Wikipedia:Requests for comment/168

Community edited version of what happened:

As a participant in a multi-party dispute over one much-discussed paragraph in DNA, 168 reverted to an old version, which he favored. When User:Lir undid the reversion, 168... reverted again and protected the page. Shortly afterward, Ed Poor posted a message addressed to 168... (named) and to Lir (unnamed) on Talk:DNA condemning the protection, while confessing he hadn't scrutinized the matter closely. Other admins said protection was called for, but said the fact that 168... had done it made the act improper. About a week later, 168 removed Ed's message, suggesting in the summary comment that its judgmental tone was inappropriate to the DNA talk page. Mav reverted this removal stating only that Ed "has a right" to post it. 168 then reverted mav's reversion using the rollback feature, which Mav told 168 is against the rules. 168... later created Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mav and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ed Poor - Request for comment pages about the two main people that have criticized 168...'s actions.

Applicable policies

Wikipedia:Protection policy

Rule number 2: Do not protect a page you have edited recently, have been in a dispute with in the past, or where you are in some other way involved
Rule number 3: Add {{msg:protected}} to the top of temporarily protected pages
Rule number 4: List pages you protect or unprotect on Wikipedia:Protected page

Possible outcomes

De-adminship - posts both in favor and against.
Temporary de-adminship - option barely mentioned.
Censure - not discussed.
Probation - not discussed.
Only talk - so far, and perhaps that's all that's appropriate

Visit: Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/168 to comment

Part of an ongoing proliferation of disputes brought to you by User:Lir