Ok first off let me clarify that reverting is when you undo someone elses edit yes it does include the readdition of material that has been removed by another user Your use of the word vandalism is incorrect in this case because everything that you have been involved in so far is classified as a content dispute since you and your opponents have been disputing whether certain text should be included This is not a case of vandalism this is for example Secondly many of the users that you have been reverting or the ones that have been reverting you are on the same restrictions so IMO now everyone is equal and no one is winning or losing What Ive tried to explain to you is that edit wars get nothing accomplished You keep reverting and reverting and then someone reverts you and the cycle continues Wikipedia articles arent meant to go backandforth like that The only real way you get something accomplished is by discussing it with other users in the hopes that you can form a compromise or consensus To answer your numbered questions After we last spoke you continued to revert     On Sason you reverted  times in the last  hours Even though you came close to breaking the threerevert rule which you were blocked for on May  three reverts is not some sort of magic barrier that prevents you from being blocked An admin could have easily blocked you for simply edit warring This is the type of stuff that occurred on ArmenianAzeri pages for example before the arbitration case After that many users were placed on editing restrictions a lot of the problems were solved Aggressive editing can be characterized as constant edit warring and basically a method of getting your version of the article by constant reverting as opposed to discussion Is is the exact opposite of what is outlined at WPRR Even if you believe the information you are adding is NPOV if it is contested by several users the best thing is to discuss it with them and once you have come to an agreement to implement that version  Im sure youve tried to be civil but here I notice you referring to your opponents as vandals this is inappropriate because as I explained above youre involved in a content dispute here If other users have personally attacked you please show me links of this and I will warn them It is never acceptable to do so Yes it is possible You can get mentored at WikipediaAdoptaUser Wikiadoption was created back in  as a program designed to help new and inexperienced users Although you may disagree with him it is within Namsos right to nominate an article for deletion if he believes it is nonnotable However as you can see from the discussion at WikipediaArticles for deletionErich Feigl it appears that many users there are deciding to keep the article so Im not sure that it matters anyways Everything that you mention awards documentaries books Google hits etc can be mentioned at the AfD articles for deletion page I have noticed that youve already made a comment there already Make sure to keep an eye on that page the discussion is typically open for five days I dont know the specifics about why your sources were removed but if you feel like youre not getting anywhere with these disputes you might try posting something at the Reliable Sources noticeboard if there is a dispute on whether your sources are valid or not Another option is the new Ethnic and cultural conflicts noticeboard Finally after you have made all attempts at resolving the conflict including those two links I gave you and you still feel like nothing has been accomplished you can check out formal mediation There a mediator will get involved and act as a third party I hope all that I have said is helpful Please feel free to drop a note on my talk page if you have any further questionscomments