Ive been trying unsuccessfully to keep the recent changes list from looking lik this: HectorRodriguez's reversion of VeryVerily's additions to [[mass murder]], RickK's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversions, HectorRodriguez's reversions of VeryVerily's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversion, RickK's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversions of VeryVerily's reversions of HectorRodriguez's of [[Manuel Noriega]], [[Panama]], [[History of Panama]], [[Communist Party of France]], [[Saddam Hussein]], [[mass murder]], and countless other articles.
In effect, RickK and VV have been automatically (and arbitrarily) reverting every single edit by Hector, subjecting him to a policy of auto revert reserved only for hard-banned trolls - a recipe for edit wars. On a positive note, RickK showed signs of agreeing to change his tactics in a recent edit to the Saddam page, which addressed content issues without the ad hominems. VV, however, still feels no need to defend his edits with counter-arguments backed up by factual evidence on the talk pages. He calls Hector a vandal, which he feels is sufficient reason to delete any edit by this user. When I try to give him advice for avoiding edit wars, he attacks me incessantly and refuses to contemplate his own biases.
Someone else has to put a stop to these silly ideological proxy battles. I keep on failing to steer the discussion toward content issues.
See my comments on [[Talk:Saddam Hussein]], [[Talk:Manuel Noriega]], and [[Talk:Mass murder]] for further details.
User:172
_________________________________________________________________ Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
This matter is partially before the arbitration committee with respect to RickK. I question whether anything can be done with respect to this sort of situation (which you, 172, and I have also sometimes been in). There is at present no rule regarding reversions, however extensive, simply a proposed rule of 3. Likewise advocacy of a right or left wing cultural and political point of view is common among a number of Wikipedia editors including ourselves. I fear that to a certain extent this is simply monkey see, monkey do.
I suggest that the solution to the general problem is to made an actually enforceable rule regarding repeated reversions. An additional issue is to insist that an article which falls along a left-right cultural and political spectrum include material which authentically sets forth both viewpoints.
Fred
From: "Abe Sokolov" abesokolov@hotmail.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:53:20 +0000 To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Hector vs. VV/RickK proxy flame wars
Ive been trying unsuccessfully to keep the recent changes list from looking lik this: HectorRodriguez's reversion of VeryVerily's additions to [[mass murder]], RickK's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversions, HectorRodriguez's reversions of VeryVerily's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversion, RickK's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversions of VeryVerily's reversions of HectorRodriguez's of [[Manuel Noriega]], [[Panama]], [[History of Panama]], [[Communist Party of France]], [[Saddam Hussein]], [[mass murder]], and countless other articles.
In effect, RickK and VV have been automatically (and arbitrarily) reverting every single edit by Hector, subjecting him to a policy of auto revert reserved only for hard-banned trolls - a recipe for edit wars. On a positive note, RickK showed signs of agreeing to change his tactics in a recent edit to the Saddam page, which addressed content issues without the ad hominems. VV, however, still feels no need to defend his edits with counter-arguments backed up by factual evidence on the talk pages. He calls Hector a vandal, which he feels is sufficient reason to delete any edit by this user. When I try to give him advice for avoiding edit wars, he attacks me incessantly and refuses to contemplate his own biases.
Someone else has to put a stop to these silly ideological proxy battles. I keep on failing to steer the discussion toward content issues.
See my comments on [[Talk:Saddam Hussein]], [[Talk:Manuel Noriega]], and [[Talk:Mass murder]] for further details.
User:172
Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Fred Bauder wrote
An additional issue is to
insist that an article which falls along a left-right cultural and political spectrum include material which authentically sets forth both viewpoints.
My observation is that disputed articles are typically badly written (as well); that is, neglected as articles in the point-scoring. This can be deplored by everyone. 'Balance' is a journalistic concept. Not in itself a recipe for quality.
Charles
This is not true, as I've repeatedly said, and you are hardly one to be impartial on the subject, since you're one of the biggest POV-inserters on all of Wikipedia. As I have said, again and again, there were several HectorRodriguez edits which I did not revert, because they were not POV insertions. But when he goes on and on about the evils of the US in so many edits, without putting anything in context and without any substatiation, then of course he's going to be reverted. I mean, come on, are we really supposed to believe that the only reason why millions of Cambodians died is because of Western oppression?
RickK
Abe Sokolov abesokolov@hotmail.com wrote: In effect, RickK and VV have been automatically (and arbitrarily) reverting every single edit by Hector, subjecting him to a policy of auto revert reserved only for hard-banned trolls - a recipe for edit wars. On a positive note, RickK showed signs of agreeing to change his tactics in a recent edit to the Saddam page, which addressed content issues without the ad hominems.
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want.