3 ms·

Do you think I'm part of the editor cabal? If so, what qualified me? If not, do you expect my changes to this article to be reverted?

dylan604 3y ago
I have no idea if you are or not. I'm challenging your claim about anyone being able to make edits as that's what Wiki wants people to think since most people will take that at face value. The reality is, that if you are not an accepted member of the cabal, then your edits will be reverted. So yes, if you are not part of the cabal, I would expect your edits to be reverted...at some point in time. I have very little faith in the system. If you are part of the cabal, how long did it take to learn the handshake? /s
- stuartjohnson12 3y ago
  I don't know what it means to be a member of the cabal. I just showed up one day and started writing edits. I have about a thousand edits now. Some of them were reverted, but most weren't. I think the reason people perceive there to be a "cabal" is that they edit articles that are either very contentious to begin with (national identity, gender, politics) or are high traffic and most of the content has already been discussed at length. Even in those areas, I think there is not a cabal, just lots of angry individual people who oftentimes end up being banned if they get angry enough. But I don't generally edit in high traffic areas generally because I don't like long litigations on talk pages. The last time I saw the "cabal" in effect on Wikipedia was when I tried to rephrase some things on a page related to a controversial topic. There were two users working together to load the page with some very biased terms. I tried to remove them but was swiftly reverted. I think that's what you mean when you say the cabal. I gave up editing that article because a long fight didn't interest me. Since then, both of the users trying to guard that article against edits have since been banned from editing in the area that article was in. The "cabal" as you see it is usually just a small number of very interested editors with a strong opinion. If their opinions are too strong, then they're usually in violation of Wikipedia policy and they get cleaned out eventually. I don't like to fight with those people though. My favourite thing to do on Wikipedia is clean up around the edges. If you follow this link, you'll be taken to a random article which is tagged as being written in a promotional tone. There are around 25,000 articles like this on Wikipedia at the moment. https://randomincategory.toolforge.org/All_articles_with_a_promotional_tone?site=en.wikipedia.org https://randomincategory.toolforge.org/All_articles_with_a_p... These articles could use attention from an average, unbiased person to help tidy them up and read more neutrally. I see fixing Wikipedia articles like a kind of gardening. There is a lot to do in areas which are not trafficked so highly. I hope you would consider contributing one day.

dylan604 3y ago

I have no idea if you are or not. I'm challenging your claim about anyone being able to make edits as that's what Wiki wants people to think since most people will take that at face value. The reality is, that if you are not an accepted member of the cabal, then your edits will be reverted. So yes, if you are not part of the cabal, I would expect your edits to be reverted...at some point in time. I have very little faith in the system. If you are part of the cabal, how long did it take to learn the handshake? /s

stuartjohnson12 3y ago
I don't know what it means to be a member of the cabal. I just showed up one day and started writing edits. I have about a thousand edits now. Some of them were reverted, but most weren't. I think the reason people perceive there to be a "cabal" is that they edit articles that are either very contentious to begin with (national identity, gender, politics) or are high traffic and most of the content has already been discussed at length. Even in those areas, I think there is not a cabal, just lots of angry individual people who oftentimes end up being banned if they get angry enough. But I don't generally edit in high traffic areas generally because I don't like long litigations on talk pages. The last time I saw the "cabal" in effect on Wikipedia was when I tried to rephrase some things on a page related to a controversial topic. There were two users working together to load the page with some very biased terms. I tried to remove them but was swiftly reverted. I think that's what you mean when you say the cabal. I gave up editing that article because a long fight didn't interest me. Since then, both of the users trying to guard that article against edits have since been banned from editing in the area that article was in. The "cabal" as you see it is usually just a small number of very interested editors with a strong opinion. If their opinions are too strong, then they're usually in violation of Wikipedia policy and they get cleaned out eventually. I don't like to fight with those people though. My favourite thing to do on Wikipedia is clean up around the edges. If you follow this link, you'll be taken to a random article which is tagged as being written in a promotional tone. There are around 25,000 articles like this on Wikipedia at the moment. https://randomincategory.toolforge.org/All_articles_with_a_promotional_tone?site=en.wikipedia.org https://randomincategory.toolforge.org/All_articles_with_a_p... These articles could use attention from an average, unbiased person to help tidy them up and read more neutrally. I see fixing Wikipedia articles like a kind of gardening. There is a lot to do in areas which are not trafficked so highly. I hope you would consider contributing one day.