Wikipedia talk:Edit warring/Archives/2017/June

For 3/1/0RR, is it "one revert" to revert one edit, or to make one edit that counts as a reversion?

If one editor makes a bunch of small edits and I revert them all at once, have I made one revert or a bunch? What if one editor makes a bunch of small edits in fairly quick succession and I revert them all individually?

I ask because a few days ago I made a four small edits to an article that may or may not have been reverts of someone else's edits (I don't know) and was shortly thereafter reverted, but each of my small edits was individually reverted. I didn't do it with the intention of wiki-lawyering and saying that whoever reverted me had violated 3RR, but more recently the tables have turned and I find myself inclined to undo a bunch of small edits made by one editor, and if anyone did want to wiki-lawyer it would be a lot easier for them since I'm under 1RR.

In theory, if making four edits whose summaries began "Undid revision XXXXXXXXX by Hijiri88 (talk)" in four minutes was a 3RR-violation, then making one edit that had the same effect would be the same, wouldn't it?

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 05:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

(By the way: I already know the best solution for my situation would be to stay the heck away from the kind of article where almost every new edit gets auto-reverted. I am fairly certain if I didn't clarify this the first response would be from someone who checked my contribs, figured out exactly what article it was, and offered me advice based on that. If I wanted advice for my specific situation I would have named the article and posted on a noticeboard rather than the policy talk page. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 05:58, 1 June 2017 (UTC) )

Undoing consecutive edits count as one revert (but some admins, indeed, may not always catch that), even if they're undone individually. El_C 06:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

For non-consecutive edits though, you can revert the whole thing (all the edits) in one fell swoop; or in parts. And if someone else edits while you're reverting those parts (turning your reverts non-consecutive), those may be seen as individual reverts, as well. El_C 06:17, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

By "you can revert the whole thing (all the edits) in one fell swoop", do you mean "This is allowed, as the fell swoop would still be considered one big revert"? Or "You could but it would technically qualify as more than one revert, so you should be careful"? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

The rules on edit warring do not make sense and punish the wrong people

Why is the status quo considered to be AFTER the first revert? If someone reverts my edit, instead of being able to revert it back, the rule is for me to go get consensus. Isn't the first person to revert the 'aggressor' so to speak? I think there is too much 'red tape' and the person who knows more about WP's rules end up dictating where the situation goes. There is a difference between edit warring and protecting your legitimate edits. Or am I wrong? This is just be babbling don't take it to seriously. El cid, el campeador (talk) 20:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

If you're "protecting" edits you think of as "yours", is it possible you're approaching this with some problematic attitudes? E.g., see WP:Ownership and WP:Battleground. I do agree that reverts for the sake of reverts are really tedious. But that's what WP:DR and WP:DISRUPTSIGNS are for. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:36, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I know I don't 'own' anything and it's a collective effort, etc., etc. I really do. And I love WP for that. But when you spend hours improving a page and then someone arbitrarily reverts them, it makes me lose faith in this system. Like I said I'm bloviating, but that's that. Sorry to bother you mates. El cid, el campeador (talk) 22:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)