X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sun Aug 16 14:35:44 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929ed1ec0908160219k31e293e5m634bc68d1b2b6676@mail.gmail.com>
References: <310272.42262.qm@web45106.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<4A87C5AD.1020605@post.pl>
	<929ed1ec0908160219k31e293e5m634bc68d1b2b6676@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 07:35:33 -0500
Message-ID: <25890ca0908160535o374d6d63la4079c951e336299@mail.gmail.com>
From: radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.5
X-Spam_score_int: -4
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview: On this one I think some of Lokyz edits are disruptive
	enough (was he drunk or something?) that Jacurek's reversion are ok.
	Trying to delete an article by replacing it with a redirect is a pretty
	serious matter. I'd say go for it. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.5 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.4 HTML_30_40             BODY: Message is 30% to 40% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	-0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb3 (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb3
Subject: Re: [WPM] Can Lokyz be reported?
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4364321079133816100=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.5
X-Spam_score_int: -4
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  On this one I think some of Lokyz edits are disruptive
	enough (was he drunk or something?) that Jacurek's reversion are ok.
	Trying to delete an article by replacing it with a redirect is a pretty
	serious matter. I'd say go for it. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.5 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.4 HTML_30_40             BODY: Message is 30% to 40% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	-0.0 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============4364321079133816100==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163645907a851c0c0471418520

--00163645907a851c0c0471418520
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On this one I think some of Lokyz edits are disruptive enough (was he drunk
or something?) that Jacurek's reversion are ok. Trying to delete an article
by replacing it with a redirect is a pretty serious matter. I'd say go for
it.

Radek


2009/8/16 Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>

> On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:39, Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl> wrote:
>
>> Jack wrote:
>> > Can Lokyz be reported? He reverted 5 times? Radek?
>> >
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lithuanian_collaboration_during_World_War_II&action=history
>>
>> And how many times you reverted...? I am too tired to check the details
>> but history implies 4, and remember - even three can get you in trouble.
>> In other words, if you have to revert 3 times, you are making your
>> opponent reverts meaningless, since you are in danger of getting a
>> double block :((
>
>
> Maybe, it can still be helped.
>
> How about this kind of approach:
>
> * Jacurek self-reverts to Lokyz' version, then reports and explicitly says
> in the report that he got carried away, but self-reverted as soon as he
> realised it's an editwar;
> * with a little bit of luck, the passingby administrator takes it into
> account;
> :* if Jacurek gets blocked, it can be reasonably argued that such a block
> has no preventive utility, which may lead to reversal;
> * once Lokyz is blocked, somebody else points out that Lokyz' redirect is
> patently silly and restores the content.
>
> It's risky, but could it work?
>
> --
> Andres Soolo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

--00163645907a851c0c0471418520
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On this one I think some of Lokyz edits are disruptive enough (was he drunk=
 or something?) that Jacurek&#39;s reversion are ok. Trying to delete an ar=
ticle by replacing it with a redirect is a pretty serious matter. I&#39;d s=
ay go for it.<br>
<br>Radek<br><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/8/16 Digwuren <span di=
r=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:digwuren@gmail.com">digwuren@gmail.com</a>&=
gt;</span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px s=
olid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im">On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:39,=
 Piotr Konieczny <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;piokon@post.pl&gt;</span> wrote:<br>=
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, =
204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">

<div>Jack wrote:<br>
&gt; Can Lokyz be reported? He reverted 5 times? Radek?<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DLithuanian_coll=
aboration_during_World_War_II&amp;action=3Dhistory" target=3D"_blank">http:=
//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DLithuanian_collaboration_during_Worl=
d_War_II&amp;action=3Dhistory</a><br>


<br>
</div>And how many times you reverted...? I am too tired to check the detai=
ls<br>
but history implies 4, and remember - even three can get you in trouble.<br=
>
In other words, if you have to revert 3 times, you are making your<br>
opponent reverts meaningless, since you are in danger of getting a<br>
double block :((</blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Maybe, it can still =
be helped.</div><div><br></div><div>How about this kind of approach:</div><=
div><br></div><div>* Jacurek self-reverts to Lokyz&#39; version, then repor=
ts and explicitly says in the report that he got carried away, but self-rev=
erted as soon as he realised it&#39;s an editwar;</div>

<div>* with a little bit of luck, the passingby administrator takes it into=
 account;</div><div>:* if Jacurek gets blocked, it can be reasonably argued=
 that such a block has no preventive utility, which may lead to reversal;</=
div>

<div>* once Lokyz is blocked, somebody else points out that Lokyz&#39; redi=
rect is patently silly and restores the content.</div><div><br></div><div>I=
t&#39;s risky, but could it work?</div><div><br></div></div><font color=3D"=
#888888">-- <br>
Andres Soolo<br>

</font><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikipedia statistics discussion list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=
=3D"_blank">http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>

--00163645907a851c0c0471418520--


--===============4364321079133816100==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============4364321079133816100==--


