Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
    Shortcuts
    Update this page

    This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule.

    You must notify any user you have reported.

    You may use {{subst:An3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.

    You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

    Additional notes
    • When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.
    • The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from.
    • Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection.
    • Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed.
    Definition of edit warring
    Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring.
    Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)
    An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions.

    Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

    Click here to create a new report

    User:Mohhamad Khalid rafsan reported by User:M S Hassan (Result: Both editors blocked 48 hours)[edit]

    Page: Rudra: Boom Chik Chik Boom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Mohhamad Khalid rafsan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [1]
    2. [2]
    3. [3]
    4. [4]
    5. [5]

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [8]

    Comments:

    • Both editors blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 18:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Redacted II reported by User:Redraiderengineer (Result: Blocked from page for one week)[edit]

    Page: Talk:SpaceX Starship flight tests (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Redacted II (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: 19:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 01:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of discussion close template (series of edits)
    2. 11:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of discussion close and RfC templates and archive time (series of edits)
    3. 11:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of archive time that removes RfC template (series of edits)
    4. 14:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of RfC template and archive time (series of edits)


    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 18:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 23:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 19:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Comments:
    Redacted II has performed four reverts within a period that slightly exceeds 24 hours in apparent violation of 3RR (outside the 24-hour period) and the spirit of the rule. Redacted II has previously been warned and blocked for edit warring on the SpaceX Starship flight tests article by ToBeFree. This is Redacted II's third report in as many months for this type of violation and ownership-asserting behavior.

    Redacted II continues to "not [learn] from a block for edit-warring" regarding SpaceX Starship-related articles, and editors express concerns of civil POV pushing. (Redacted II has previously admitted to this POV on their user page.) Redraiderengineer (talk) 19:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked – for a period of one week from page. Daniel Case (talk) 19:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Kashmiri reported by User:Pharaoh of the Wizards (Result: Declined, at ANI, article fully protected )[edit]

    Page: Tamil genocide (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Kashmiri (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 18:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "There was nothing stable about it."
    2. 18:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "Reverted edit by Dowrylauds (talk) to last version by Kashmiri"
    3. 18:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "Seek consensus before re-adding this arguably incorrect wording"
    4. 18:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225308392 by Dowrylauds (talk) Take it to Talk before restoring"
    5. 23:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1225192263 by Kashmiri (talk): Don't re-add without discussion: material on two US legislators, material on a local authorty. Don't bump up heading level unnecessarily as it clutters the TOC. Read WP:BRD"
    6. 22:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225190798 by Petextrodon (talk) Removing again per MOS:OVERSECTION"
    7. 22:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225189855 by Petextrodon (talk) you'll re-add the heading once you add content."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. reverts by Kashmiri:

    Comments:

    Editing warring in Tamil genocide and removed a 3RR warning with an edit summary Bullshit. Meatpuppetry report coming Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • I agree. It was my mistake as my edits were split between two days in my timezone, on two rather intense days, and I missed the 24h clock. However, I'm also extremely concerned about the multitude of newly registered or newly active accounts suddenly coming to Tamil genocide and reverting to one specific POV version – something I've seen only once before in my 10+ years on wiki. It's very far from normal on Wikipedia and points to some sort of off-wiki coordination (meatpuppetry). This may be taken into account when judging this report. — kashmīrī TALK 21:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding to that – a meatpuppetry report is on its way, most likely tomorrow. There's obvious meatpuppetry going on between certain editors that extends into several other Tamil-related articles and discussions. — kashmīrī TALK 21:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Admins: please be warned about other related discussions at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Personal Attack by User:Kashmiri and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leed110. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 21:38, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Then it's best presented there together with the ANI discussion, since the same topics are concerned. Acroterion (talk) 22:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And Ymblanter has fully protected the article to stop the back-and-forth. Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:شارستانی reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: Blocked)[edit]

    Page: Talk:Karluks (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: شارستانی (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. Consecutive edits made from 01:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC) to 01:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
      1. 01:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225373259 by HistoryofIran (talk)"
      2. 01:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225372939 by HistoryofIran (talk)"
    2. Consecutive edits made from 01:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC) to 01:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
      1. 01:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225368979 by HistoryofIran (talk)"
      2. 01:09, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225366867 by HistoryofIran (talk)"
    3. 00:24, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225366620 by HistoryofIran (talk)"
    4. 00:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225365682 by HistoryofIran (talk)"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 04:25, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Talk:Karluks."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 04:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Addition of non-WP:RS part 2 */"

    Comments:

    User:49.3.90.116 reported by User:PhinsUp23 (Result: Blocked 2 years; sockmaster's block extended as well)[edit]

    Page: 2024 NRL season (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: 49.3.90.116 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [9]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [10]
    2. [11]
    3. [12]
    4. [13]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [14]

    Comments:
    Suspect this IP is also being used for ban evasion in addition to violating 3RR. See previous reports/block logs regarding User:CodyCruickshank and IPs 220.236.126.177 & 110.175.242.146. Based on actions and confrontational attitude this appears to be the same person, as does 220.236.119.43. Previous attempts to discuss issues on article/user talk pages with this person are usually ignored so I didn't really bother this time, they mostly communicate via edit summaries but don't try and actually discuss their issues further. PhinsUp23 (talk) 08:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    So I've just added another diff to this, User:AP 499D25 reverted back to the previous version I gave but this IP has gone in and reverted again anyway rather than start any discussion on the article talk page or their own. PhinsUp23 (talk) 09:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked – for a period of two years I have also extended the block on 220.236.119.43 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) to that length as well. Daniel Case (talk) 22:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Minci2000 reported by User:Kansas Bear (Result: Indefinitely blocked)[edit]

    Page: Süleyman Pasha (son of Orhan) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Minci2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [15]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [16]
    2. [17]
    3. [18]
    4. [19]
    5. [20]
    6. [21]

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [22]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:Minci2000 has chosen not to use the talk page.

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [23]

    Comments:


    It appears the edit war has something to do with Suleyman's mother, which is explained in a well-referenced paragraph. Since Minci2000 has not used the talk page, I can only speculate their reason(s). --Kansas Bear (talk) 13:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Malik-Al-Hind reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Blocked 72 hours)[edit]

    Page: Mughal Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Malik-Al-Hind (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [24]
    2. [25]
    3. [26]
    4. [27]
    5. [28]
    6. [29]
    7. [30]



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [31]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [32]

    Comments:

    All edits have something to do with the reported user attempting to insert "India(n)". Please also see this ANI report [33], they are clearly a meatpuppet, and with all due respect, this would not have happened if they already got blocked for that. --HistoryofIran (talk) 13:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Bravehm reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Warned)[edit]

    Page: Hazaras (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Bravehm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [34]
    2. [35]
    3. [36]
    4. [37]



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [38]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [39]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [40]

    Comments:

    Bravehm is also extremely manipulative; I restored sourced info removed by Bravehm [41], restoring +605 bytes. They then not only revert me, but remove even more sourced info (-1189 bytes) [42], having the nerve to ask me to go to the talk page, ignoring WP:CONSENSUS and WP:ONUS. I then revert them again [43], only to get reverted again, but this time they removed even more bytes (-1751), still asking me to "explain myself" [44]. --HistoryofIran (talk) 23:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Because Bravehm was not warned about edit-warring, I have given them an opportunity to self-revert. We'll see what they do.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bravehm has self-reverted avoiding a block; however, they are warned that any subsequent reverts may result in a block without further notice.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:41, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Mohammad Umar Ali reported by User:PadFoot2008 (Result: )[edit]

    Page: Maratha Confederacy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Mohammad Umar Ali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [45]
    2. [46]
    3. [47]
    4. [48]


    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [49]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [50]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [51]

    Comments:

    1.) [52] This one has already been discussed on talk page and Flemmish agreed to my most recent revert in the talk page discussion I mean 25th May discussion not yesterday's discussion; So that revert should not be counted.
    2.) I initially reverted two times because PadFoot and I were having disputes but after that we had a long talk page discussion and in that this user didn't quote even ONE RELIABLE SOURCE but still I haven't reverted just due to Wiki guidelines and filed for WP:DRN you could check it.
    3.) Besides another user I don't know, he might be closely associated with PadFoot or could have similar interests and so they both pushed their POV constantly and harassed me multiple times on my talk page I repeatedly quoted him sources but he kept on saying the same line "Please provide WP:RS" multiple times not only on my talk page but here too; [53] too Today again I wanted to inform him of something different from the dispute we had but he wrote the same msg see this This clearly tells they are trying to harass me and they do not want to collaborate and improve the article.
    This is another example of harassing me. I request the admin whosoever is looking into this matter to look into these points I have mentioned before taking any decision. Mohammad Umar Ali

    User:JabSaiyaan reported by User:Ankitsalsa14 (Result: Declined – malformed report)[edit]

    User:JabSaiyaan reported by User:Ankitjazz14 (Result: Page protected) Page: Chibcha language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) User being reported: 94.73.32.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [1] This list shows the repeated and baseless edits made by the user without engaging in discussions of stating reliable sources.

    Diffs of the user's reverts: I had posted factual data on page GangubaiKathiawadi [2] considered authentic as per wikipedia source WP:ICTFSOURCES

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: User did not use talk page. Just kept reverting without citing sources or revealing concrete facts. Moreover the user kept stating vague data about authenticity of my sources which is evidently false. I have attempted to discuss, however the user is adamant and non-cooperative

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [3]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: The user has been reported for vandalism and given enough warnings as also seen on the talk page. Moreover past history of the user suggests clear cases of edit warring and instances of vandalism on other pages.

    Reply: User:Ankitsalsa14 doesn't know Wikipedia guidelines. The user is talking about "repeated and baseless edits made by the user without engaging in discussions" but they themselves did that first. There is a note where they made edits which states "DO NOT REMOVE FIGURES WITHOUT CONSENSUS AT THE TALK PAGE" but they kept making those edits and when reverted they started engaging in edit warring. There's nothing to report here, the user themselves removed one of thier unreliable sources here,[54] There are already enough sources attached to the main page and more reliable, the sources of this user aren't reliable for budget purpose. Same sources has been used for multiple recent Bollywood productions. They are also unnecessarily adding warnings on my talk page instead of discussing, I even replied to them here,[55] but instead of replying back and discussing they want to engage in edit warring. JabSaiyaan (talk)

    • Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Bbb23 (talk) 13:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    References

    1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gangubai_Kathiawadi&action=history
    2. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangubai_Kathiawadi
    3. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JabSaiyaan#2nd_warning_against_vandalism

    User:Félix137792 reported by User:Tgeorgescu (Result: Semi-protected)[edit]

    Page: Yahwism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Félix137792 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 11:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Records and developments */ The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel - Mark S. Smith, The Memoirs of God: History, Memory, and the Experience of the Divine in Ancient Israel - Mark S. Smith, Did God Have a Wife? Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel - William G. Dever, Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? - William G. Dever, Biblical History and Israel S Past: The Changing Study of the Bible and History - Megan Moore, Brad Kelle"
    2. 11:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Records and developments */ The attached source and statement are not accepted by the majority of historians. At most, it would hold its place if it was also pointed out that this is not the consensus of historians at all. According to most historians (see: William G. Dever or Mark S. Smith) Yahweh was already present in the early period and also syncretism happened then."
    3. 11:13, 25 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225575550 by Tgeorgescu (talk)"
    4. 22:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC) "Most scientists don't think so. in fact, it is contrary to the consensus."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 11:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC) "Welcome to Wikipedia!"
    2. 11:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Yahwism."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 11:35, 25 May 2024 (UTC) "Revert"

    Comments:

    Plus two reverts by two different Hungarian IPs. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:45, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • The article was semi-protected for one year by El C.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:28, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • For two years. It was protected for one year prior, so I doubled it this time around. El_C 13:50, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Excelsiorsbanjo reported by User:Locke Cole (Result: Page fully protected for a week)[edit]

    Page: Spokane County, Washington (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Excelsiorsbanjo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [56]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 2024-05-25T15:41:20
    2. 2024-05-24T14:40:49‎
    3. 2024-05-24T02:29:32‎
    4. 2024-05-23T02:59:49
    5. 2024-05-22T06:02:36
    6. 2024-05-17T03:01:14
    7. 2024-02-26T14:37:18
    8. 2024-02-22T21:29:44
    9. 2024-02-16T05:23:14
    10. 2024-02-09T20:58:07
    11. 2024-01-30T08:35:07‎
    12. 2024-01-10T05:46:44

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 2024-05-24T15:46:52‎ (which they removed shortly thereafter with the edit summary delete noise) Masem had previously warned them of 3RR in 2019 as well, which they acknowledged).

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [57]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 2024-05-25T16:39:08

    Comments:

    • Excelsiorsbanjo has been very combative on the talk page, misunderstanding and misrepresenting what constitutes consensus, and generally being unwilling to reconsider their position and edit warring over a long period to enforce their preferred version of the article. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to add a little more context, in the diffs above they've reverted three different editors: myself, Leif One and an IP 2601:602:cc00:e7d0:ac64:af82:c4a4:bcb5. —Locke Cole • t • c 17:25, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Page protected In full for a week. As the reported user has suggested themselves, we need more formal consensus here on the question of whether the flag is still official or not. Daniel Case (talk) 23:29, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Дејан2021 reported by User:DerbyCountyinNZ (Result: Indefinitely blocked)[edit]

    Page: Oldest people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Дејан2021 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: Already reverted

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oldest_people&diff=1225582570&oldid=1225385321

    User was blocked for 24 hours for edit warring. On expiration of block they resumed the edit war. They were then blocked for 1 week. That expired a couple of days ago. They have again resumed the edit war.

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [58]

    Comments:

    That is unfounded and there is no reason to delete that case. I MENTIONED THE SOURCE. That's the violation of Wiki rules, one person keeps canceling my edits for NO reason. For no good reason, the user "Wwew345t" has undone my edits. I did not continue the war with changes and I ask that the issue be resolved.
    Additional links:
    1) my edit, I cited the source and correctly added the person to the list: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oldest_people&diff=prev&oldid=1225582570&title=Oldest_people&diffonly=1
    2) an edit by "user: Wwew345t" who undid my edit a few hours later without any reason: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oldest_people&diff=prev&oldid=1225628665&title=Oldest_people&diffonly=1
    He invents reasons and imposes falsehoods, there is no problem with the man's age, his age is validated by an international body that specifically deals in longevity research (Gerontology Research Group), he claims that he should be deleted, because his age was not verified by a profit non-scientific company LongeviQuest (LQ), this kind of behavior and humiliation of a scientific institution is unacceptable, therefore, his age is validated by the GRG, that is enough, it is not the job of LQ fans to express views about the reliability of GRG, in the Wiki rules nowhere it says that GRG is an unreliable source, that is all incorrect, GRG has been used as a primary source for decades without any problems. Дејан2021 (talk) 20:05, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=1225667879"