User talk:LtFury/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:LtFury. 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.

Archive 1

Re: Your WP:AIV submission

Howdy! I wanted to report to you that IP 71.162.85.88 has been temporarily blocked. However, the reason in question isn't vandalism. Vandalism is specifically defined as intentionally disruptive behavior, which you COULD construe this as, sure, but there's a more obvious problem that was afoot - edit warring. See, this user was in dire, repeated violation of the three-revert rule, which is a bright-line rule that provides a standard for judging whether certain behavior is edit-warring. You can edit-war without violating 3RR, of course, but violating 3RR is considered edit-warring, unless it's in one of the specific exceptions (see link). Remember, 3RR isn't about who's right or who's wrong. It's about discouraging and curbing a severely non-constructive behavior. You can be completely in the right on an issue and still violate 3RR (unless, again, it's one of the listed exceptions). If you run into a problem like this again, you can report it at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Just be sure to provide links to the three initial reverts as well as the subsequent revert that's in violation. Take a look at some example posts there and you'll get the idea very quickly. Don't let this discourage you from reporting something to AIV if you're in doubt though. It doesn't hurt anything. Anyway, in future, if someone is about to violate 3RR, you can warn them in advance with a {{uw-3rr}} template on their talk page. I hope this helps illuminate a few things. I apologize if you already know some of this and I've come across as condescending, but I figure it's better to assume inexperience and help inform people than it is to assume experience and risk not telling someone something that'll help them. Anyway, now you know a proper channel for dealing with that kind of thing (as well as a rules pitfall to avoid yourself!). Normally I wouldn't have blocked this user for such a thing if they weren't warned in advance, but their activities went wayyyyyy beyond just putting a single toe over the line, if you get what I mean. If you have any questions, drop me a line! - Vianello (Talk) 19:51, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

thank you i will do next time thx. LtFury♣(talk) 20:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010

You have been blocked from editing for a short time to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:13, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Just to be clear, the one and only exception to the policy on edit warring is reverting blatant vandalism, which is edits done deliberately to harm Wikipedia, which was not the case here. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

LtFury (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I just was trying to keep a page clean form a bad source that a user was posting was trying to do a editing war i was just cleaning up. I'm am sorry if this wasn't the right way to do it then.

Decline reason:

Only the most recent request (see below) is reviewed. Sandstein 07:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I'd just like to point out that, as that other mentioned to me in their unblock request, it is impossible for one user to edit war, it takes a minimum of two. So if you thought hey were trying to start an edit war, going ahead and engaging in it with them was absolutely the wrong answer. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:07, 13 March 2010 (UTC)