This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Peterzor (talk | contribs) at 07:31, 19 May 2013 (Undid revision 555756083 by Peterzor (talk)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 07:31, 19 May 2013 by Peterzor (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 555756083 by Peterzor (talk))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Edit waring
Editors who engage in edit warring are liable to be blocked from editing to prevent further disruption. While any edit warring may lead to sanctions, there is a bright-line rule called the three-revert rule (3RR), the violation of which often leads to a block. The three-revert rule states:
An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert. Violations of the rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as an edit-warring violation.Moxy (talk) 16:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
- We have an informal process that most follow when there is a dispute about content as outlined at Misplaced Pages:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Please come to the talk page. You may have noticed I agree with one of your edits and would like you to join the talk page on the matter over getting blocked. You may have noticed that I had restored the article to its original version before the content dispute despite agreeing with a portion of your edit - this is because there is a debate about that term thus the article should remain as it was till it is all worked out.Moxy (talk) 18:33, 17 May 2013 (UTC)