It's not a "manual geomorphological modification implement", or an "individual tactical entrenchment excavator".

To call a spade a spade is to describe something clearly and directly. Rather than using oblique and obfuscating language, just "tell it like it is".

Users too often cite policies, like our policy against personal attacks and our policy against incivility, not to protect themselves from personal attacks, but to protect their edits from review.

Although editors who consistently engage in disruptive editing are disruptive editors, and editors who consistently vandalize are vandals, there is still a requirement for editors to be reasonably civil to each other. But being civil should not be confused with being friendly or courteous, let alone charitable or credulous.

It's OK to let others know when you think they're acting inappropriately, but a bit of politeness and tact while doing so will get them to listen more readily. One can be honest and direct about another editor's behaviour or edits without resorting to name-calling or attacks. Discuss troubling edits, in reasonable terms, on that article's discussion page. If the behaviour of a user remains troublesome, use the dispute resolution process. When referring to a particular bad edit, it is always best to include a diff.

See also[edit]

• Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade, arguing that excessive bluntness can escalate disputes
• Wikipedia:Our social policies are not a suicide pact
• Wikipedia:Avoid the word "vandal"
• Wikipedia:Discuss cruft
• Wikipedia:Don't call the kettle black
• Wikipedia:Duck test
• Wikipedia:Give 'em enough rope
• Wikipedia:You can't squeeze blood from a turnip