This is a
humorous
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors and is made to be humorous. This page is not one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. This essay isn't meant to be taken seriously. |
Something ticks you off! As many good men and women do, you have your ideology, the motor of your existence. You have an opinion; nay, you have knowledge, and you wish to spread the Word on wikipedia.
Often when attempting to "spread the faith" as it were, you encounter one serious problem: other editors. There is you, and a bunch of Nazi-esque [blank]-ists. You are the prophet, they are the persecutors.
You insert your content, but they remove it. You remove [blank]-ist dogma, they put it back. You have no choice but to perform on them what is called a revert. When other editors continue to remove your content, and you stand tall against them, you are in a revert war.
There will certainly be many users of the opposite ideology. Worse still are the "neutrals" (crypto-[blank]-ists in fact, even if they don't know it!). These users have an ideology even more extreme and yet more sinister than your ideological opposites: adherence to that nonsense, WP:NPOV. Those spoil-sports can be a real nuisance, as they can be harder to bait and harder to discredit. On the plus side, they are unlikely to care as much, so doggedness may be all you need here.
But don't worry, if you follow a few simple rules, you can prevail in most revert wars and in most editorial conflict, and thus spread the faith to your heart's content.
Beware of RanSAI, random sanctimonious administrative intervention. This force of nature is unpredictable, and could come along at any time. As a result, you have to ensure you are as prepared as possible.
The good news is that on Wikipedia, despite being an encyclopedia, knowledge is egalitarian, discipline is not. This is one of your biggest advantages. The enforcers of Wikipedia policy, its administrative class, are unlikely to be a big deal to you, as long as you aren't too clumsy. Admins enforce disciplinary policies, not encyclopedic policies. Yes WP:NPOV is in theory a policy, but they're unlikely to have any knowledge of your pet-topics or much interest in them, being primarily a collection of seasoned vandal-fighters and talk-loving, action-shy mandarins. And even if they do, they won't be able to express an opinion, however expert, without becoming "involved" and thus unable to act. The only policies taken seriously in practice are policies concerning behaviour and discipline. With encyclopedic information, all you need to prevail are numbers! Thus, even if some "neutral" has more knowledge than you, you can still make him your bitch!
This is a
humorous
essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors and is made to be humorous. This page is not one of
Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been
thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. This essay isn't meant to be taken seriously. |
Something ticks you off! As many good men and women do, you have your ideology, the motor of your existence. You have an opinion; nay, you have knowledge, and you wish to spread the Word on wikipedia.
Often when attempting to "spread the faith" as it were, you encounter one serious problem: other editors. There is you, and a bunch of Nazi-esque [blank]-ists. You are the prophet, they are the persecutors.
You insert your content, but they remove it. You remove [blank]-ist dogma, they put it back. You have no choice but to perform on them what is called a revert. When other editors continue to remove your content, and you stand tall against them, you are in a revert war.
There will certainly be many users of the opposite ideology. Worse still are the "neutrals" (crypto-[blank]-ists in fact, even if they don't know it!). These users have an ideology even more extreme and yet more sinister than your ideological opposites: adherence to that nonsense, WP:NPOV. Those spoil-sports can be a real nuisance, as they can be harder to bait and harder to discredit. On the plus side, they are unlikely to care as much, so doggedness may be all you need here.
But don't worry, if you follow a few simple rules, you can prevail in most revert wars and in most editorial conflict, and thus spread the faith to your heart's content.
Beware of RanSAI, random sanctimonious administrative intervention. This force of nature is unpredictable, and could come along at any time. As a result, you have to ensure you are as prepared as possible.
The good news is that on Wikipedia, despite being an encyclopedia, knowledge is egalitarian, discipline is not. This is one of your biggest advantages. The enforcers of Wikipedia policy, its administrative class, are unlikely to be a big deal to you, as long as you aren't too clumsy. Admins enforce disciplinary policies, not encyclopedic policies. Yes WP:NPOV is in theory a policy, but they're unlikely to have any knowledge of your pet-topics or much interest in them, being primarily a collection of seasoned vandal-fighters and talk-loving, action-shy mandarins. And even if they do, they won't be able to express an opinion, however expert, without becoming "involved" and thus unable to act. The only policies taken seriously in practice are policies concerning behaviour and discipline. With encyclopedic information, all you need to prevail are numbers! Thus, even if some "neutral" has more knowledge than you, you can still make him your bitch!