At 05:03 AM 9/15/2012, Sverre Haslund wrote:
Hmm.. my edit about SGS certificate has held for 10 minutes. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer#Commercial_plans>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer#Commercial_plansÂ

Sverre Haslund

Eek.

Page history shows revert warring See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:3RR#The_three-revert_rule.

It's a bit tedious to figure this out exactly, but it looks like:

TheNextFuture, 5RR. I predict a block any day for TheNextFuture. This is an SPA, likely the sock of a banned user. New users don't file AfDs in their first few edits. Once upon a time, there would have been somone all over TheNextFuture, like me.

Insilvis, 5RR. block for revert warring likely. "Good reverts" is generally not a defense.

Shaslund, 2RR. SPA, only five edits total, one edit in 2009 to Blacklight Power. Block not likely unless Sverre pushes this further. Shaslund is clearly not an experienced user, doesn't use edit summaries (very important when reverting, to explain).

Given the insistent activity from editors (on both sides) clearly not following WP policy and guidelines, I predict that the article will be protected from editing. Semiprotection might not be adequate here. With less than this, and really only one revert warrior, Cold fusion was full-protected. All it takes is someone who knows how to file an RfPP.

In any case, Shaslund's first attempt to insert the material lasted 53 minutes before being reverted by Insilvis. The second lasted 24 minutes. A third might get him blocked, a fourth would very, very likely result in a block if it's within 24 hours.

The 3RR rule is a "bright line," one must have a critical interest to cross it and survive, and an admin might block first and ask questions later. Something like illegal content or libel. I once survived a 3RR violation block because I was reverting blatant sock puppets. First entry in my block log.... reversed as soon as the admin took a closer look. I was new.

Insilivis might make that claim here, TheNextFuture is so obvious.

Reply via email to