http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress&a...
By the way, this user is also a sysop, but should this make a difference? This is a serious question.
Is he? He fails to appear on [[Wikipedia:List_of_administrators]] or [[Special:Listadmins]].
Allan Crossman wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress&a...
By the way, this user is also a sysop, but should this make a difference? This is a serious question.
Is he? He fails to appear on [[Wikipedia:List_of_administrators]] or [[Special:Listadmins]].
I'd somehow associated this user's behaviour as that of a sysop. Apologies. Was Vandalism_in_progress the correct place to report users in revert wars? (As far as I remember I checked the 3RR policy and it referred me to the VIP section for this). Whether or not they did break the 3RR, I'd expect there's a penalty for censoring the VIP article.
Speaking of the 3RR. I notice different sysops are interpreting this rule differently. Some sysops have defined terms such as a "simple revert" or a "complex revert", where complex reverts are simple reverts but with additional editing. Is this a widely adopted definition of reverts now? I think the "complex revert" is a reasonable extrapolation, but I think it's important to ensure it is adequately defined, as it may be possible to define any edit as a "complex revert" otherwise.
Regards, Edmund
I'd somehow associated this user's behaviour as that of a sysop. Apologies. Was Vandalism_in_progress the correct place to report users in revert wars?
No reverting isn't vandalism. VIP is busy enough just dealing with straightfowards George Busher is a wanker type vandalism.
Theresa
I agree. Labeling it vandalism seems to give many users an excuse to be drawn into revert wars. Unless it's simple vandalism (inserting profanity, making the article ungrammatical, blanking it, patent nonsense, ect), no one should violate the 3RR. Many folk have a much broader definition of vandalism than simple vandalism, and if apprised of this they should be blocked like other violators. Besides, it doesn't accomplish anything and impedes resolution.
No reverting isn't vandalism. VIP is busy enough just dealing with straightfowards George Busher is a wanker type vandalism.
Theresa
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l