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.
From: Nicholas Knight <nknight(a)runawaynet.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 07:09:33 -0800
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)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?"
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