[WikiEN-l] Re: 1729

[Charles Matthews]

Timwi wrote

> Charles Matthews wrote:
>
> > I wrote
> >
> >>I have intervened in the endless 1729 edit war, splitting the page into
> >>three. Now [[1729 (number)]] and [[1729 (anecdote)]] are protected,
since
> >>[[User:Wik]] is reverting again.
> >
> > Well, Wik nominated me for de-admin on the strength of this.
>
> It appears that you protected a page on which you were involved in an
> edit war yourself. This is generally considered abuse of sysop power. Do
> not do this again if you don't want to appear [[Wikipedia:Requests for
> de-adminship]] again ;-)

Yes, some broad-minded people have been explaining that.  If the definition
of 'edit war' is drawn up so rigorously as to include what I did, I quite
see why some reasonable people do feel that way.  My side is that others in
an edit war had created a Gordian knot.  I was immediately attacked by both
sides in that war; given the personalities I assumed I had done something
right; but perhaps I was in the wrong nonetheless, and their private battle
should have been left to run its course.  I saw no reason to be bounced by a
de-admin request/hassle-and-hustle user page barrage pincer movement, but
today I'm unwinding this as best I can.

Charles