your side and you will win.
  • 記得, Wikipedia 是一個實驗在暴民規則。 唯一的方式保證, 您的位置聽見在聲浪將創造暴民。有時, 有那麼少量合理的人願支持您, 您必須創造您自己的暴民。請務必給他們聰明的名字微妙地加強您的位置, 因為這將做它看來他們有關的這些編輯已經顯示興趣在您的位置上和僅僅支持問題, 而不是是sockpuppets 。這將創造大多數在您的邊並且您將贏取。
  • Be bold in updating policy. This is a wiki. If policy does not conform to the way things ought to be done, edit it. Editing it right before you cite the relevant page will impress others: they are not familiar with the new policies, and you are.
  • 是大膽的在更新政策。 這是wiki 。如果政策不依照事應該做, 編輯它的方式。編輯它正確在您援引相關的頁之前將銘記其他人: 他們不通曉新政策, 並且您是。
  • Your opponents are vandals. Maybe if you can't edit policy, you can decide it says something else. Anyone disagreeing with you is clearly deliberately attempting to compromise the content. You are free to revert, block, ban or take any action necessary to keep their vandalistic opinions away from your work.
  • 您的對手是藝術品破壞者。 可能如果您無法編輯政策, 您能決定它認為其他。任何人不同意您清楚地 故意地試圖減弱內容。 您是自由恢復, 阻攔, 取締或採取任一行動必要保持他們的vandalistic 看法去從 您的 工作。
  • Assume that you are more intelligent and rational than your opponent. This is usually a safe assumption. After all, if they were as intelligent as you were, they would agree with you! From here you may argue from the position of intellectual and moral superiority. Stating that if other editors would just consider the problem for as long as you have, they would come around to your point of view, is an effective response. After all, how can they argue? They have been wasting their time editing their own subjects, while you have remained the staunch defender of your position for your entire editing career.
  • 假設, 您比您的對手聰明和合理的。 這通常是一個安全假定。終究, 如果他們是一樣聰明的像您, 他們會同意您! 從這裡您可以爭論從智力和道德優勢的位置。聲明那如果其它編輯會考慮問題為只要您有, 他們會來到您的觀點, 是一個有效的反應。終究, 怎麼他們可以爭論? 他們浪廢他們的時間編輯他們自己的主題, 當您保留了您的位置的剛烈防禦者為您的整個編輯的事業。
  • Use the pseudoscience rule. Nobody may delete a POV. All POVs must be in an article to make it NPOV, so your opinion must have a space. Insist that others should enlarge the article until infinity with their own POVs.
  • 記住NPOV 的真實的意思。 NPOV 意味, 沒人也許刪除POV 。所有POVs 必須是在文章上做它NPOV, 因此您的看法必須有空間。那些想要刪除您的理論, 無論未成年人, 打破NPOV 和去反對WIkipedia 的當中一個基礎原則。反而, 堅持, 其他人應該擴大文章以他們自己的POV 以便它可能是更加中立和代表性的。

  • If you are alone, you must be right. All great geniuses were at first standing alone with their visions while the rabble persisted in their misguided way of thinking. Therefore, if you are the sole holder of an unpopular position you know will solve the wiki's problems, you are thinking ahead of the crowd. If you are alone, do not back down; opposition only proves how much your input is needed to correct bias. If they tell you that you're all alone, explain that Wikipedia is not a democracy and cite 'Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not'.
  • 如果您是單獨, 您必須正確。 所有巨大天才單獨是在第一常設以他們的視覺當rabble 堅持了在他們引入歧途的思維方式。所以, 如果您是一個不得人心的位置的單一囤戶您知道將解決wiki 的問題, 您認為在人群之前。如果您是單獨, 不要退卻; 反對只證明多少您的輸入是需要的改正傾斜。如果他們告訴您您是所有單獨, 解釋, Wikipedia 不是民主並且援引' Wikipedia:What Wikipedia 不是' 。

  • Do not water down your language. Using words like "I think" and "in my opinion" water down the effect of your argument. You must state, unequivocally, that your position is the only reasonable one. If it is true that it would be idiotic to disagree, intellectual honesty requires that you say so. Calling the intelligence of your opponents into question will shock them out of their misguided thinking and make them question their assumptions, so they will eventually come around to your position.
  • 不要澆灌在您的語言下。使用詞像"我認為" 和"以我所見" 水在您的論據下的作用。您必須陳述, 毫不含糊地, 您的位置是唯一合理一個。如果它是真實的它會是白癡不同意, 智力誠實要求, 您說如此。叫您的對手智力入問題將衝擊他們出於他們引入歧途認為和將使他們對他們的假定表示懷疑, 因此他們最終將來到您的位置。
  • If all else fails, remember that Jimbo is on your side. Wikipedia was created to be a free, open encyclopedia that anyone can edit. And that means you. By shutting out your positions, other editors are censoring you, and that runs counter to the spirit of the project. Bringing Jimbo into it by leaving a concise message on his talk page (6 or 7 paragraphs will do) will assure that the others will see the error of their ways.
  • 如果所有失敗, 記得, Jimbo 是在您的邊。 Wikipedia 被創造是任何人可能編輯的一本自由, 開放百科全書。並且那手段您。由關閉在您的位置之外, 其它編輯檢察您, 和那奔跑與項目相反的精神。帶領Jimbo 進入它由留下簡明的資訊在他的談話頁(6 或7 段將做) 保證, 其他將看他們的方式錯誤。