User:Netscott/3RR report gaming

From this version of WP:AN/3RR:

User:Netscott reported by User:Jayjg (Result:1 week)
Three revert rule violation on. :


 * Previous version reverted to: 14:35, 24 August 2006


 * 1st revert: 14:47, 24 August 2006
 * 2nd revert: 15:49, 24 August 2006
 * 3rd revert: 14:56, 24 August 2006
 * 4th revert: 15:53, 24 August 2006
 * 5th revert: 16:01, 24 August 2006

Three revert rule warning diff from before this report was filed here (if applicable) :
 * 16:10, 24 August 2006

Time report made: 16:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments: Reverting, in this context, means undoing the actions of another editor or other editors in whole or part. It does not necessarily mean taking a previous version from history and editing that. A revert may involve as little as adding or deleting a few words or even one word (or punctuation mark). Even if you are making other changes at the same time, continually undoing other editors' work counts as reverting. "Complex partial reverts" refer to reverts that remove or re-add only some of the disputed material while adding new material at the same time, which is often done in an effort to disguise the reverting. This type of edit counts toward 3RR, regardless of the editor's intention.
 * Netscott doesn't like an image in an article, and is gaming the 3RR rule to deprecate it in various ways. His first two reverts are straightforward, adding text to the caption. The third makes it invisible, the fourth marks it as "original research", and the fifth adds slightly different wording to the caption, but meaning the same thing. Quoting from WP:3RR:
 * The editor is insistent that he will not revert himself. . Jayjg (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * As I already stated to User:Jayjg I'll not be editing further today on this article. Please reveiw these diffs carefully... and please inform me if they do constitue a breach of 3RR. I beg to differ. (→ Netscott ) 17:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a clear 3RR violation. The policy makes clear that repeated undoing of another editor's work counts toward a 3RR violation, as was explained in the warning you received. You're attempting to game the system, and you ignored the warnings and turned down the chance to revert yourself. SlimVirgin (talk)  17:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * SlimVirgin, there's only two editors who've been undoing another editor's work more than three times here (and you falsely labeled one of your reverts a "rvv"). (→ Netscott ) 17:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I made numerous efforts to resolve this lack of observation of NPOV policy. How is citing what an image's source claims about the image "deprecating" it? (→ Netscott ) 17:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, well your continued claim that this violates NPOV, despite your refusal to cite the actual section of policy violated, in no way vitiates your violation of 3RR, and refusal to undo that violation. Jayjg (talk) 22:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I honestly do not believe that I've violated 3RR here. What's up with the out of order time stamps in your report here by the way? (→ Netscott ) 23:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm adding for the record that Netscott has been blocked six times in five months by several different admins. If I'd known, I wouldn't have wasted my time leaving warnings. This user is a clear system gamer. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Blocked for a week - can't believe that he only got 12hrs for all these rpt tranzgressions.Blnguyen | rant-line 01:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)