In your theoretical situation a single revert might be an edit war  But the situation here was different than that  In this situation my side was discussing things on the talk page and the other side wasnt  They repeatedly refused to answer my question about which part of my argument was wrong  Because they couldnt answer the question because they knew damn well that I wasnt wrong but they were too petty to admit it  I was following Wikipedia dispute resolution policy and theyre the ones who werent  And if the other side wasnt discussing their position then my side was justified in changing the article to our version  Especially if I only did it once  And Im not abusing the unblock templates  All my requests for unblocks have been totally legitimate  The fact that they get denied doesnt mean Im abusing the blockunblock process  It means that the admins are  And as Ive said several times now these arent personal attacks  Theyre attacks on the substance of the issues  If the so called edit war is about how to apply the Use Common Sense rule then saying that the other side has no common sense applies to the substance of the issue  If theyre following the letter of the rules rather than the spirit which is what bureaucrats do then saying that the other side are bureaucrats applies to the substance of the issue  Im not breaking Wikipedias policy on civility  Although you are  It says and I quote again to treat constructive criticism as an attack is itself disruptive and may result in warnings or even blocks