Help:Edit conflict
From Wikicpa
This page discusses edit conflicts, and how to deal with them. To understand what an edit conflict is, consider the following situation:
- Aaron clicks "Edit this page" on a page.
- Rob clicks "Edit this page" on the same page.
- Aaron finishes his edits and clicks "Save page". The page is saved with Rob's version.
- Rob finishes his edits and clicks "Save page". Aaron gets an "edit conflict" page.
Contents |
Layout of the edit conflict page
At the top is Aaron's version of the whole page, even if Rob is doing section editing.
At the bottom is the text Rob was going to submit. This will be Rob's version of the page, if he edited the entire page, or Rob's version of the section he edited, if he was editing just one section.
In the middle is a difference of the two pieces of text. For the section Rob is editing it shows Rob's changes and Aaron's possible changes, except what both have changed in the same way. For the other sections it shows the full new text as if all that text was added.
Rob can edit the upper text and press Save. In the case Rob was doing section editing this will be interpreted as the new version of the section, hence produce duplication of the other sections, unless Rob deletes them before saving. The best solution in this case is to save your new text (e.g., to the Windows Clipboard), cancel out, then try again.
When pressing Save and the system is slow, one may be able to make another edit and press Save again before the system responds. This gives an edit conflict with oneself. In this case the upper text may be the old version instead of the one involving the first edit, i.e. the system notices the earlier change but has not processed it yet. A moment later. while one is looking at the edit conflict page, the first change is carried out in the background, and the upper text no longer is the current one. Hence, the diff shows the combined edit, and in the case of section editing, like before, the "addition" of the other sections.
Resolving an edit conflict
If Rob only made small changes, and Aaron made large changes, he may choose to work from Aaron's version, and re-merge his changes in. Rob might choose to add some text like "via edit conflict" to warn Aaron and others that he had to do this.
If Rob made large changes, and Aaron made small changes, he may choose to work from his version. One option is for Rob to copy the bottom text into the top text (or just copy over the one section of the top text, if Rob was section editing), with an appropriate edit summary (eg "via edit conflict, will remerge"). Then Rob can view the page history, determine Aaron's changes, and re-apply them to his version, in a separate edit.
If both Aaron and Rob made large changes, matters become complicated, and Aaron and Rob just have to do the best they can. For example, if both Aaron and Rob simultaneously add a large section of text on the same subject, then it may be best for Rob to submit his changes, and then for Aaron and Rob to both have a look at the two versions and decide between themselves which version is better.
Rob should not just post his changes over the top of Aaron's. We assume good faith - mistakes are occasionally made, and newcomers may not understand the edit conflict window. However, Rob must not routinely ignore edit conflicts. It is absolutely not acceptable for Rob to overwrite Aaron out of laziness.
Mistakes
Sometimes mistakes will be made in the merging process, because Rob is human, and this may cause some of Aaron's changes to be accidentally reversed. Sometimes Rob may have good reasons for thinking that Aaron's improvements aren't useful. In these case, Aaron and Rob are expected to resolve their differences amicably.
If Aaron made a small change, which Rob accidentally reversed, then Aaron must not revert to her version. It is absolutely not acceptable for Aaron to reverse Rob's major improvements to the page out of a desire to protect her minor improvements, or to punish Rob for his carelessness. This is particularly important if the page has subsequently been edited by, say, Dan and Stephanie.
The best approach for Aaron in this circumstance is for Aaron to edit Rob's version, reinstate his minor improvements, and leave Rob's major improvements intact. He may also add something to the edit summary to indicate that he had to do this - for example: "Reinstating link which Rob accidentally removed". Rob should then apologize to Aaron for his mistake, and thank him for reinstating his improvement.
If Rob repeats his error, then the best approach is for Aaron to have a friendly word on his talk page, point him to this page, and ask him if he could take a little more care in future. This is particularly important for newcomers, who may not understand the correct way to resolve edit conflicts, though even experienced users may need the occasional friendly reminder.
Prevention
Because edit conflicts are irritating and time-consuming, you may choose to alter your editing habits to render them less frequent: aiming to make more edits to pages that have not been edited recently, such as those listed on ancient pages, for example.
Another means of avoiding edit conflicts is to make a single larger change, rather than frequent smaller changes: this makes it more likely that you will get an edit conflict, but less likely that you will cause others to get an edit conflict.
