While the community as a whole does make Wikipedia policy, gaming the system by engaging in actions which technically break no explicit rule while engaging in a pattern of behavior which violates broad Wikipedia policies may meet with a common sense reaction by administrators. If you take the matter to arbitration you may find the Arbcom awarding a commendation to the administrator and a lengthy ban to you.
Edit warring, failure to communicate with other editors about controversial edits and repeated violations of NPOV policy will weigh much heavier in the scale than the minor technical violations of blocking policy.
Fred
From: Nicholas Knight nknight@runawaynet.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 07:09:33 -0800 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Illegitimate block.
David Gerard wrote:
I fear admin consensus appears to be against you on this one, that you do not in fact have some sort of ironclad right to four reverts in 24h 1m, and that admins will in fact apply the "is this person taking the piss?" test.
Last I checked, admins had no special authority to decide Wikipedia policy, and admin consensus was irrelevant next to community consensus. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l