User:Twitbookspacetube/What about them?
 | This is a draft article. It is a work in progress open to editing by anyone. Please ensure core content policies are met before publishing it as a live Wikipedia article. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Last edited by SporkBot (talk | contribs) 6 years ago. (Update) |
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it 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. |
Sometimes, when editing this great encyclopedia we all use, you get into a dispute with another editor. This happens regularly, however, sometimes while defending yourself, you find yourself in the firing line for topic bans, blocks or other restrictions rather than the other guy/gal you are in a dispute with.
This is because, regardless of who is right or wrong, you can still be disruptive. Wikipedia doesn't care about who is right or wrong, it cares about disruptive editing. As such, when you disrupt the encyclopedia such as when you are trying to make your point, you will find that said encyclopedia may not see your point over your disruption. As such, you can often find that the restrictions are placed on you, rather than who you want sanctioned.
Say for instance, you find yourself in a long running content dispute with another editor, you get dragged through the mud at AFD and ANI, and manage to survive without sanction due to your defence, which is repeated and expanded at any possible opportunity. After that, you continue the dispute, without regard for why you got dragged through the mud until you get dragged through it at ANI again, only this time, your defence is seen as disruptive and sanctions are placed against you, not the other guy/gal.
Why would they place sanctions on you and not them? Because you are being disruptive in your defence by continuing to stifle discussion with your needless repetition and additions. We heard you the first time, now let other editors discuss what to do about the content dispute. If you find yourself repeating the same points over and over, ask yourself, do I really need to say this again? Will the discussion derail without me saying this again? - more often than not, the answer to those questions is no. If you do, however, insist on continuing to say the same thing over and over again, you end up causing more disruption than the original content dispute. As such, the admins will react accordingly and put sanctions against you, not them.