rdfs:comment
| - The purpose of this policy is to prevent edit warring, which is considered disruptive to the normal editing process. It is not a license to make three reverts on a page every day, but is rather an "electric fence" to stop warring. Making four reverts to a page within a time period just longer than 24 hours can also be considered a violation of this rule. Users that provide large explanations in edit summaries may still be blocked. Disruptive warring using means other than reverting is also covered under this policy; this includes deletion, restoration, uploading, protection, and blocking.
|
abstract
| - The purpose of this policy is to prevent edit warring, which is considered disruptive to the normal editing process. It is not a license to make three reverts on a page every day, but is rather an "electric fence" to stop warring. Making four reverts to a page within a time period just longer than 24 hours can also be considered a violation of this rule. Users that provide large explanations in edit summaries may still be blocked. Disruptive warring using means other than reverting is also covered under this policy; this includes deletion, restoration, uploading, protection, and blocking. In the following cases, exceptions can be made to this policy to permit reversion as often as needed:
* Blatant vandalism, such as page blanking. ("The electromagnetic sword is for tards.")
* Copyright violations. A good example is the Knowledge Base, although there are exceptions.
* Obviously libellous material. More controversial facts should be debated on the article's talk page.
* Personal attacks with no purpose whatsoever. "u stupid noob go to hell & get off dis wiki" has less value than "No offence, but you wouldn't be a very good administrator". Violators are generally blocked for 12 hours. Administrators can block for other periods of time as they see fit, particularly for repeat offenders. If the reverts were under good faith, the offenders should be warned before taking action against their accounts.
|