- "That is a violation of [this] policy."
- "If you add that to/remove this from this article, it is vandalism."
- "You are trying to assert ownership of this article."
- "This must be a sock puppet account."
- "You obviously have a problem with [subject]."
Yes, there may be actual behaviorial policies and guidelines around. They can be interpreted however one may wish, and can be twisted to fit the beliefs of the one spouting their side of the argument. This is commonly known as Wikilawyering and is not congruous with the guidelines cited in gaming the system.
The act of throwing around such accusations is a lack of assumption of good faith. There is a more civil way of dealing with disputes if you are really concerned about a violation taking place. These concerns may be brought up on various boards, such as Dispute resolution. There are warning templates that can be placed on a user's talk page, but they should be used sparingly, and only when it appears that the user is unfamiliar with such a guideline, or is intentionally breaking it, despite all warning.
Creator/contributor
- "I created this page."
- "I have made most of the contributions to this article."'
- "I started this page; please run all proposed changes through me first."
- "I am Wikipedia's top contributor in this field."
- "I received a barnstar for this contribution."
- "You're not even a member of the WikiProject with scope over this article."
- "Those of us who worked hard to push this to Good Article get the final say about what's in it."
On Wikipedia, articles are not owned. Just because you created an article does not mean it is yours to decide how it should be written in the future. Once you save your initial edit, it is out there for anyone else to edit at will.
Being the creator, a major contributor, or a scope-asserting WikiProject in no way, shape, or form grants any special rights to dictate or otherwise decide its contents.
Empowerment
- "Now, stay out of this matter."
- "I'm right, you're wrong."
- "My way or the highway."
Such arguments do not help reach an agreement in any way. They are only one person bullying the other. Wikipedia's mission is to provide readers with the best possible information to everyone. Wanting to have it your way all the time defeats that purpose.
There are no cooldown blocks for those involved in edit warring. The reason why editors can be blocked for edit warring is not as punishment for breaking some rule. Likewise, pages are not fully protected to punish the community or to say a page is so important it cannot be edited. These measures are taken in order to keep the situation under control and prevent further disruption.