In my humble opinion every good wikipedian should make the majority of their editing using their real name and surname in order to encourage free speech and dialogue amongst all the people of the world.[neutrality is disputed]
I don't consider myself a Don Quixote; sometimes there are very good reasons to remain anonymous or pseudonymous and I will protect everyone's right to do so.[dubious – discuss]
My P.O.V.s are relative to myself as long as they don't harm people or groups of people with a clear malignant purpose.[clarification needed]
Many people know that if someone reverts an article more than three times in 24 hours (3RR), they may be blocked to prevent edit warring. But did you know that:
Although reverts on different articles do not count towards the limit, different reverts on the same article do count. So if you revert Paragraph A twice and Paragraph B twice in 24 hours, you have made four reverts and may be blocked.
If you revert three times, wait for 24 hours and start reverting again, you may be blocked for 'gaming' the rule. The three-revert rule is an electric fence, not an entitlement.
Although you cannot be blocked for repeatedly reverting vandalism, many Wikipedians mistake edits for vandalism when they are not. For example, edits that do not respect the neutral point of view policy are not vandalism.
The easiest way to avoid being blocked for reverting is to revert as little as possible and discuss with your fellow editors instead. Some editors limit themselves to one or no reverts a day. Select categories on Wikipedia are limited to 1RR (one revert rule). Those articles will have an edit notice to apprise you of their special status. For 1RR you may only revert one edit in the entire category per 24-hours.
.png?lang=en){kind=small}
