User:Collect/archivedfromWPeditor

The following is an actual part of a User page from a WP editor. It is not my opinion in any way, nor should anyone ascribe the words orsentiments below to me. Thanks!

The next step in the edit war when tedious editing and attacking others with wikipolicy doesn't work in a content dispute:

Since this is a content dispute, you cannot report them to the WP:ANI notice board. But if you know your wikipolicy, you could probably find some reason to report them to WP:ANI. Try to find out what pushes their buttons, so they say something they shouldn't or do something they shouldn't. Ask allies via e-mail what makes them mad, read old content disputes to see when and why they got mad, etc. When you get them to say something they shouldn't, report them to WP:ANI. Then you could e-mail an ally admin, who is not involved with the dispute, to ban them (problem is that there are only conservative admins and few liberal ones).

E-mail an ally who just happens to not be involved in this dispute, ask this ally to put a stern warning message on the "enemy's" user page. Here is an example template.

You have to show that you made a "good faith effort" to fix the dispute in you want a successful RfC or Arbcom later.

SUGGESTION 1: Get a third party mediator to help Wikipedia:Third Opinion. Tell everyone on the disputed talk page about this mediator request, it makes you look like a diplomat and like you want to negotiate. When you put in the request for a mediator, follow up a lot--the mediators suck at following up. If you want a mediator fast--on my page are two mediators I worked with before, User talk:Tyrenius, User_talk:Fagstein, they are great, you could ask them to mediate ASAP. SUGGESTION 2: Call a Request for Comment on the disputed page. Go to WP:RfC to set it up. Then e-mail all of your allies asking them to comment. Remember: it is important to sway the conversation quickly at the beginning. Most neutral Wikipedians who see this RfC are lazy and will only read the first couple of entires before making uninformed comments (votes) DANGEROUS SUGGESTION 1: If the problem is with a particular editor, call a RfC. This is the last step towards an Arbcom. The danger with an RfC is that your behavior can go on trial too. E-mail you allies about the RfC, again, making sure they comment fast and first. RfCs sometimes can make your "enemy" leave wikipedia--end of problem. DANGEROUS SUGGESTION 2: If the RfC does not solve the problem, call an Arbcom, either on the disputed page or on the person. The danger with an Arbcom is just like the danger of a RfC, your behavior can go on trial too. Plan on spending a lot of time going through the editors history with a fine tooth comb. Again, to repeat, e-mail you allies about the Arbcom making sure they comment fast and first, setting the tone of the Arbcom. I have found over the years the best litmus test of ongoing success or failure in edit wars is how little or how much opponents post on your talk page. I have found the more opponents post on your talk page, the worse off you are doing; whereas the less opponents post on your talk page, the more your opponents are on the defensive.