How to use in-sentence of “Good faith”:
+ Users who appear to be children changing pages in good faith who give out identifying personal information should be treated kindly and advised that giving out personal information is a bad idea and may be dangerous.
+ Article was created by an IP, and given we do have kind of a weak spot on articles related to Islam, I think we should Assume good Faith and not scare them away.
+ If an editor has “already shown” incompetence that causes disruption, no amount of good faith fixes this problem.
+ And to expand a little bit, I believe this right is necessary as there has been a significant increase in xwiki vandalism/LTAs that compromise the project, one in particular has done so much damage to a specific category of BLPs that most of the good faith reverts back to “good” versions are still reverts back to one of his hundreds of IP socks.
+ It’s a good faith edit, because supposedly there was a movie in 2005 with the above mentioned swear word as a title.
Example sentences of “Good faith”:
+ Any blocking based on the quality of articles made in good faith would be an abuse.
+ I've reverted to the edit immediately prior, although a lot of good faith edits in the meantime have been nullified by that.
+ A good faith editor would either stop and do something else when warned, or ask a question about why their edits were bad.
+ Any blocking based on the quality of articles made in good faith would be an abuse.
+ I’ve reverted to the edit immediately prior, although a lot of good faith edits in the meantime have been nullified by that.
+ A good faith editor would either stop and do something else when warned, or ask a question about why their edits were bad.
+ When I warned him that that was a misuse of rollback to undo good faith edits, he then proceeded to.
+ It could very well be cross-wiki promotion, looking at the similar-looking articles in Chinese and Japanese, but I am assuming good faith at the moment.
+ Please try to improve the article or make a good faith attempt to verify the citations in question before adding this template, and discuss the matter on the talk page.
+ It’s not transparent or kind to these ESL editors; they deserve that much for making long good faith edits.
+ If editors on a talk page suggest in good faith that you may have a conflict of interest, try to identify and minimize your biases, and consider withdrawing from editing the article.
+ He appears to be working with good faith and I believe anyone who is doing so should be treated with respect.
+ I would really like to assume good faith but this page makes me hard for me to do so.
+ Second problem would be it lacks the ability to distinguish good faith users from malicious ones.
+ All editors are expected to stick closely to these policies when creating and evaluating material, and to respect the good faith actions of others who edit content to ensure it complies with these policies.
+ Judging on behaviour elsewhere can be seen as one user is not assuming good faith in the new user, as well as insulting the new user saying “they are incapable of becoming a better editor”.
+ Assuming good faith also does not mean that no action by editors should be criticized, but instead that criticism should not be attributed to badness unless there is specific evidence of badness.
+ I have unblocked, as it was a good faith block, but a bad mentoring plan.
+ Saying that the other side in a conflict is not assuming good faith can be a form of not assuming good faith.