Forum:Edit warring prevention policy: Difference between revisions

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:


Thoughts? --[[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revanvolatrelundar]] 15:26, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
Thoughts? --[[User:Revanvolatrelundar|Revanvolatrelundar]] 15:26, January 6, 2011 (UTC)
:Generally behind you on this.  Think something like [[wikipedia:wikipedia:3RR|Wikipedia's 3-revert-rule]] makes sense.  I think it's a bit harsh to say that edit warring is present after just one reversion.  Somewhere in the 3-5 range is clear evidence of a "war".  And there does have to be a time limit on it.  If you revert something I do, but I don't notice until a week later, it would hardly be a "war" for me to revert your reversion then.  A time frame of anywhere between 12 and 72 hours seems a fair enough suggestion of a "war". So a good, basic rule would run along the lines of
::'''If you revert an article [3 to 5 times] within [12 to 72 hours] then you will be blocked for [a period of time, depending on the number of offenses] to cool down a bit.''' '''[[User:CzechOut|<span style="background:blue;color:white">Czech</span><span style="background:red;color:white">Out</span>]]'''  [[User talk:CzechOut|☎]] | [[Special:Contributions/CzechOut|<font size="+1">✍</font>]] 15:44, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:44, 6 January 2011

IndexPanopticon → Edit warring prevention policy
Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.


I think it is time that the wikia created a new policy for edit warring that has been recently plaguing this wikia. I propose the following policy to prevent constant edit revertion that swamps the activity page:

Once a user's edit is reverted and a reason has been provided, then the topic must be discussed and voted for on the talk page instead of a big revertion war. Those who do not follow this could then face blocking after a warning from an admin.

Thoughts? --Revanvolatrelundar 15:26, January 6, 2011 (UTC)

Generally behind you on this. Think something like Wikipedia's 3-revert-rule makes sense. I think it's a bit harsh to say that edit warring is present after just one reversion. Somewhere in the 3-5 range is clear evidence of a "war". And there does have to be a time limit on it. If you revert something I do, but I don't notice until a week later, it would hardly be a "war" for me to revert your reversion then. A time frame of anywhere between 12 and 72 hours seems a fair enough suggestion of a "war". So a good, basic rule would run along the lines of
If you revert an article [3 to 5 times] within [12 to 72 hours] then you will be blocked for [a period of time, depending on the number of offenses] to cool down a bit. CzechOut | 15:44, January 6, 2011 (UTC)