User talk:Northmeister/Archive23102

=SPECIAL ARCHIVE 23102UNBLAB=

Note: Discussion pertaining to block made of 3RR that I contested because I did not make 3 reverts at Anchor Baby - Which is an ongoing dispute over my attempt to make that article NPOV. Although I did not revert three times and believe the block unjustified - I accepted that edit warring should stop and that the page before last reversion should remain until discussion complete. That is my word given and it shall be kept. --Northmeister 02:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Discussion below.

FROM (talk)

Anchor Baby
- You wrote: ''I have warned you for multiple reversions in violation of WP:3RR. Reverted your last edit instead of blocking you, as you did not have a warning in your talk page. If the editwar continues, editors may be blocked and/or the article may end up protected until editors can find common ground.'' ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC) -   - ::What are you specifically talking about? I've not come close to violating this - and if your going to accuse - please be specific as to how this accusation is true. I've reverted once, due to vandalism. That's moot right now. The other edits are word changes period. I need specifics as to how this warning is appropriate? --Northmeister 00:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC) -   - :::Your recent response on the anchor baby talk page is not specific. I made three edits within the 24 hour period. One - to revert what I consider vandalism. Two - to make corrections concerning the concerns on the talk page. Three - to correct something I missed on edit two. The last two are not reverts. If your going to accuse me of something - then have good reason to do so. I want to know specifically how I violated or am even close to violating the three revert rule. PLEAS LET ME KNOW. HOW? --Northmeister 00:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

FROM Northmeister Talk:

WP:3RR Warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 00:24, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Anytime an editor or user is engaging in a revert war it's appropriate to remind them that reverts are not a productive editing strategy, except in actual cases of vandalism. The {3RR} tag is usually given out when an editor seems about to violate the rule, not just after. Posting a warning is a prerequisite before an editor can be blocked for violating the 3RR. Experienced editors do no need to be warned again. Jossi was doing you a favor by posting the 3RR warning tag.

As for the actual reverts: [. That's a bunch of reverts, even spread out over more than 24 hours, involving three other editors. I suggest less reverting and more discussing. [[Special:Contributions/Will_Beback| ·:· ]]Will Beback ·:· 01:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * First revert diff
 * Second revert diff
 * Third revert diff
 * Fourth revert diff
 * Fitft revert diff

You have been blocked from editing for in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

unblock I did not revert three times in 24 hours as the actual diffs show. This is a false accusation and the block was applied by the accuser who made the false claim.

You were edit warring, and by taking a look at your blocklog, you should have known better. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I am editing. Whether an edit war exists is not my fault alone. I did NOT REVERT THREE TIMES and I HAVE BEEN BLOCK on FALSE CHARGES. MY PAST HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT - that itself was based on the actions of another user and I WAS UNBLOCKED for similar reasons. You should unblock me and apologize. I will not let this rest. This is an outrage and I will seek a redress of my grievances for this violation of POLICY. --Northmeister 01:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Based on the numbered diffs above, it does look like you were engaged in edit warring. If unblocked, would you be willing to stop edit warring and discuss your proposed changes on the talk page instead? &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 01:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not the only person involved here thus this 'edit war' does not belong on my shoulders as that was never my intention in the first place. Also, I did not revert three times in 24 hours. I would not do this out of respect for Wikipedia rules - having learned this long ago with the WP:OR debate and being advised by Flonight and Charles Matthews and guided by them. Jossi blocking me for the 3RR reason (which is false) is unjustified. I am sure that editor felt they were doing the right thing - but I was in violation of nothing. However, out of respect for yourself, I will abide by your admonition and not revert (even though I never reverted three times) anything more there. Instead I will engage on the talk page only to address my concerns over NPOV and to remove the personal attack agaisnt myself. That is my personal promise to you. This stuff is awful, I'm the victim of a personal attack through the 'parable' stuff and I get blocked for something I did not do. Again, my word is always gold - that you can bank on - and I am an old soul that values honor. I'll simply state my case on the talk page - and move on. It's not worth my time with the insults thrown my way through satirical parables or nought. Thank You for addressing my concerns and if you could - could you address the personal attack or insult made my way at that talk page see parable in the proper fashion and remove the insult? To Jossi below: I will revert my last reversion; which was revert two. I do not understand why you posted the warning and blocked me. I was not in violation. If you had concerns, I would of been more than willing to hear them and address them with you. Again, I did not violate 3RR. --Northmeister 01:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Carl. If user agrees to stop edit warring and self reverts his last edit, I would not oppose to unblocking. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll unblock based on the above. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 02:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No objections from my side, despite the fact that the user was edit warring. Hopefully edit warring will cease, otherwise the article may be protected and editors that edit war, blocked. Thanks Carl. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Jossi: I'll admit to 'edit warring' - although that was not my intention. I'll take this recent experience as a lesson learned about 'edit wars' and what they are composed of. Thanks Carl for understanding. Jossi - My IP seems also blocked. Could you unblock that too or is that automatic? --Northmeister 02:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I will remove the autoblock. Try in a few minutes. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Should be OK now. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:36, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I reverted myself on your suggestion. I also took out the personal insult through the parable. - Sorry about this headache - never intended. The best, --Northmeister 02:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)