3RR.html
 
| ca | de | en | es | fr | it | nl | no | pl | pt | ru | ro | fi | sv | tr | vo |


 

This page documents an official English Wikipedia policy, a widely accepted standard that should normally be followed by all editors. Any edit to this page should reflect consensus. If in doubt, consider discussing changes on the talk page.
Shortcuts:
WP:3RR
WP:TRR
This page in a nutshell: Edit warring is harmful. A contributor who reverts the same page, in whole or in part, more than three times in 24 hours, except in certain circumstances, may be blocked from editing.
To report a violation, see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR.
Wikipedia policy
Behavioral standards
Bots
Civility
Editing policy
No legal threats
No personal attacks
Ownership of articles
Sock puppetry
Three-revert rule
User accounts
Vandalism

The three-revert rule (often referred to as 3RR) is a policy used to prevent edit warring.

Contributors must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period, whether or not the edits involve the same material, except in certain circumstances. A revert is any action, including administrative actions, that reverses the actions of other editors, in whole or in part. A group of consecutive reverts by one user with no intervening edits by another user counts as one revert. (This differs from the definition of "revert" used elsewhere in the project.)

The rule applies per person, not per account; reverts made by multiple accounts count together. The rule applies per page; reverts spread across multiple pages so that an editor does not revert a single page more than three times do not violate the rule (but may indicate disruptive editing).

Users violating the rule may warrant a block from editing for up to 24 hours in the first instance. Administrators tend to issue longer blocks for repeated or aggravated violations, and will consider other factors, such as civility when doing so. Administrators decide whether to issue a block. Where multiple editors violate the rule, administrators should treat all sides fairly.

The template message {{uw-3rr}} may help explain the rule to unaware users involved in edit warring. Report violations of the rule at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR.

The rule does not entitle editors to revert a page three times each day. Administrators may still block disruptive editors for edit warring who do not violate the rule.

Contents

Exceptions

The following actions are exceptions to the three-revert rule, and do not count as reverts under the rule's definition. Since edit warring is harmful, these exceptions define narrow situations.

  • Reverting your own actions ("self-reverting").
  • Reverting obvious vandalism – edits which any well-intentioned user would immediately agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding bad language. Legitimate content changes, adding or removing tags, edits against consensus, and similar actions are not exempt. Administrators should block persistent vandals and protect pages subject to vandalism from many users, rather than repeatedly reverting. However, non-administrators may find reversion unavoidable before administrators can respond.
  • Reverting actions performed by banned users.
  • Reverting the addition of copyright violations or content that unquestionably violates the non-free content policy.
  • Reverting the addition of links to content that is clearly illegal, such as child pornography and pirated software.
  • Reverting the addition of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced controversial material which violates the policy on biographies of living persons. What counts as exempt under BLP can be controversial. Consider reporting to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard instead of relying on this exemption.
  • Reverting edits to your own user space, provided that doing so does not restore copyright or non-free content criteria violations, libelous material or biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced controversial material about living persons.

Such actions may be controversial or considered edit warring. When in doubt, do not revert; instead, engage in dispute resolution or ask for administrative assistance.

Not an entitlement

The three-revert rule limits edit warring. It does not entitle users to revert a page three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique. Disruptive editors who do not violate the rule may still receive a block for edit warring, especially if they attempt to game the system by reverting a page. Administrators take previous blocks for edit warring into account, and may block users solely for disruptive edit warring.

The bottom line: use common sense, and do not participate in edit wars. Rather than reverting repeatedly, discuss the matter with others; if a revert is necessary, another editor may do it, which will demonstrate a consensus for the action. Request page protection rather than becoming part of the dispute by reverting.

Avoiding three-revert rule violations

Editors who find themselves on the verge of a three-revert rule violation have several options to avoid engaging in such an edit war. These options include discussing the subject on the page's talk page, requesting a third opinion or comment on the article, or one of the many other methods of dispute resolution.

Editors may wish to adopt a policy of reverting only edits covered by the exceptions listed above; see Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary.

If you break the three-revert rule by mistake, or if another user informs you that you have, reverse your most recent reversion of the page, restoring the version you reverted, even though you may not like that version. Administrators may decide not to block in such cases, unless the incident forms part of more persistent edit warring.

See also
All Right Reserved © 2007, Designed by Stylish Blog.