User talk:187.17.52.174

Keating

See WP:BRD. Your change is disputed so it is now incumbent upon you to get a consensus on the article's talk page. Timeshift (talk) 02:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I think you have mistaken an essay for a policy. It's first of all incumbent on you to explain why you dispute the edit. You do not have the right to simply revert edits because you don't like them. 187.17.52.174 (talk) 02:18, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps you'd like to utilize the talkpage? Or not. Timeshift (talk) 02:31, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure. But if you are the kind of person who thinks "disagree" is an adequate edit summary for a revert then it seems unlikely that you'll be much use in a discussion. 187.17.52.174 (talk) 02:34, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Since when is a talkpage discussion about just two editors? Timeshift (talk) 02:38, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Who said it was? 187.17.52.174 (talk) 02:41, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Was that not the premise of your previous comment? Timeshift (talk) 02:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

No. 187.17.52.174 (talk) 02:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for edit warring, as you did at Paul Keating. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

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.

The full report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:187.17.52.174 reported by User:Skyring (Result: Blocked). EdJohnston (talk) 04:03, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

• EdJohnston, I may have beaten you to the block--for 12 hours. Hope you don't mind; I tweaked the template a bit. IP, you can't edit war even if you're right. Drmies (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

But people are entirely free to just revert without giving a sensible reason or engaging in the discussion that they demanded. Indeed, I am familiar with the rules, both written and unwritten. 187.17.52.174 (talk) 04:10, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Apart from WP:BRD, it seems. --Pete (talk) 04:14, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

And when did essays become rules? Or were you in fact just unfamiliar with the difference? 187.17.52.174 (talk) 04:17, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, WP:3RR is certainly not just an essay. Johnny338 (talk) 04:24, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Same with WP:CIV. Timeshift (talk) 04:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

It's the way we do things. Seems to work quite well. Why not register an account and resume discussion when able? --Pete (talk) 04:25, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

You all behaved abominably, and the only reason the IP got blocked and you all didn't is that they were worse. But tag-teaming and reverting just for the sake of reverting, thinking (correctly, I guess) that you can get away with it because the other party is just an IP, yeah, that's pretty despicable. IP, you were essentially correct with your edit, and you were correct in your assessment of how editors treat others, but you just can't continue an edit war in this way. You have my sympathy. Drmies (talk) 04:27, 18 June 2014 (UTC)