Changes

Engaging in [[civil discourse]] means having thoughtful and respectful conversations - even when there are fundamental or other disagreements. It involves employing [[listening skills]] such as active listening, speaking/writing [[empathy|empathetically]] and respectfully, and focusing on the issue at hand rather than off topic, extraneous references, [[spam]] and personal attacks.<ref>For example, a discussion on economy or interest rates should not devolve into a discussion of Russian flush toilets.</ref> Civil discourse helps build mutual understanding and also promotes productive dialogue.

Engaging in [[civil discourse]] means having thoughtful and respectful conversations - even when there are fundamental or other disagreements. It involves employing [[listening skills]] such as active listening, speaking/writing [[empathy|empathetically]] and respectfully, and focusing on the issue at hand rather than off topic, extraneous references, [[spam]] and personal attacks.<ref>For example, a discussion on economy or interest rates should not devolve into a discussion of Russian flush toilets.</ref> Civil discourse helps build mutual understanding and also promotes productive dialogue.

* You must be civil. No bullying. Incivility and personal attacks should be replaced with the {{[[Template:personal remark removed|personal remark removed]]}} template. Conservapedia Administrators as well need to interact with others according to the same standards of civility we ask of editors.

* You must be civil. No bullying. No threatening other editors. Incivility and personal attacks should be replaced with the {{[[Template:personal remark removed|personal remark removed]]}} template. Conservapedia Administrators as well need to interact with others according to the same standards of civility we ask of editors.

* For content disputes, be reasonable and make every effort to use an article's talk page to have a cordial and constructive dialogue. Stick to the facts and avoid extraneous and impertinent arguments. Back up your facts with a source or sources. If you are proposing alternative content in a content dispute, it must be sourced. Do not engage in personal attacks. Do not put User names in subheadings to gang up on an editor or hold up to ridicule. Avoid excess verbiage. Avoid bringing up irrelevant past disputes with editors and stick to the content dispute at hand. If you have a content dispute with another editor, do not immediately post to the other editor's personal talk page. The article talk pages is where the vast majority of discussion should take place. Avoid unnecessary content disputes by sourcing your article content.  

* For content disputes, be reasonable and make every effort to use an article's talk page to have a cordial and constructive dialogue. Stick to the facts and avoid extraneous and impertinent arguments. Back up your facts with a source or sources. If you are proposing alternative content in a content dispute, it must be sourced. Do not engage in personal attacks. Do not put User names in subheadings to gang up on an editor or hold up to ridicule. Avoid excess verbiage. Avoid bringing up irrelevant past disputes with editors and stick to the content dispute at hand. If you have a content dispute with another editor, do not immediately post to the other editor's personal talk page. The article talk pages is where the vast majority of discussion should take place. Avoid unnecessary content disputes by sourcing your article content.  

* There is a difference between intellectual discourse, and attacking someone for what they believe.  Wikipedia condones bullying and mob rule, we don’t.

* There is a difference between intellectual discourse, and attacking someone for what they believe.  Wikipedia condones bullying and mob rule, we don’t.