User talk:Erakura/Archives/2019/December

Request for help
I've been kind of off-again, on-again editing the wiki for quite some time now, though I started back in 2007. Most of my work involves reverting vandalism, RC patrol, and smaller copyedits to articles. I reverted a change at the page HESA Karrar made by the editor behind the following IPs (I assume these are all the same person, anyway):

I came across the edit on Recent changes -- I don't have any specific knowledge of the article's subject. However, I decided that the change was most likely vandalism, so I reverted. I assumed good faith and didn't place a warning (perhaps this was an error on my part.) They came back and re-removed the content with the summary "Why is the false information being put back?". I reverted again and warned the second IP on their talk page, asking them to seek consensus on the article's talk page before removing content that way, especially if it's already referenced; and if they have information disputing the existing content, they should present it. They have reverted a third time now, and I'm going hands off to avoid violating 3RR. There is enough doubt in my mind about whether this truly qualifies as vandalism/blanking to push things any further. So I want a second opinion perhaps from someone who knows more than I do.

Am I in the wrong here -- did I go too far in reverting these changes, and perhaps there was an alternative way I could have handled the situation better? I enjoy fighting vandalism, and I am always looking to learn more so that I'm being helpful rather than making mistakes and causing un-needed problems. Thank you in advance! [Erakura|talk ⁄ edits] 21:30, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I'd call those edits "vandalism", but the content is sourced, and if there are sources disputing that account, they haven't been presented. I'll restore it and leave a note on the article's talk page. There the issue should be discussed. Huon (talk) 22:51, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Sir John Slade, 1st Baronet
Sorry you had to become involved in the developing edit war. Unfortunately for the unregistered user, who seems to be switching between different IP addresses, the subject of the article is essentially universally described in relevant scholarship as being incompetent as a general commanding cavalry. There is an almost inexhaustible supply of impeccable references in the corpus of military and biographical history to that effect. A Wikipedia article should reflect the balance of available scholarship, above all. I'm unsure what the unregistered user wants to achieve, at present he or she is merely pushing me to root out more citations as to Slade's perceived performance as a cavalry commander and the low opinion he was held in by both superiors and inferiors alike. Probably not the intention. Urselius (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy notification: ANI discussion
Hi, thank you very much for your AIV report. An ANI discussion has been opened about the issue at Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Feel free to comment. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:07, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:STiki!

 * I noticed you've undergone a username change. See the above note about username changes. If you'd like your previous contributions to be credited to your new name, please drop me a note over at WP:STiki. Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 02:50, 31 December 2019 (UTC)