Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Logged-in users will also see a "Revert" link for versions other than the current one. Click on a Revert link to make the change. If the image is at Wikimedia Commons you must click through to the image page there to do the revert. Then scroll down to the thumbnails. Beside the thumbnail you wish there will be the word "Revert".
A reversion is an edit, or part of an edit, that completely reverses a prior edit, restoring at least part of an article to what it was before the prior edit.
Another case where the re-revert may be necessary is when an incumbent editor reverts without justification in the edit summary, which is a form WP:Status quo stonewalling. But see WP:QUO . Sometimes bold, revert, revert may function as a form of bold, refine (see above), particularly among editors who already have a positive working relationship.
There is a long-simmering issue when dealing with 1RR, namely there is no policy that covers what a revert is. WP:REVERT which defines a revert as reversing a prior edit or undoing the effects of one or more edits, which typically results in the article being restored to a version that existed sometime previously. is an essay, and Help:Revert, which is an information page, uses undoing or ...
The Bold, Revert, Revert, Revert cycle (BRRR) is a proactive strategy for winning edit wars. It is a cross between gaming the system process, the " ignore all rules " excuse , and mutual assured destruction .
Incidentally, I assume when you say "revert", you mean "undo", because the software isn't smart enough to identify any other kid of reversion. If there were really interest in getting rid of impulsive reversions, I would start by eliminating the undo button (leaving the rollback button, strictly for use against vandalism). The undo button ...
Wikipedia:What editors mean when they say you have to follow BRD is a completely different thing, and what people usually mean already is in the formal policies (specifically WP:EW and WP:EPTALK). Also, the reason this isn't a policy is because experienced editors rejected it.
WP:3RR says that you're allowed to revert vandalism, sockpuppetry, and several other things, without regard to the three-revert rule. That's true. That's true. That doesn't mean, however, that it's always a good idea to do so, nor that such reverts can never be disruptive .