In Wikipedia competence is required. Good faith and willingness to help is not enough.

What competence is required?[edit]

Linguistic competence[edit]

First of all, anyone who wants to participate in English Wikipedia actively should know English sufficiently well. The sufficient level depends on the work being performed: in many cases it is possible to update images without knowing English at all, but one needs to know English rather well in order to write or significantly edit the articles. Ability to read and write in English well also helps to communicate and collaborate with other users.

It can also be necessary to know other languages, especially when trying to translate articles.

Users who want to improve their linguistic competence might wish to use resources provided in b:Subject:English language and b:Subject:Languages, or similar pages in other Wikibooks.

Subject matter competence[edit]

In order to write articles on some subject, one must be at least somewhat familiar with that subject. However, since writing articles (properly) is a rather good way to learn something new, this type of competence is relatively easy to develop.

Social competence[edit]

Wikipedia is a community project. It means that each user comparatively active in Wikipedia must be able to collaborate with other users.

It is especially important that each editor working in Wikipedia would be able to handle criticism well.

Users who want to improve their social competence might wish to use resources provided in b:Subject:Psychology.

Technical competence[edit]

Minimal technical competence is required simply in order to be able to put one's text in Wikipedia. In most cases such competence is sufficient. However, while writing articles, one might also need to have at least some understanding of MediaWiki syntax. Additional technical competence is required for writing templates, bots and the like.

Users who want to improve their technical competence might wish to use resources provided in Help:Contents or b:Subject:Computing, or to ask some questions in Wikipedia:Help desk.

Understanding the order in Wikipedia[edit]

In order to work in the Wikipedia successfully, one also has to have at least some understanding of the order in Wikipedia. In most cases, it is sufficient to understand, what can be easily guessed using common sense (for example, that it is not good to insult other users for no reason). It is also indicated by Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. But there are some cases when more understanding is necessary.

Understanding the order in Wikipedia is especially important when one is trying to explain it to someone else.

Users who want to improve their understanding of order in Wikipedia might wish to use resources provided in Wikipedia:A primer for newcomers, Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, Category:Wikipedia information pages or Category:Wikipedia essays, or to ask some questions in Wikipedia:Help desk.

Ability to reason and offer arguments[edit]

Users participating in discussions also have to demonstrate ability to reason and offer arguments. Otherwise the discussions would be pointless.

Users who want to improve such abilities might wish to use resources provided in b:Subject:Communication, b:Subject:Philosophy or b:Formal Logic.

Ability to choose a work one can do[edit]

Ability to choose a work one can do is also related to other competences. It can reduce (or even cancel) problems caused by limitations of other competences.

When competence is insufficient[edit]

Substitutes of competence[edit]

If the competence is somewhat insufficient, it can be partially substituted by humility and obedience. For example, a user who is not familiar with policies of Wikipedia can do pretty well while doing what more knowledgeable users tell him.

Unsuitable substitutes of competence[edit]

Good faith is not a substitute of competence (it is required in addition to competence, not instead of it). That's why assuming good faith is possible: if we can choose from assumption that a user is acting in bad faith and assumption that the user lacks some competence, we are to choose the second assumption. Such choice does not mean that it is not possible to protect Wikipedia from the damage made by such user.

Industriousness or productivity are not substitutes of competence either. On the contrary, a user who does more work in Wikipedia needs more competence.

What to do with the ones with insufficient competence?[edit]

Some editors do not have sufficient competence. What is to be done in such case? First of all, one should calmly and civilly point out the problems. In many cases that is sufficient to improve the competence. Yet exceptions also exist, especially when the user overestimates the competence.

If we are dealing with a serious insufficiency of competence that proved to be unimprovable using the normal means, one should remember that Wikipedia is not an educational institution and its goal is not the improvement of competencies of the editors at all costs. In such case the editor can be asked to leave editing Wikipedia to others.

See also[edit]

• Dunning–Kruger effect – the tendency for incompetent people to be unaware of their incompetence—and for highly skilled people to believe that people capable of their achievements are more numerous than they really are.
• Reasonable person
• Wikipedia:Encourage the newcomers
• Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope
• Wikipedia:Levels of competence
• Wikipedia:Randy in Boise – a class of incompetent editors
• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not therapy