Thread:Richard Monkey/@comment-26890527-20170402164945/@comment-258494-20170403135355

Richard Monkey wrote: Thank you Robert. Can I also apologise for the rant earlier. I don't know what came over me. It was very childish and I wasn't acting like someone my age should.

Thanks, Richard.

A block is not always for punishment...sometimes it is a "time out" to give people a chance to discuss an issue (especially when it is a short block such as for "3 days"). I felt that the Gerontology Wiki would be going in the wrong direction if we add 1907? births to the list of supercentenarians born in 1907. Without age validation, there's no point in keeping track...it would be like including drug cheats with clean athletes.

I also made it clear that I'm not operating as a normal member but as the Chief Bureaucrat, appointed by the Gerontology Wiki founder. I'm like a "referee", a "chair umpire". If I overrule the edit of someone else, they should take it to the talk page and not undo my edits. If I'm doing something that's a clear OOPS/mistake, that's one thing. But an UNDO, by definition, is already an administrative decision.

The Wikia rules state that one can found (or operate) a Wiki according to the rules for that particular Wiki.

The Gerontology Wiki is designed to be an encyclopedia. Quality control is important. We have seen quite a bit of problems with vandalism lately, and the last thing we need is another edit war.

So, we'll welcome you back tomorrow, with the understanding that you should not be undoing my "UNDO" edits. You should take the issue to the talk page to discuss the issue.

Thank you for your understanding.Ryoung122 (talk) 13:53, April 3, 2017 (UTC)