32,238
edits
User talk:ZS: Difference between revisions
→Reverts
(→Reverts: new section) |
|||
| Line 256: | Line 256: | ||
Hey, I notice you suggesting that [[User_talk:Blaff 60|Blaff 60]] keep reverting edits if a spammer strikes. However, that would start an edit war which fills recent changes (and the page history) with often hundreds of revert-redo-revert edits. The best thing to do is ignore the spammer and report it to staff straightaway. If the spammer has gone, then you can revert the edits; but if they're still there, the edit war could go on for hours! Thanks for helping out, just wanted to give my opinion on that method. [[User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] <sup>[[User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]</sup> 22:53, December 1, 2009 (UTC) | Hey, I notice you suggesting that [[User_talk:Blaff 60|Blaff 60]] keep reverting edits if a spammer strikes. However, that would start an edit war which fills recent changes (and the page history) with often hundreds of revert-redo-revert edits. The best thing to do is ignore the spammer and report it to staff straightaway. If the spammer has gone, then you can revert the edits; but if they're still there, the edit war could go on for hours! Thanks for helping out, just wanted to give my opinion on that method. [[User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] <sup>[[User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]</sup> 22:53, December 1, 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I was under the impression he would have the rationality to reinforce the validity of the article by searching for better sources; if the article's sources are not included within a month or two, I have good reason to list it for deletion. Having not revealed these intentions, I could be at fault for misleading him to thinking that he has authority to protect his article. I don't want to side anyone and imply that I'm someone whom others can hide behind for protection. - [[User:ZS|ZS]] 10:07, December 2, 2009 (UTC) | |||