Cool Hand Luke writes:
If your edits really are the editorially correct thing for the article, it should be no problem to get someone else to revert with you. Thus only the allegedly irrational party of an edit war will break the 3RR, but not the supposedly NPOV editors do.
Nice theory. But in practice this is simply false. Most of our articles have very few people who actively edit on them or who are even qualified to even edit them. Sure, hundreds of people do edits on [[God]] or [[Prophet]]. But how many people can recognize vandalism or abuse on [[Process philosophy]], [[Conservative responsa]] or esoteric math and physics articles?
In practice very often we cannot easilly get someone else to help us revert or edit, at least not for a few days. I've asked for help on articles, only to have other editors say "I don't know enough about the topic; I can't do anything." JayJG points out this same issue.
Again, I am not saying that we should throw away the 3+ revert rule, or any other rule. But we DO NOT blindly enforce Wikipedia rules with 'bots. Sysops are supposedly human beings with some amount of common sense. Let's see some evidence of this. If I want to be part of 'bot community, I'll play Doom 3 in single-player mode.
Robert (RK)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com