[WikiEN-l] me and my three reverts

Wed Feb 2 18:14:18 UTC 2005

Daniel Mayer wrote:
> No argument from me there. But that opinion on how the 3RR should work is
> apparently a minority one. I base this on asking several other ArbCom members
> and making an inquiry on the 3RR talk page. The rule states 'no more than 3
> reverts on any page in 24 hours.' Most people take that very literally (for
> better or worse). I interpret 'reverts' to be the same or substantially the
> same revert. Oh well.

Yes, and there are some good reasons to interpret it fairly literally,
while at the same time leaving a little breathing room for common
sense recognition that randomly changing one irrelevant word in a
different part of the article is still a revert.

The main reason to be fairly literal about it (but not obsessively so)
is that the whole point of it is to keep enforcement simple.

--Jimbo

-- 
�\"La nèfle est un fruit." - first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org