Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about writing
|This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.|
Wikipedia is not about writing a perfect set of rules in Wikipediaspace, or meta or Commons, for that matter. We are here to write an encyclopedia.
Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy.
Wikipedia is not a battleground.
Disruptive editing – too many edits
Disruptive editing can occur on an article or project page if the number and rate of edits being made to a particular section or to the whole page are such that the current state of the section or page becomes unclear to the degree that editors observing the editing (via a watchlist rather than engaging in the flurry of edits) would be confused. This form of disruptive editing may occur during a brief period of time, or over a protracted period. If the rate of editing is excessive, then it may be considered that disruption has and will continue to occur. Usually in these cases it becomes necessary that a request to have the page protected from editing is made.
If the form of a particular section or page “yo-yo’s” back and forth over longer periods of time, even months or longer, such that no clear consensus can form as to the composition and the direction of the page, then this is quite likely to be the result of disruptive editing. Other methods to solve the dispute will be necessary, since page protection is not applicable. The next step is likely to be to sponsor an Rfc on the section, or a series of Rfc’s and so on.
(For some background, see here From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Disrupting a talk page
There are various “talk pages” and various ways in which a talk page may come to be disrupted. On the most formal of talk pages, that is at Arbcom, or Mediation, or such places, an agreed moderator is given the responsibility to enforce editing decorum, as per well-specified ground rules. At a busy Arbcom page, a number of clerks will be necessary, especially as the proposed decisions come to be passed and a motion to close must be scrutinized and enacted per form. Notice-boards such as AN/I are not, at present, moderated.
User talk pages are generally considered as to be “moderated” by the user, that is the user is usually given precedence in archiving, blanking or otherwise refactoring the user talk page. These restrictions apply; a user ought not to blank an important template, such as a block or unblock template during the current course of those events. Reverting a user’s edits on their user talk page may be considered as poor form, and coming to the page of a blocked user, or any user, to make uncivil or unhelpful posts is not recommended.
On article talk pages, the form, content and direction of the article should be discussed. References ought to be accumulated for comparison purposes if necessary on the talk page. Discussion unrelated to the particular article ought to be kept to a minimum. TLDR posts, off=topic posts, re=hashes of matters that are currently considered quite finalized due to recent consensus, and debating points which ignore completely WP’s policiea or even worse, principles, or those posts which are obviously in ignorance of settled discussions easily available in the archives, ought to be strongly discouraged, and may be archived, removed or otherwise refactored quickly if taking that action will aid the talk page discussion to progress.
In article talk space, in Wikipedia talk space, and template or Portal talk etc., or at Rfc, Rfa, and so forth, a page may become disrupted if incivility breaks out between two editors or two groups of editors. If posts are not kept in separate sections, if adequate headers and sub-headers are not used, or if too many posts are made or replied to so as to “clog” the page and the edit history, the formation of an informed and valid consensus may be impeded, and so disruptive editing may be needing to be addressed here. Sometimes, the failure to archive a page properly or often enough makes contribution difficult, particularly for editors whose connection to the internet is narrow band. Sometimes a mass over-excitation may occur on the page or in larger spheres of the wiki, or disruption seem to occur because ït is full moon. Then, it is time to “put the salad bowl away”.