User talk:Jokkmokks-Goran/Archives/2012/June

Please read WP:BRD. I quote, "the BRD cycle does not contain another "R" after the "D". Discussion and a move toward consensus must occur before starting the cycle again. If one skips the Discussion part, then restoring your edit is a hostile act of edit warring and is not only uncollaborative, but can get you into trouble." Up to now, you have ranted, raged and reverted. I would like to work in a collaborative manner and I await for you to discuss your individual proposed amendments before introducing radical changes to the paragraph.
Best Wishes AnkhMorpork (talk) 22:50, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

1RR

You have broken 1RR at Battle of Bint Jbeil.Please revert yourself.--Shrike (talk) 04:14, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Shrike, can you explain to the editor how they have broken 1RR ? It's unclear. To me it looks like an edit followed by a revert. Can you provide a diff that shows the version of the article being reverted to for the first edit ? Sean.hoyland - talk 04:34, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Change of any text is considered a revert see WP:3RR.--Shrike (talk) 04:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

We talking about this edit[1]--Shrike (talk) 04:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

No, it usually isn't. 1RR is to prevent edit warring. It's not a tool to be used to prevent people from editing articles. If something has been in an article for a long time and someone changes it, it's just a routine edit. Who was the editor edit warring with in their first edit ? Sean.hoyland - talk 05:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Then you should initiate a change for definition of revert the policy is quite clear.

If the policy is quite clear to you, go through AnkhMorpork's edits and file a 1RR report for every instance that matches your criteria, cases where an editor has made 2 changes to the existing content an article within 24 hours separated by another editor's edit. You will find a huge number of instances like this in the topic area because they are routine. 1RR is about edit warring. Unless you can show that an editor is edit warring they aren't edit warring. Who was the editor edit warring with in their first edit ? Sean.hoyland - talk 05:29, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure who is right. I did not consider my first edit as a revert as it "reverted" a change that apparently was made 2 months ago. I will not revert in this case (since I would only re-revert again outside the time limit) but I will be more careful in the future. In stead of technicalities I think we should concentrate on the real issue. The Islamic Resistance is the official name of the armed wing of Hezbollah. I see no reason not to use this name. Israel is trying to blur the line between combatants and non-combatants.

Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 07:40, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Jokkmokks-Goran, since Shrike ignored what I said and filed a 1RR report against you anyway without notifying you (despite notifying an editor being mandatory per the instructions at WP:AN3), I am notifying you now. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Jokkmokks-Goran_reported_by_User:Shrike_.28Result:_No_violation.29, and of course there was no violation. Sean.hoyland - talk 07:43, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Apparently you didn't break 1RR so I take my words back.Though I still may ask clarification from ARBCOM about revert restriction in the area.--Shrike (talk) 19:16, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jokkmokks-Goran. You have new messages at Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Battle_of_Ayta_ash-Shab.
Message added 12:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shrike (talk) 12:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you should post your opinion on the noticeboard you can do it in the thread that I have started.--Shrike (talk) 09:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)