Wikipedia talk:Edit warring/Archives/2018/December

Comment

User:‎Flyer22 Reborn made the following comment as an edit summary to an otherwise null edit:

Comment: We recently discussed singular they at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, but I see that you also recently queried the matter and checked the archives there.

Moving it to where it belongs. CapnZapp (talk) 11:05, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Nope. See my statement here. There was absolutely no reason to bring the matter to the talk page. It was a note, and it was meant to be a note. It is there for all to see, since your assertion, as made clear here at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, was incorrect. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:57, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

You think there's no reason. I beg to differ. Anyone talking to me gets on a talk page, simple as that. I sure won't reply through dem dummy edits. That's just how I roll.

As for my reply now, it's mostly bafflement. Did you get angry I reposted your precious dummy edit? Why did you lash out at me? Nothing about the talk discussion over at MOS suggests I have made an error. All it basically contains is some editor trying to argue we should not even say that we have no guidance to give regarding singular they?

Anyway, are we done here? Appears we're arguing about nuthin' at this stage. CapnZapp (talk) 23:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Nope. Now move on. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:21, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

And nothing at the MOS talk page suggests you have made an error? You made it seem like Goldenshimmer was wrong to use singular they and that the MOS speaks on singular they. The MOS discussion shows that this is not yet the case. There is no controversy with using singular they like that in our guidelines and policies. Granted, the Gender-neutral language article does note that wording like "he or she" is gender neutral. But it obviously is not gender neutral enough to some people. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:29, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Admin + Non-Admin Edit Wars

Regarding the policy on edit warring there seems to be a lack of clarity re: what should happen in instances where an administrator is involved in an edit war with a non-administrative user, or something close to an edit war that does not meet the technical criteria. In the latter case it appears the current convention is to warn the non-administrative user and not the administrative user. Particularly, in this case where the administrative user engaged in repeated reversions of fully cited material based on highly questionable allegations of original research and used language likely to cause dischord -- notably the phrase 'piss-poor sentence' --, the user was warned to stop, but not the administrator. While it was noted that the suggestion to take the matter for dispute resolution was the right call, it highlights something that appears to be missing from the Wikipedia guidelines. Specifically, are administrators automatically deemed to be correct in cases of edit-warring or similar behaviour prior to official dispute action? Similarly, what is the consensus on application of this rule with regard to blocking and bans i.e. given it takes two to edit war, which user is rightly the recipient of the block or ban? Mrspaceowl (talk) 08:57, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Admins are no different than other editors when edit warring. They can be reported at WP:ANEW. The link you provided does not link to admin edit warring.- MrX 🖋 12:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)