Misplaced Pages:Three-revert rule: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 21:44, 4 April 2009 editIRP (talk \| contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers23,649 editsm Revert; I'll put it on a different page← 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
(45 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			#REDIRECT ]
	{{policy\|WP:3RR\|WP:TRR\|WP:3-RR}}
	{{nutshell\|]ring is harmful. A contributor who ] the same page, in whole or in part, more than three times in 24 hours, except in ], may be ] from editing.}}

			{{Rcat shell\|
	:''To report a violation, see ]''.
			{{R to section}}

			{{R with Wikidata item}}
	{{behavioral policy list}}
			}}

	The '''three-revert rule''' (often referred to as '''3RR''') is:

	:''Contributors must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period, whether or not the edits involve the same material, except in ]''.

	The rule is a ] designed to prevent ] and encourage ].

	Users violating the rule may be ] for up to 24 hours for the first offense. Administrators tend to issue longer blocks for repeated or aggravated violations, and will consider other factors, such as ] when doing so. Administrators decide whether to issue a block. Where multiple editors violate the rule, administrators should consider all sides.

	Report violations of the rule at ]. While a warning is not required, before reporting a violation consider posting a <tt>{{]}}</tt> template message on the talk page of an editor who may not be aware that edit warring is prohibited.

	== Application of the rule ==

	A "page" is any page on Misplaced Pages, including talk and project space. A revert is any action, including administrative actions, that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part. A series of consecutive saved revert edits by one user with no intervening edits by another user counts as one revert. (This differs from the definition of "]" used elsewhere in the project.)

	The rule applies per person, not per account; reverts made by ] count together. The rule applies per page; reverts spread across multiple pages so that an editor does not revert a single page more than three times do not violate the rule (but may indicate ]).

	The rule does not entitle editors to revert a page three times each day. Administrators may still block disruptive editors for edit warring who do not violate the rule.

	==Exceptions==

	Since the rule is intended to prevent ], reverts which are clearly not edit warring 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 breach the rule.

	The following actions are exceptions to the three-revert rule, and do not count as reverts under the rule's definition. Since edit warring is harmful, these exceptions define narrow situations.

	* Reverting your own actions ("self-reverting").
	* Reverting '''obvious''' ] – edits which any well-intentioned user would immediately agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding cruel or offensive language. Legitimate content changes, adding or removing tags, edits against consensus, and similar actions are not exempt. Administrators should ] persistent vandals and ] pages subject to vandalism from many users, rather than repeatedly reverting. However, non-administrators may have to revert vandalism repeatedly before administrators can respond.
	* Reverting actions performed by ].
	* Reverting the addition of ] or content that unquestionably violates ].
	* Reverting the addition of links to content that is clearly illegal, such as ] and ].
	* Reverting the addition of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced controversial material which violates the policy on ]. What counts as exempt under BLP can be controversial. Consider reporting to ] instead of relying on this exemption.
	* <span id="Exception_for_user_page_and_user_subpages" />Reverting edits to your own ], provided that doing so does not restore copyright or non-free content criteria violations, libelous material or biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons.

	However, even such actions may be controversial or considered ]. 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 preferable to reverting. Similarly, blocking or page protection will often be preferable in case of repeated addition of copyrighted material.

	==Not an entitlement==

	The three-revert rule limits ]. It does not entitle users to revert a page three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique. Disruptive editors who do not violate the rule may still receive a ] for edit warring, especially if they attempt to ] by reverting a page. Administrators take previous blocks for edit warring into account, and may block users solely for disruptive edit warring.

	The bottom line: ''use common sense, and do not participate in edit wars.'' Rather than reverting repeatedly, discuss the matter with others; if a revert is necessary, another editor may do it, which will demonstrate a ] for the action. ] rather than becoming part of the dispute by reverting.

	==Avoiding three-revert rule violations==

	]

	Editors who find themselves on the verge of a three-revert rule violation have several options to avoid engaging in such an ]. These options include discussing the subject on the page's talk page, requesting a ] or ], or one of the many other methods of ].

	Editors may wish to adopt a policy of reverting only edits covered by the ] listed above; see ].

	If you break the three-revert rule by mistake, or if another user informs you that you have, reverse your most recent reversion of the page, restoring the version you reverted, even though you may not like that version. Administrators may decide not to block in such cases, unless the incident forms part of more persistent edit warring.

	==See also==

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

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

	{{Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines}}

	]
	]

	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]
	]

Latest revision as of 04:05, 10 September 2023

Redirect to:

Misplaced Pages:Edit warring#The three-revert rule

This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:

To a section: This is a redirect from a topic that does not have its own page to a section of a page on the subject. For redirects to embedded anchors on a page, use {{R to anchor}} instead.

From a cross-project redirect: This is a redirect from a title linked to an item on Wikidata. The Wikidata item linked to this page is Misplaced Pages:Three-revert rule (Q4656567).
- Use this template only on hard redirects – for soft redirects use {{Soft redirect with Wikidata item}}.

When appropriate, protection levels are automatically sensed, described and categorized.