Check out all of Lir's edits in Christopher Columbus and her comments in Talk:Christopher Columbus.

Zoe

 Toby Bartels <toby+wikipedia@math.ucr.edu> wrote:

Zoe wrote:

>Toby wrote:

>>Ed Poor wrote:

>>>Should I go back,
>>>say, 15 edits ago (to yesterday's "clean" version) and edit that? I can't
>>>figure out whether that's bending over to accommodate anti-social behavior
>>>-- or that's anti-social in itself.

>>[Yes.]

>So what do you do when you've gone back 15 edits, reverted to a clean version,
>incorporated all of the "good" changes that have happened since then, and the
>original perpetrator then comes along and adds his/her "bad" changes again?
>How long are you supposed to keep doing that?

So that I can understand better where you're coming from,
is there an article whose history I should look at
where you've had bad experience with uncooperative editors?

BTW, I don't think that you should feel obligated,
when dealing with a demonstrably recalicitrant person,
to seek out the good edits and keep them in your reversion.
You should only need to do that, IMO,
when dealing with somebody that (so far at least)
appears to be acting in good faith,
but has nevertheless made some bad edits that require reversion.

Of course, if I disagree with you about whether the person is recalcitrant,
then *I* can seek out the good edits. But I wouldn't insist that you must,
so long as you are acting in good faith (which you, Zoe, do).


-- Toby
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l