Revert warriors

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
kołdry
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Revert warriors

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Aug 28, 2014 7:53 am

To see what would happen, I made this edit to the Social proof article. I've found that trying to add text to social science articles often earns a brusque response. Sure enough, the edit was reverted about an hour later. The revert might be justified, because unless that academic paper actually says the words, "social proof" somewhere in it (and that's difficult to determine since it is behind a pay wall), it could be considered synthesis to use it in that article.

Here's the thing, however. I looked at the editor's contributions and it appears that about 90% of the editor's edits are reverts to social science articles. The editor rarely tries to discuss the disputed content first. He/she just reverts, reverts, and reverts some more. I expect that this probably discourages a lot of the newbie editors from ever trying to edit WP again. How many revert warriors like this does WP have?

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Revert warriors

Unread post by Poetlister » Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:53 am

Cla68 wrote:How many revert warriors like this does WP have?
Far too many. You're right that this is a major turn-off for newcomers.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

Drowninginlimbo
Critic
Posts: 263
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:52 am

Re: Revert warriors

Unread post by Drowninginlimbo » Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:38 pm

Cla68 wrote:To see what would happen, I made this edit to the Social proof article. I've found that trying to add text to social science articles often earns a brusque response. Sure enough, the edit was reverted about an hour later. The revert might be justified, because unless that academic paper actually says the words, "social proof" somewhere in it (and that's difficult to determine since it is behind a pay wall), it could be considered synthesis to use it in that article.

Here's the thing, however. I looked at the editor's contributions and it appears that about 90% of the editor's edits are reverts to social science articles. The editor rarely tries to discuss the disputed content first. He/she just reverts, reverts, and reverts some more. I expect that this probably discourages a lot of the newbie editors from ever trying to edit WP again. How many revert warriors like this does WP have?
Personally I agree with the reversion and would have made it myself if I had seen your addition, but I agree with your general point also, there are a lot of people who revert constantly without even going to the article talk page.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: Revert warriors

Unread post by Kumioko » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:05 pm

I haven't looked at the article in question but I have also noticed a lot of revert warriors. Its common among certain projects like US Roads, Wisconsin, Novels and a number of others. Additionally, its also common among non christian articles like those pertaining to Witchcraft, paganism, and other non mainstream religions. Some reversions are valid, many are not. I have seen cases where typo, grammar and puncuation fixes were reverted sight unseen for petty reasons...like not a member of [insert your favorite project here].

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: Revert warriors

Unread post by EricBarbour » Fri Aug 29, 2014 3:45 am

Wondering if he's the "Andrew" listed here:

http://socialidentityresources.com/the-authors/

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Revert warriors

Unread post by Hex » Tue Sep 02, 2014 10:20 am

In addition to the revert warriors, there are also the speedy deletion douchebags, like this guy. (Permalink because his next edit was to blank the comment.) Eric may find that of interest, as one of his nominations was of a notable audio hardware designer.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

Post Reply