Wikipedia talk:Edit warring/Archives/2011/March

Should we add exemption for sandbox page?
I think we should add exemption of 3RR in sandbox page.Why??? because that page is oftenly used for experiment,and has very high risk about edit warring...... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpson H (talk • contribs) 10:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I think most admins will be savvy enough not to block for mere tests that happen to revert each other. And as it is possible (but please don't) for someone to actually get into a disruptive edit war in the sandbox, I don't think an exemption is a good idea. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * An exemption might mean that an individual or two could "hog" the page by reverting anything anyone else might place upon it - although they might eventually be warned/sanctioned for disruption, they could discourage a number of other users before action is taken. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

another editor/other editors Plural or singular?
Do you mind can I ask a question please. I am somewhat confused by the singular and plural in the rule: "Other editors" sounds plural to me, including any edits which affect existing text: e.g. if someone comes to the same article at 9:00AM amends a ref from editor X from 2005, at 1:00pm returns and changes wording in a line from editor Y from 2008, and at 8:00pm deletes and substitutes a more relevant reference from editor Z from 2004 that he/she has broken the 3RR? Sorry the example might sound somewhat contrived, it's theoretical. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 14:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * "A revert means undoing the actions of another editor(singular)."
 * "Undoing another editor's (singular) work — whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert."
 * "A "revert" means any edit (or administrative action) that reverses the actions of other editors,(plural)"
 * All the reverts you have mentioned would normally count toward the three-revert limit. Whether 'editor' or 'editors' is used in the policy is not significant for the meaning. EdJohnston (talk) 21:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)