All,
A couple of users have begun edit warring to remove some text in [[WP:3RR]], namely:
* "Reverting in this context means undoing the work of another editor. It does not necessarily mean going back into the page history to revert to a previous version. The passage you keep adding or deleting may be as little as a few words, or in some cases, just one word."; and * The portion of the policy that stipulates that partial reverts count as much as whole reverts. Others' input is appreciated.
K
Wait until they breach 3RR and then block them for a couple of hours to cool off.
On 2/21/06, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
Wait until they breach 3RR and then block them for a couple of hours to cool off.
If they're successful in changing policy, then they won't be able to be blocked. ;-)
Jay.
On 2/21/06, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/21/06, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
Wait until they breach 3RR and then block them for a couple of hours to cool off.
If they're successful in changing policy, then they won't be able to be blocked. ;-)
Sneaky POV-pushers that we are, we revert their edits and *then* block them. Hah!
Tony Sidaway wrote:
On 2/21/06, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/21/06, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
Wait until they breach 3RR and then block them for a couple of hours to cool off.
If they're successful in changing policy, then they won't be able to be blocked. ;-)
Sneaky POV-pushers that we are, we revert their edits and *then* block them. Hah!
Hah! That is what I have seen others do often to get people blocked and change an article to their consensus! Wait... how did you know how to do that?
I'm surprised it was even called an edit-war. Perhaps, everybody who joined in actually became a part of that edit-war, and everybody should be blocked. Hah!
I don't try to game the system to not get blocked. However, I'm against any block on any users. Understand the difference. It's open content, but it is also a work in progress for an encyclopedia.
I fear that consensus on what is appropriate knowledge is easily influenced by policies like this. The 3RR needs attention to avoid such, as the likely-hood of a thwarted consensus is even implied in the laughter above.
I'm just a wiki-peon that finds it hard to find those that want to help create a neutral point of view. Instead, I find those that want to compete for views.
Jonathan
To my recollection I haven't used 3RR for nearly a year. If someone is editing like a dick, it's usually easy enough to block them for disruption.
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:55:03 +0000, you wrote:
To my recollection I haven't used 3RR for nearly a year. If someone is editing like a dick, it's usually easy enough to block them for disruption.
This is fair comment: 3RR is diagnostic of disruption, but far from being the only such diagnostic. On the other hand, not everybody has your level of confidence in their own judgment, so 3RR is a worthwhile policy as giving a good indication that blocking a given dick will not be viewed as contentious. Guy (JzG)
Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 02:55:03 +0000, you wrote:
To my recollection I haven't used 3RR for nearly a year. If someone is editing like a dick, it's usually easy enough to block them for disruption.
This is fair comment: 3RR is diagnostic of disruption, but far from being the only such diagnostic. On the other hand, not everybody has your level of confidence in their own judgment, so 3RR is a worthwhile policy as giving a good indication that blocking a given dick will not be viewed as contentious. Guy (JzG)
It does seem like a fair comment. The 3RR page still needs attention. It has become a sole article to edit to attempt to update the needs the surrond the issues related to 3RR. I must implore to this audience that the page needs to be kept very simple. It appears there needs to be a page for vandal related reversions, as part of the policy against vandalism has crept on anybody that just reverts even with the best of good-faith edits. The page is just complex in its attempts to handle multiple situations. In the process to keep it simple, lets split the page into vandal related reverts and another to handle non-vandal related reverts. It's a step.