Wikipedia:Canvassing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is considered a guideline on Wikipedia. It is generally accepted among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.

Shortcut: WP:CANVAS WP:CANVASS

For external advertising in article space, see Wikipedia:Spam.

Canvassing (also known as "internal spamming" and "cross-posting") is overtly soliciting the opinions of other Wikipedians on their talk pages, and it is controversial. However, it is agreed that disruptive canvassing, even if it seems to be within guidelines below, is never acceptable. On at least one occasion, a provocative attempt to stack an ongoing poll by cross-posting has contributed towards an Arbitration Committee ruling of disruptive behavior that resulted in probation and eventual banning by the community². (Canvassing also includes the use of a custom signature to automatically append some promotional message to every signed post.)

An arbitrator clarified the position: "Briefly, I think a reasonable amount of communication about issues is fine. Aggressive propaganda campaigns are not. The difference lies in the disruption involved. If what is happening is getting everyone upset then it is a problem. Often the dividing line is crossed when you are contacting a number of people who do not ordinarily edit the disputed article."

1 Types of canvassing
2 If you have canvassed
3 See also

[edit] Types of canvassing

	Scale		Message		Audience
Accepted¹	Limited posting	AND	Neutral	AND	Nonpartisan
	↕		↕		↕
Not accepted	Mass posting	OR	Partisan	OR	Partisan
Term	Excessive crossposting		Campaigning		Votestacking

Note 1: Messages that meet all of these criteria are friendly notices.

[edit] Votestacking

Votestacking is sending mass talk messages out to editors who are on the record with a specific opinion (such as via a userbox or other user categorization) and informing them of a current or upcoming vote. In the case of a re-consideration of a previous debate (such as a "no consensus" result on an AFD or CFD), it is similarly unacceptable to send mass talk messages to editors that expressed only a particular viewpoint on the previous debate, such as only "Keep" voters or only "Delete" voters.

[edit] Campaigning

A hard and fast rule does not exist with regard to selectively notifying certain editors who have or are thought to have a predetermined point of view on their talk pages in order to influence a vote. However, the greater the number of editors contacted, the more often this behavior is engaged in, and the greater the resulting disruption, the more likely it is that this behavior will result in warnings and/or sanctions. Some Wikipedians have suggested that informing editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who voted in a previous AfD on a given subject) may be acceptable.

The Arbitration Committee has ruled that "[t]he occasional light use of cross-posting to talk pages is part of Wikipedia's common practice. However, excessive cross-posting goes against current Wikipedia community norms. In a broader context, it is unwiki. "¹. Wikipedia editors are therefore not to engage in aggressive cross-posting in order to influence votes, discussions, requests for adminship, requests for comment, etc.

[edit] Friendly notice

It is sometimes acceptable to contact a limited group of editors with regard to a specific issue as long as it does not become disruptive. This is more acceptable if they have made an unsolicited request to be kept informed, and absolutely unacceptable if they have asked you to stop.

[edit] Forum shopping

Leaving messages on multiple administrators' talk pages to attempt to get a second or third opinion on an administrative decision is usually deemed "internal spam" or "forum shopping" and can be blockable. The proper venue for such discussions is the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.

[edit] If you have canvassed

The following guidelines for cross-posting have wide acceptance among Wikipedians:

Clean up your mess. For example, after engaging in cross-posting to promote some vote, be sure to remove those cross-posts after it is over.
Be open. Don't make cross-posts that initially appear to be individual messages.
Be polite. Wikiquette issues are extra-important when a message is likely to be read by many people.
Avoid redundancy. Rather than copying the same five page essay to twenty talk pages, write it once, in the place where it is most relevant, and then link to it.
Don't use a bot. If you're not willing to spend the time personally sending the messages, don't force us to spend the time reading it (or throwing it away). Also note that running bots without authorization is almost guaranteed to get its (and your) account(s) blocked.
Don't attempt to sway consensus by encouraging participation in a discussion by people that you already know have a certain point of view.

There are often better alternatives to canvassing. For example, suppose you've written a cool new article, and you want lots of people to read it. Simply add links to it from other encyclopedia articles, where it is relevant, and also add it to appropriate categories. This increases the exposure of your article, while simultaneously benefiting the encyclopedia, without annoying your fellow contributors.