--- Abe Sokolov <sokolov47(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm not apologizing. My protection of the page was
justified. It received support beforehand and I have
since noticed that it has been defended.
BTW, this comment on the mailing list by Jimmy Wales
seems to support my action: "Sysops should generally
not edit a page that has been protected due to
a dispute, whether or not they were involved in the
edit war to start
with. I say "generally not" because of course there
can be
exceptions, for example rolling back to a version
before the edit war
might be useful in some cases, or attempting a
one-shot temporary
compromise."
Cp of what I put on Erik page
:Sorry 172. But what you did was neither reverting to
a version *previous* to the edit war (which was 51
edits ago
[
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Catholicism&oldid=1178359])
nor an attempt in compromise in any way (since it just
consisted in reverting all the other editor edits).
What you did was not following these two guidelines
Jimbo mentionned. Don't try to mislead us here please.
We can all make mistakes from time to time. Especially
in an edit war with heated spirits. That is no big
deal in the end.[[user:Anthere]]
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com