[WikiEN-l] Re: 3RR policy change

[JAY JG]

>From: Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: 3RR policy change
>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 05:58:16 -0700

>
>Never hurts to correct a typo while reverting, but its still a revert.
>
>Fred
>
> > From: "JAY JG" <jayjg at hotmail.com>
> > Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 07:26:32 -0500
> > To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> > Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Re: 3RR policy change
> >
> > My question is, what about editors who revert while simultaneously (and
> > deliberately) making non-trivial changes, so they can claim their edits 
>were
> > not a delete at all?
> >
> > Jay.

The issue that I'm talking about is when an editor does a significant 
re-work of part of an article (say, re-wording or adding a number of 
sentences) while simultaneously reverting other parts of the article, in 
order to do a revert while being able to claim that they are doing 
substantive edits.

Jay.