→1RR: new section |
|||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
It sure looks like you've broken the one-revert rule with your latest on [[Ghouta chemical attack]], as you reverted VM less than 24 hours ago. Care to self-revert? -[[User:Kudzu1|Kudzu1]] ([[User talk:Kudzu1|talk]]) 15:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
It sure looks like you've broken the one-revert rule with your latest on [[Ghouta chemical attack]], as you reverted VM less than 24 hours ago. Care to self-revert? -[[User:Kudzu1|Kudzu1]] ([[User talk:Kudzu1|talk]]) 15:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
||
:No. The principles involved are more important to resolve than any potential violation of 1RR. I could have waited a couple hours to avoid it. But that wouldn't be right. I would rather take {{ping|Volunteer Marek}}'s suggestion and go to WP:AE rather than a technical 1RR complaint. And I prefer for someone else to do the filing. I would love to see someone actually argue against the points I have made on the talk page. [[User:Mnnlaxer|Mnnlaxer]] ([[User talk:Mnnlaxer#top|talk]]) 15:20, 5 June 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:21, 5 June 2015
John A Rizzo
Please excuse my intrusion into your space. I am inviting you to comment on John A. Rizzo here [1]. Thank you. Glennconti (talk) 23:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Ghouta chemical attacks and Volunteer Marek
Before addressing content issues about Ghouta chemical attack, I have to give a bit of history. I was reading the lead to Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and saw a statement I thought deserved a Citation Needed tag. diff @Volunteer Marek: believed that the intro section didn't need citations if the same statement was later sourced in the text. I showed him that was wrong User_talk:Volunteer_Marek#Lead_section_citations and he thankfully added citations that improved the article. Great.
However, immediately after this episode, Volunteer Marek decided he needed to patrol the Ghouta chemical attack article, which I have recently made lots of edits to and that he'd never edited before. He then accused another editor of edit warring (Talk:Ghouta_chemical_attack#Edit_warring_on_a_1RR_restricted_article), which was not upheld (Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Erlbaeko), and things went downhill from there (Talk:Ghouta_chemical_attack#False_flag_motivation_-_actual_content_of_edit_war). On to content! Mnnlaxer (talk) 20:58, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
1RR
It sure looks like you've broken the one-revert rule with your latest on Ghouta chemical attack, as you reverted VM less than 24 hours ago. Care to self-revert? -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:04, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
- No. The principles involved are more important to resolve than any potential violation of 1RR. I could have waited a couple hours to avoid it. But that wouldn't be right. I would rather take @Volunteer Marek:'s suggestion and go to WP:AE rather than a technical 1RR complaint. And I prefer for someone else to do the filing. I would love to see someone actually argue against the points I have made on the talk page. Mnnlaxer (talk) 15:20, 5 June 2015 (UTC)