Misplaced Pages

:Three-revert rule: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:44, 20 June 2007 editDreftymac (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,939 edits →Exceptions: add footnote to keep this item from getting bloated with additional exceptions to the exceptions← Previous edit Latest revision as of 04:05, 10 September 2023 edit undoGrumpylawnchair (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers5,449 edits Undid revision 1174703418 by 2601:205:457C:3920:F19A:D27F:4B2B:3BBB (talk) Reverting unexplained content removalTags: New redirect Undo 
(331 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
⚫ #REDIRECT ]
:''To report a violation, see ]''.
{{policy|]<br/>]}}
{{policy in a nutshell|]ring is harmful. Wikipedians who revert a page in whole or in part more than three times in 24 hours, except in certain special circumstances, are likely to be ] from editing.}}
{{Policylist Behavioral}}


{{Rcat shell|
The '''three-revert rule''' (often referred to as '''3RR''') is a policy that applies to all ]s, and is intended to prevent ]:
{{R to section}}

{{R with Wikidata item}}
:An editor '''must not''' perform more than three ], ''in whole or in part'', on a single page within a 24-hour period. A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time.
}}

Any editor who breaches the rule may be ] for up to 24 hours in the first instance, and longer for repeated or aggravated violations.

The rule applies per editor. The use of ] is not a legitimate way to avoid this limit, and reverts by multiple accounts are counted as reverts made by one editor. The rule otherwise applies to all editors individually.

The rule applies per page. For example, if an editor performs three reverts on each of two articles within 24 hours, that editor's six reversions do not constitute a violation of this rule, although it may well indicate that the editor is ].

The rule does not convey an entitlement to revert three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique; rather, the rule is an "]".<ref name="electric fence">See ]</ref> Editors may still be ] ''even if they have not made more than three reverts in any given 24 hour period'', if their behavior is clearly disruptive. This particularly applies to editors who persistently make three reverts each day, or three reverts on each of a group of pages, in an apparent effort to ]. Many administrators give less leniency to users who have been blocked before, and may block such users for any disruptive edit warring, even if they do not exceed three reverts on a page in 24 hours. Similarly, editors who may have technically violated the 3RR may not be blocked, depending on circumstances.

The bottom line: use common sense, and do not participate in edit wars. Rather than reverting multiple times, discuss the matter with other editors. If an action really needs reverting that much, somebody else will probably do it &mdash; and that will serve the vital purpose of showing that ] over which course of action is preferable. Engaging in ] or ] is often preferred over reverting. Apparent breaches of the rule, including instances of edit warring, may be reported at ].

==What is a revert?==

A ], in this context, means undoing, ''in whole or in part'', the actions of another editor or of other editors. This can include undoing edits to a page, undoing ] (sometimes called "move warring"), undoing ] (sometimes called "]"), or recreating a page.

An editor does not have to perform ''the same'' revert on a page more than three times to breach this rule; all reverts made by an editor on a particular page within a 24 hour period are counted.

Note that consecutive reverts by one editor are often treated as one revert for the purposes of this rule.

==Exceptions==

Since the rule is intended to prevent edit warring, reverts which are clearly not such will not breach the rule. Since edit warring ], exceptions to the rule will be construed narrowly.

Since reverting in this context means undoing the actions of another editor or editors, reverting your own actions ("self-reverting") will not violate the rule.

There are other instances where multiple reverts may not constitute a breach of this policy:

* reverts to remove ''']''', such as graffiti or page blanking -- this exception applies ''only'' to the most simple and obvious vandalism, the kind that is immediately apparent to anyone reviewing the last edit. It is not sufficient if the vandalism is simply apparent to those contributing to the article, those familiar with the subject matter, or those removing the vandalism itself. (For other, less obvious forms of vandalism, please see ] or ]);
* reverts to remove clear violations of the ] or ] policies;
* reverts to remove clearly ], or unsourced or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons (see ]);
* reverts to undo actions performed by ] or ] evading their block; and
* reverts done by a user within his or her own ], provided that such reverts do not restore copyright violations, libelous material, ] violations, or other kinds of ] enumerated in this policy or elsewhere.<ref>See e.g., ] regarding non-free content used outside WP main article space.</ref>

Any of these actions may still be controversial; thus, it is only in the clearest cases that they will be considered exceptions to the rule. '''When in doubt, do not revert'''; instead, engage in ] or ask for ].

Note that in the case of vandalism, ] editors who have engaged in vandalism or ] the page in question will often be better than reverting. Similarly, blocking or page protection will often be preferable in the case of repeated addition of copyrighted material.

==Enforcement==

Editors who violate the three-revert rule may be ] for up to 24 hours, or longer in the case of a repeated violation. Many administrators use escalating block lengths for users with prior violations, and tend to consider other factors, like edit warring on multiple pages or incivility, when assigning a block. In the cases where multiple editors violate the rule, administrators should treat all sides equally.

Additionally, the rule is enforced by:

* Educating editors who may not be aware of good Misplaced Pages practice in the matter
* Peer pressure and leadership by example (see ] and ])

Apparent breaches of the rule may be reported at ].

==I have violated 3RR. What do I do?==

If you have broken 3RR by mistake and now realize it, or if another user has left you a note on your talk page that points out that you broke 3RR, then you should '']'' your change back to the "other version," even though you may not like the previous version. In general, this should be enough to prevent you from being blocked, although there are no guarantees. If you seem to be the ''only'' person who feels that the article should be the way that you have made it, perhaps it is better the way everyone else thinks it should be.

==Notes==
{{reflist}}

==See also==

{{Spoken Misplaced Pages|Misplaced Pages - Three-revert rule.ogg|2005-04-10}}

*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]
*]

]

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
⚫ ]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 04:05, 10 September 2023

Redirect to:

This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect: When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.