User:Pundit/Incivility or harassment

I recently heard from a friend and a wiki-veteran, whom I respect and value a lot, something that struck me: he insisted that even though we naturally have to fight harassment, we need to rather focus more on incivility. He reasoned, that just fighting harassment is not enough, and since harassment in his eyes is a subset of uncivil behavior, he believed that we basically need to enforce our policies on civility more.

Well, harassment indeed is listed as one of the forms of uncivil behavior in en-wiki policies, and also has a separate policy page, in a typically chaotic wiki manner. Is it really fully covered in incivility though? After giving it some thought, I think not, and I'd love to share my draft reflections in a table below. Comments are welcome :)

	harassing	not harassing
uncivil	You make comments that are not only rude, but also aimed at causing emotional distress through humiliation, demeaning, or embarrassing someone. In short, you're a massive jerk. Examples: You refer to someone's gender, race, orientation, country of origin, or otherwise stereotype someone. You want to hurt them. "If only you went to school, you stupid Pollock!" ,"Sweetie, shut up when adults speak!" Cover song: I don't know... Ride of the Valkyries from Apocalypse Now? (links to Youtube) Horst-Wessel-Lied goes too far, but what fits?	You make rude and harsh remarks. Your criticism is not constructive, even if it is not meant to make someone humiliated or embarrassed. You're basically very impolite. Examples: you use profanities. You suggest someone is stupid. You are unnecessarily critical and blunt. "You idiot!" "F*ck you!" Cover song: Shut your f*king face from South Park (links to YouTube, with an obvious advisory about profanities)
civil	You act in a seemingly polite or socially acceptable manner, that is aimed at causing emotional distress. Your behavior demeans, humiliates or embarrasses a person, even though you do not use profanities and cleverly follow the protocol. You often don't have to break it, as you can use your social power and position to your advantage. You act in a pattern: just one instance is often innocent enough, but all together they form harassment. Examples: You obsessively keep correcting someone's punctuation. You follow someone's every move to find their perceived mistakes (in a less or more mild version of cyberstalking). You mass delete someone's articles, because some of them contain bad references. "Let me politely point out that you appear to be utterly confused about this topic. I took the liberty of correcting your 345 grammar and 432 factual errors, notifying you about each and every one separately, so that I could create a better learning experience for you. You'll thank me later, have a great day!" Cover song: Every breath you take, The Police (links to Youtube)	You are mature enough to express your disagreement in a way that is constructive and does not discourage or distress others. You are able to use the theory of mind (a powerful Jedi trick!) and empathy to carry the discussion in a way that is aimed at a consensus. You seek the truth rather than victory, and you want to seek it with them, even if they initially don't think you're on the same side. Examples: You see that somebody is mistaken about a fact. You engage in a constructive discussion, exchange sources. You eagerly admit errors on your side, when there are any. You help the other person grow, reinforce their drive to knowledge. You lead to a situation in which they are more likely to contribute in the future, and follow your path. You are awesome! Cover song: New hope theme from Star Wars (links to Youtube)

For reference, on-wiki harassment is defined as:

a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons. Usually (but not always), the purpose is to make the target feel threatened or intimidated, and the outcome may be to make editing Wikipedia unpleasant for the target, to undermine, frighten, or discourage them from editing.

Incivility, on the other hand, is defined as:

personal attacks, rudeness and disrespectful comments. Especially when done in an aggressive manner, these often alienate editors and disrupt the project through unproductive stressors and conflict.

PS I link to en-wiki policies, and I know it results in a certain bias. Yet, I think that it is the easiest way to discuss the issue in English...