Wikipedia talk:Edit warring/Archives/2023/May
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Edit warring. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Reverting after recent consensus
What happens if members of a WikiProject collectively revert additions of specific content to an article after an RfC/consensus to no longer include that content? The content being added isn't disputed as such, but per the RfC it's deemed to no longer be verifiable and doesn't adhere to WP:CRYSTAL.
The consensus at said WikiProject was reached this week (short version: professional boxing matches should only be added to record tables until after they have taken place), but new events in the sport have prompted IPs and users alike to scramble to add the content – specifically to Errol Spence Jr. and Terence Crawford – (Personal attack removed) even with clear edit summaries explaining why those additions are now deprecated.
Going forward, the same thing will happen at other boxing articles whenever new fights are announced. Bear in mind, professional boxing is not a seasonal sport and is famously fickle with so-called scheduled events. That's the reason the Project made the bold decision to do away with adding future fights to record tables. Unfortunately, it now means a teething period where editors unfamiliar with the consensus are baffled – and annoyed – about the change. Everyone had their chance to pipe up at the RfC, so any dissenters missed the boat as far as we're concerned.
With that said, it's not feasible to request PP for any articles affected because it's IPs and users alike who make the same edits. I also don't think it's feasible to report anyone to AIN because it would be the same report every time. So, where we do stand? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2023 (UTC)