Many people know that if someone reverts an article more than three times in 24 hours (3RR), they may be blocked to prevent edit warring. But did you know that:
Although reverts on different articles do not count towards the limit, different reverts on the same article do count. So if you revert Paragraph A twice and Paragraph B twice in 24 hours, you have made four reverts and may be blocked.
If you revert three times, wait for 24 hours and start reverting again, you may be blocked for 'gaming' the rule. The three-revert rule is an electric fence, not an entitlement.
Although you cannot be blocked for repeatedly reverting vandalism, many Wikipedians mistake edits for vandalism when they are not. For example, edits that do not respect the neutral point of view policy are not vandalism.
The easiest way to avoid being blocked for reverting is to revert as little as possible and discuss with your fellow editors instead. Some editors limit themselves to one or no reverts a day. Select categories on Wikipedia are limited to 1RR (one revert rule). Those articles will have an edit notice to apprise you of their special status. For 1RR you may only revert one edit in the entire category per 24-hours.
Neologisms are words and terms that have recently been "coined" and generally do not appear in any dictionary. Avoid using neologisms when creating articles on Wikipedia unless they are part of the subject being covered and need to be explained; in such a case, be sure to define the new words! Neologisms include words made up on the spot and these should never be used in a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia relies on established English to explain its subjects. It is important that every word in Wikipedia can be understood by those who read it. This ensures that Wikipedia always conveys accessible and meaningful knowledge.
A tag has been placed on Template:Animal pov requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.[edit]
Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 08:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I'm Ral315, editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost. It appears that you have not edited in at least a few months. To avoid spamming your talk page any further, should you be on leave, your name has been removed from the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to continue receiving the Signpost on your talk page, please leave a note on my talk page to that effect, and I will restore your name, and keep you on the list indefinitely. Ral315 (talk) 07:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Boogster! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.
Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.