Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:44, 31 March 2021 editEdJohnston (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,202 edits →User:Equivamp reported by User:Elix240 (Result: No violation): Closing. There could be a WP:MEDRS issue← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:48, 31 March 2021 edit undoEdJohnston (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,202 edits →User:5.152.72.140 reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Blocked): ClosingNext edit →
Line 282:		Line 282:
	::*{{AN3\|nv}} – Only two reverts by each party. Still, it has been argued that the ] wants to add] is not backed by ]. I hope that editors will work that out on the talk page. ] (]) 00:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)		::*{{AN3\|nv}} – Only two reverts by each party. Still, it has been argued that the ] wants to add] is not backed by ]. I hope that editors will work that out on the talk page. ] (]) 00:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

	== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==		== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked) ==

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Colchis}} <br />		'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Colchis}} <br />
Line 299:		Line 299:
	IP keeps changing the date from the 13th-century BC to the 17th-century BC without any reliable source to support it. Seems like ] to me. He has also begun edit warring other places, such as ].--] (]) 21:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)		IP keeps changing the date from the 13th-century BC to the 17th-century BC without any reliable source to support it. Seems like ] to me. He has also begun edit warring other places, such as ].--] (]) 21:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
	:Writing so it doesn't get archived. --] (]) 10:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)		:Writing so it doesn't get archived. --] (]) 10:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
			*{{AN3\|b}} – 48 hours. The IP editor makes lots of reverts but has never used a talk page. ] (]) 00:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

	== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==		== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==

Revision as of 00:48, 31 March 2021

v t e Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles and content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

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.

See this guide for instructions on creating diffs for this report.
If you see that a user may be about to violate the three-revert rule, consider warning them by placing {{subst:uw-3rr}} on their user talk page.

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.

Twinkle's ARV can be used on the user's page to more easily report their behavior, including automatic handling of diffs.

Click here to create a new report

Noticeboard archives
Administrators' (archives, search)
348	349	350	351	352	353	354	355	356	357
358	359	360	361	362	363	364	365	366	367
Incidents (archives, search)
1155	1156	1157	1158	1159	1160	1161	1162	1163	1164
1165	1166	1167	1168	1169	1170	1171	1172	1173	1174
Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
471	472	473	474	475	476	477	478	479	480
481	482	483	484	485	486	487	488	489	490
Arbitration enforcement (archives)
327	328	329	330	331	332	333	334	335	336
337	338	339	340	341	342	343	344	345	346
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

User:PantelisPatra reported by User:FDW777 (Result: Warned)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

(repeat of this edit)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
Editor was also warned of COVID-19 general sanctions here. FDW777 (talk) 20:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Fifth revert added. FDW777 (talk) 14:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

These are not all within 24 hours, so that's misleading, and there's been a fair amount of edit warring on that page by other editors, including the filer of this report. Perhaps the best solution is to lock the page for a short period.Kenosha Forever (talk) 15:14, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The first four are, and the fifth was made subsequent to this report. FDW777 (talk) 15:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: User:PantelisPetra is warned for edit warring. They continued to revert at 05:23 on 29 March, while this report was open. Their last change is shown as revert #5 in the list above. They may be blocked if they revert again without getting a prior consensus for their change on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 17:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Conorcool2021 reported by User:General Ization (Result: Blocked)

User being reported: Conorcool2021 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Consecutive edits made from 05:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC) to 05:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 05:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "#suggestededit-add 1.0"
2. 05:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
3. 05:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
4. 05:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
Consecutive edits made from 04:48, 28 March 2021 (UTC) to 04:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 04:48, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "#suggestededit-add 1.0"
2. 04:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
Consecutive edits made from 04:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC) to 04:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 04:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
2. 04:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "#suggestededit-add 1.0"
3. 04:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
4. 04:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"
5. 04:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Everett Ruess */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

04:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Everett Ruess."
04:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on Everett Ruess."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

04:52, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Remains identified */"

Comments:

Repeatedly edits article to indicate that the subject, missing since 1934, "might have survived who knows"; also introduces other MOS issues. No response to edit summaries and warnings inviting discussion on the article's Talk page and to seek consensus. This type of edit (marking missing persons as possibly still alive) seems to be a specialty of the editor. Please also review edits at Disappearance of Alice Corbett, including comment to another reverting editor "I'm not going away pal" in the body of the article. General Ization 05:10, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@General Ization Looks like outright vandalism, not even edit-warring. I've already put in a request on Misplaced Pages:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism. For example, they're removing useful information and replacing it with personal commentary, such as this edit. Uses x (talk • contribs) 05:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, but I suspect the admins at AIV will prefer to handle it as a content dispute versus outright vandalism. Doesn't hurt to try, though, since the editor appears to be WP:NOTHERE. General Ization 05:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

They're banned now from that report. All good. Uses x (talk • contribs) 05:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – Indef by User:Paul Erik. EdJohnston (talk) 16:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:117.111.0.0/19 reported by User:Jasper Deng (Result: Block, Semi)

Previous version reverted to:

List of diffs. Click to view.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Diffs of the user's reverts: (warning issued after this one)

List of diffs. Click to view.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Diffs of the user's reverts:

(warning issued after this one)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
I really cannot believe this is going to be necessary for a figure skating-related article, but this highly dynamic IP range has been doing nothing for the past month but edit warring on this page, with all reverts being within the last 24 hours. I participated in the reverting only because of the WP:BLP-violating nature of these edits. The IP has been asked to discuss numerous times in edit summaries and yet has not touched my talk page thread.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

IPs contributing to the EW at this page include (so far):

117.111.19.172
117.111.19.47
117.111.19.84
117.111.19.96
117.111.2.103
117.111.2.113
117.111.2.128
117.111.2.192
117.111.2.130
117.111.2.232
117.111.2.99
117.111.25.232
117.111.25.233
117.111.28.125
117.111.28.154
117.111.28.200
117.111.28.31
117.111.3.151
117.111.3.161
117.111.3.180
117.111.3.209
117.111.3.234

Rangeblock, please? General Ization 06:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that is what I'm suggesting. The range above covers everything from 117.111.0.0 to 117.111.31.255 (CIDR notation).--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: The /19 range has been blocked and the article has been semiprotected by other admins. EdJohnston (talk) 16:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Charan311 reported by User:245CMR (Result: Warned)

the Previous version reverted to: I am not able to add the version as the case is very complex. The reverting started when the user tried to push his own pov personal research in the lead of the article. Meanwhile, a reconstruction of the lead took place and after that Charan didn't stop pushing his pov. I had to revert it multiple times (not more than 3 times in one day). Please see the history of the article

Some of diffs of the user's reverts:

Before these, the user also tried to put his pov original research, without any reference from the given source. One such is this one:

, where despite my efforts, he was not willing to listen

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: , this is the current difference of the edit warring

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I have tried multiple times to resolve this, but all were useless. As per one source of the sentence of the article: “Her avatars as Vishnu's mate are Kamala or Padma, mate of Vamana (Vishnu's dwarf avatar); Dharani (meaning the Earth), mate of Parashur Rama; Sita, mate of Rama; Varahini, mate of Varaha; Radha, mate of Krishna; and some say Rukmini, another of Krishna's consorts. ” I have tried to put my reasons in the edit summary box whenever I reverted , (you can check more in the revision history)..245CMR.• 06:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: User:Charan311 is warned. They may be blocked if they revert again at Lakshmi again without first getting a consensus for their change on the article talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 16:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:117.111.2.113 reported by User:Iseult (Result: Already blocked)

User being reported: 117.111.2.113 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Blocked – Covered by the /19 rangeblock issued in a prior report above. EdJohnston (talk) 18:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:117.111.3.234 reported by User:Iseult (Result: Already blocked)

User being reported: 117.111.3.234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

06:39, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Mariah Bell/Lim Eun-soo collision */previously explained all edits"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

with slightly different IP addresses per edit group Iseult parlez moi 06:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Iseult: Let's keep it in one report -- I've made one report for 117.111.0.0/19 above (covers all from 117.111.0.0 to 117.111.31.255).--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:47, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – Covered by the /19 rangeblock issued in a prior report above. EdJohnston (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:2402:3A80:1F8B:FAF6:28CF:F1DB:A5E5:D14C reported by User:Dam222 (Result: Semi)

User being reported: 2402:3A80:1F8B:FAF6:28CF:F1DB:A5E5:D14C (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

13:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014671644 by Dam222 (talk)"
13:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014666671 by Ahmetlii (talk)"
12:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014665729 by Ahmetlii (talk)"
12:33, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Corrected and updated the info."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

13:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Final warning: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Undo without knowing and does not use reliable source. Dam222 🌋 (talk) 13:39, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: Page semiprotected one month. See also the IP's edit filter log. EdJohnston (talk) 22:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:HijaziSultan reported by User:M Imtiaz (Result: Warned)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

16:25, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014509180 - Talk"
13:52, 27 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014504114 - The J-P58 scientific evidence is there, this seems like a personal opinion of yours."
13:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014399807 by Agricolae (talk)"
20:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014386795 by Agricolae (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1014504077

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Special:Permalink/1014589050#Y_DNA_SAYYIDS

Comments:

Ignored warning by Victor Schmidt, and appears to refuse to understand BRD. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 16:31, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Reply: — Preceding unsigned comment added by HijaziSultan (talk • contribs) 19:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC) All discussions can be found in the Wiki/Sayyid Talk page regarding these edits. Scientific evidences being dismissed for no reason. HijaziSultan (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:33, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Result: User:HijaziSultan is warned. They may be blocked if they revert again at Sayyid without getting a prior consensus in their favor on the article talk page. People on the other side have told them they probably are violating WP:RS since 'citizen science' (familytreedna.com) is not going to pass Misplaced Pages's sourcing requirements. EdJohnston (talk) 15:49, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Equivamp reported by User:Elix240 (Result: No violation)

User has repeatedly reverted mentions of the sexed brain theory.

Comments:
User cites WP:SYNTH as reason for reversal without explaining why contributions are, in fact, WP:SYNTH. Given the types of changes that have been consistently removed, I am concerned that Equivamp is attempting to suppress mentions of the sexed brain theory. I have been accused of edit warring myself despite their history of removing any mention of this specific topic. If there is a legitimate issue with my contributions, I am open to constructive criticism; however, my edits have been made in good faith and Equivamp's reversions appear to be the result of a disagreement with the theory itself. Elix240 (talk) 20:53, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with your characterizations of my motivations. I also think you should have given me time to respond to the talk page discussion you started before you escalated the dispute resolution process. I'm at work right now but I intend to reply to it tonight. I do not plan on continuing discussion here unless prompted by an admin (please ping me with any comments or questions directed at me in such a case). --Equivamp - talk 21:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The 3rd diff listed above is from August 2020 and does not involve Elix240. Elix240 tried to add their material twice and Equivamp reverted twice; Elix240 is the edit warrior contravening WP:ONUS and, yes, WP:SYNTH. Matter is being discussed on the talk page. Crossroads 04:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

No violation – Only two reverts by each party. Still, it has been argued that the material that User:Elix240 wants to add is not backed by WP:MEDRS. I hope that editors will work that out on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 00:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

User:5.152.72.140 reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Blocked)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Comments:

IP keeps changing the date from the 13th-century BC to the 17th-century BC without any reliable source to support it. Seems like Misplaced Pages:Tendentious editing to me. He has also begun edit warring other places, such as Mushki.--HistoryofIran (talk) 21:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Writing so it doesn't get archived. --HistoryofIran (talk) 10:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – 48 hours. The IP editor makes lots of reverts but has never used a talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 00:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

User:93.136.90.14 reported by User:Kautilya3 (Result: )

User being reported: 93.136.90.14 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Consecutive edits made from 23:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC) to 23:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 23:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014760504 by Kautilya3 (talk) even your map shows Xikang is bigger than just light blue, and light blue also includes parts of Yunnan, Gansu and Qinghai"
2. 23:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014760169 by Kautilya3 (talk)"
22:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014757759 by Kautilya3 (talk) your map is ridiculous, it shows Sichuan as part of Xikang"
22:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014756810 by Kautilya3 (talk) it was de jure province, what you show didnt exist by law"
22:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 999234067 by Kautilya3 (talk) not correct map"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

22:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Xikang."
22:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Xikang."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

23:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC) on User talk:93.136.90.14 "/* 3RR's reached */ new section"

Comments:

This editor seems like he can only talk in edit summaries of reverts. Kautilya3 (talk) 23:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Surprisingly the editor reinstated my content after all this warring. But he also exceeded 3RR at another page: , , , . And there was no enagement on the talk page: Talk:Tibet_Area_(administrative_division)#Dubious lead sentence. So, a warning, for now, would be useful. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Viennese Waltz reported by 91.125.11.18 (Result: )

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Consecutive edits made from 09:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC) to 10:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 09:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014829201 by 146.199.206.3 (talk)"
2. 09:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014829901 by 146.199.206.3 (talk)"

09:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014831692 by 146.199.206.3 (talk)"

10:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014833493 by 146.199.206.3 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Editor has received repeated warnings from administrators and other editors over the past three years

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

See edit summary 17:07, 26 March 2021

Comments:

This editor seems like he can only talk in edit summaries of reverts. 91.125.11.18 (talk) 11:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

146.199.206.3 and 91.125.11.18 are both the banned user Vote (X) for Change. His contributions can be reverted on sight. He should not even be bringing this case. See WP:LTA/VXFC. --Viennese Waltz 12:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I read the cited page, which seems to consist of a lot of allegations unsupported by diffs and nothing relating to me. For example, the last report is this . I checked the science desk archive around the time of the report and found this , this and this User talk:90.192.119.245. There are two IPs involved 200 miles apart. 91.125.11.18 (talk) 12:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

It's not edit warring to revert the posts of a banned user. --Viennese Waltz 15:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Poojanthebeast reported by User:Nemov (Result: )

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

14:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014855075 by Nemov (talk) - Erroneously removed section. Subject is a public figure and section is appropriately sourced and referenced."
13:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014759979 by Nemov (talk) - Item is properly sourced, BLPCRIME is not applicable as Benjamin Rich is a public figure (see WP:PUBLICFIGURE) - removed judges comments on the case"
15:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014671719 by Nemov (talk) - The reference is sourced from a newspaper which has been in publication since 1888 and with an online version since 1998. . Please let me know if you have any concerns about the wording."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

13:28, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Adding unreferenced controversial information about living persons on Bald and Bankrupt."
22:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Bald and Bankrupt */ new section"
13:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Bald and Bankrupt */"
14:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Bald and Bankrupt */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

14:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC) on User talk:Poojanthebeast "/* Bald and Bankrupt */"

Comments:

User continues to ignore direction. I've asked numerous times to find support for edits. Nemov (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User Nemov has incorrectly claimed: 1) section is "unreferenced" when the reference is sourced from a newspaper which has been in publication since 1888 and with an online version since 1998. 2) that it "violates BLP:CRIME" - this is not applicable as Benjamin Rich is a public figure (see WP:PUBLICFIGURE)

The additions made are factual, accurate, written dispassionately and properly sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poojanthebeast (talk • contribs) 19:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

When it comes to BLP we have to use caution when adding information without proper sourcing. User continues to add content without multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation. There's no notable sources that document if it's even the same person. I have requested that the user for consensus for change, but user continue to edit the page without multiple reliable third-party sources. - Nemov (talk) 14:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

References

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/5618610.cleared-men-behaved-appallingly/

User:Alluburam reported by User:Fylindfotberserk (Result: )

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

15:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014866110 by Lone Warrior 007 (talk)"
12:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014848646 by Lone Warrior 007 (talk)"
Consecutive edits made from 03:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC) to 05:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 03:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014792279 by SangrurUser (talk)"
2. 03:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
3. 03:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
4. 03:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
5. 03:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
6. 03:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Issues and Party manifestos */"
7. 03:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
8. 03:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
9. 04:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "/* Election & Voter Turnout */"
10. 04:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
11. 04:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
12. 04:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
13. 05:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
02:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014789416 by SangrurUser (talk)"
Consecutive edits made from 01:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC) to 01:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 01:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014678507 by SangrurUser (talk)"
2. 01:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
3. 01:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
4. 01:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
5. 01:49, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
6. 01:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
12:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014660910 by SangrurUser (talk)"
Consecutive edits made from 10:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC) to 10:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 10:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014638905 by SangrurUser (talk)"
2. 10:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC) ""
3. 10:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC) ""
Consecutive edits made from 05:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC) to 06:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 05:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014624877 by 120.61.1.138 (talk)"
2. 05:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014619029 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
3. 05:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014618977 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
4. 05:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014618792 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
5. 05:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014618111 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
6. 05:58, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014618040 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
7. 05:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617833 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
8. 06:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617754 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
9. 06:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617666 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
10. 06:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617647 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
11. 06:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617591 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
12. 06:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617519 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
13. 06:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617477 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
14. 06:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617412 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"
15. 06:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014617272 by Manakpreet Singh (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

"new section" by User:Lone Warrior 007

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Consecutive edits made from 12:48, 7 January 2020 (UTC) to 04:11, 28 March 2021 (UTC) on Talk:2022 Punjab Legislative Assembly election

Comments:

The user keeps on edit warring despite requests to engage in discussion. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Yitbe reported by User:Hipal (Result: )

Diffs of the user's reverts with edit summaries:

07:34, 26 March 2021 Undid revision// It's better to put a "better source needed" tag where you doubt the source is unreliable. Action like this is most similar with vandalism.
15:50, 26 March 2021 Undid revision 1014346972 by Hipal (talk) most probably van
22:11, 27 March 2021 Undid revision 1014414712 by Kuru (talk) I did what's right
06:45, 29 March 2021 Undid revision 1014789962 by Kuru (talk) I added more RS to the article. Everyone can review it.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 15:53, 26 March 2021

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 17:42, 26 March 2021‎ 19:22, 26 March 2021

Comments:
Yitbe appears unable to assume good faith of other editors (as indicated by the edit summaries above and ) and unable to identify reliable sources (as indicated by the edit summaries, edit-warring and ).

While Yitbe has finally responded on the article talk page, Yitbe argues and edit-wars to include unreliable sources. --Hipal (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes I did a reverts; I have also explained why I did the reverts.

While Hipal accused me of using unreliable sources, I asked Hipal to start a discussion under the talk page of the article. Though Hipal started a discussion, I responded to it after almost 24 hrs later, for I couldn't come online. But within this gap, Kuru reverted the edition with the reason "no response".

I added more RS for the article and copyedited it, for I was accused of using unreliable sources. (With the edit summary, "I added more RS to the article. Everyone can review it"). If it's called the edit-warring, I'm ready to be blocked or banned. But I request for a neutral admin to see my issues except Kuru. Thank you. - Yitbe 19:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:2600:1700:BD20:B780:0:0:0:0/64 reported by User:Tehonk (Result: )

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: User's IP changes

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User does not participate to the talk page, as you can see I tried and opened discussion and invited them, does not provide source or explanation or anything at all. Only edit warring.Tehonk (talk) 17:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Tehonk: you make the original date change here without any source. It appears you and the IP editor are edit warring over an unsourecd date, but the IP editor is pushing for the WP:STATUSQUO date. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: "original" date (that is just added about a month ago without any source, so I don't get why you call that "the original date") is not supported by anything, the only source presented on the page supports my correction, so I'm not making it "without any source", it's the contrary. I'm making it what the presented source supports. If the IP editor wants to change it, it needs to be added with a source that supports it. And, talk page is ignored, and I did not make more than 3 reverts while they didTehonk (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

User:2603:7081:1742:EF00:7444:A85F:6F6C:DE1E reported by User:Tgeorgescu (Result: )

User being reported: 2603:7081:1742:EF00:7444:A85F:6F6C:DE1E (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

19:21, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "There are facts, but the correct term is scientific theory, which are more verifiable, testable, and falsifiable than facts. See https://www.realclearscience.com/2017/03/28/why_there_are_no_quotscientific_factsquot_275446.html"
Consecutive edits made from 18:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC) to 18:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
1. 18:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "There are no scientific facts. There are facts, but the correct term is scientific theory. See https://www.realclearscience.com/2017/03/28/why_there_are_no_quotscientific_factsquot_275446.html"
2. 18:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""
18:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Please understand that there are no scientific facts. See https://www.realclearscience.com/2017/03/28/why_there_are_no_quotscientific_factsquot_275446.html for more information on this. Scientists do not speak in facts. Theories are better, since they are testable, repeatable, and falsifiable."
18:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

19:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Is Genesis History?."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User:Polilogaritmo reported by User:Headbomb (Result: Partially-blocked 1 week)

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

Previous version reverted to: Initial introduction of material

Diffs of the user's reverts: , , , .

Pattern is starting again with , a blind revert that doesn't even realize the material has been moved around and merged elsewhere .

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User talk:Polilogaritmo and Talk:Predatory publishing#Research Industry

Comments:

Long term edit-warring with multiple users (see ). Repeated warnings at User talk:Polilogaritmo and Talk:Predatory publishing#Research Industry to not introduce original research/synthesis have done nothing. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and thanks for the assistance. There is no edit warring here, sorry, Headbomb was too impulsive. I reverted only once his change, as I did not agree that he removed a full section under the name "Relation to Open Access Publishing". That section had been there for one year, awaiting some minor edits for improvement, but he has now merged it into "History". The change is very relevant, because the fact that some folks can see a relation to Open Access Publishing is very relevant and this strong point is now made less obvious and misplaced. Ironically, it was Headbomb one year ago who accepted that section but issued a 'Personal reflection' tag seeking for improvement. Also XOR'Easter had accepted that test in its former place for one year, but found it obvious to undo my revert one minute after it was done. My feeling is that they decided to remove the 'Personal reflection' tag they had accepted, just because I had mentioned it in our dispute in Talk:Predatory publishing.

We do have a dispute on an good faith edit "Relation to the Research Industry" where it seems likely we will need to go through conflict resolution eventually, as we are not getting a consensus. I am still waiting for him to provide any argument before I disturb Misplaced Pages editors with a help request. The text in dispute is a five line paragraph fully referenced with verifiable sources. Please take a look at the Talk:Predatory publishing under "Relation to Research Industry" and "Relation to Open Access" for more details and uncompromising attitude. Admittedly, several editors claim the same, interestingly, with very similar style and reacting one after the other in few minutes.

I did get unintentionally into an Edit War saturday the 26th of march. It was my first time with conflict and I thought that would trigger some kind of spontaneous conflict resolution. Now I have learned how to proceed in the talk page. Sorry @Headbomb: for that. I appreciate your patience with apprentices and admit my unfamiliarity with the process. Happy to be learning fast and contributing to Misplaced Pages with help from expert peer editors.

Best regards and thanks for the support.Polilogaritmo (talk) 23:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Your entire response to that section is basically "I'm rubber and you're glue, you read WP:OR yourself!" Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Polilogaritmo - I beg to differ. You've edited and added the content back to the article six times over the last two days. This is definitely edit warring. ~Oshwah~ 02:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 1 week (partial block from the article). ~Oshwah~ 02:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Kinsley Bottom reported by User:SinkingInMercury (Result: Both partially-blocked for 1 week)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: ,

SinkingInMercury (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments:

I constantly kept telling the user that he has wrong and to provided sources of decades long relationships. He has the same amount of reverts as I do. He made the original edits, I told to have a discussion regarding this issue so neither of us would get blocked. I was busy doing stuff outside of Misplaced Pages, and instead of waiting for my response, he reverted the edits again without my response. He has no patience waiting for response. He assumes he is right just because it happened for a little bit. I accept that we were engaged in this edit war, but him constantly making these claims without discussing and sources of decades long relationships is disingenuous. Kinsley Bottom (talk) 00:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I already provided my sources in the article when User:Kinsley Bottom asked in the edit summaries. User:Kinsley Bottom still kept reverting them nonetheless and failed multiple times to explain why they should be removed. Also, User:Kinsley Bottom still has not provided explanation for removing the character's other abilities from the article, which were sourced. SinkingInMercury (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Both editors blocked – for a period of 1 week (partial block - Batman, Catwoman, Two-Face). ~Oshwah~ 00:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
SinkingInMercury, Kinsley Bottom - You two really need to put aside the frustration and work things out peacefully on the talk pages of the articles. The edit warring over Batman, Catwoman, and Two-Face is extensive and very disruptive, and both of you absolutely know better than to do that. ;-) I've only blocked you two from editing those three articles, not the entire website. The block will expire in one week. During the seven-day block, please take the time do peacefully work things out properly, discuss the issues and the disputes on the articles' talk pages, and come to a consensus between the two of you regarding everything. This way, when the blocks expire, one of you can publish the appropriate changes to these articles (if any) that reflect what the both of you agree on. :-) I expect that this is going to happen, and I also expect that the edit warring will not continue on other articles, nor will it continue when the block expires. If this happens, I'll have no choice but to impose further blocks. Please don't make me have to do that... :-/ ~Oshwah~ 01:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:2600:1010:B121:DFCA:4114:5555:1B60:8AC reported by User:RoseGold1250 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Page-multi error: no page detected.

User being reported: 2600:1010:B121:DFCA:4114:5555:1B60:8AC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Page protected ~Oshwah~ 01:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User: Npovobsessed reported by User:Daiichi1 (Result: )

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

"No reason why this content is 'less' important than others"
"The entire 'Activities' category should be deleted in the logic. Reverting the edit."
"Create a talk page if you want. Reverted"
"You need a sufficient further explanation on the Talk page if you want to alter this article. As far as I know, your reason cannot delete a sourced content on the article according to the rule. Reverted"
"CANNOT DELETE A SOURCED REASON WITHOUT A SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OR DEBATE. DID YOU READ MY COMMENT? POSTING THIS COMMENT AGAIN TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU READ. REVERTED."

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: User refuses to discuss edits after multiple attempts to get him to do so in my edit summaries, they even refuse to give a justification for their edits. The user is also currently involved in another edit war on the Anti-Korean sentiment page with another user. His behavior is unconstructive and it seems he isn't here to build an encyclopedia, this edit on the talk page of the Anti-Korean sentiment page (which he later reverted) indicates a clear conflict of interest as he admits to editing in order to prevent damage to the reputation of Korea, he also didn't assume good faith and immediately made accusations of nationalism against a user with Japanese characters in his name, this shows clear impartiality and bias doubly so given the long history of tensions between the two countries. A topic ban wouldn't be a bad ideaDaiichi1 (talk) 02:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

First of all, although it makes sense that you wrote a biased comment of the edit war, you did not mention why you, not me, are involved in the edit war over the article Voluntary Agency Network of Korea. All Misplaced Pages editors, including me, are allowed to revert the blanking of contents with an appropriate source. If you want to delete the sourced content in the article, you should have started a discussion on the talk page of the article. But you did not although I repeatedly warned for THREE times as you can see on my previous comments. Second, for the edit war against the user with Sino-Japanese characters, he/she repeatedly tried to add unsourced and factually inaccurate information on Anti-Korean sentiment article, and I believe that I took the right action to revert the user's edit. I should have reported potential edit wars before I start the edit war, but I could not since I am a new editor on Misplaced Pages who does not know how to report. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Npovobsessed (talk • contribs) 04:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to mention that after reporting him here the user reverted the page again . Daiichi1 (talk) 10:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:98.213.52.136 reported by User:Assem Khidhr (Result: )

User being reported: 98.213.52.136 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

04:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC) "Rearranged somewhat, as matzah and salt water are not on the seder plate"
20:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014734915 by Fleabite531 (talk) Right, but they gave no sense of notability. A JVP campaign might belong on the JVP page, but not on the page for a practice of 10000x more people"
18:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Undid revision 1014705868 by Fleabite531 (talk) A paragraph in the same fluff piece published in several outlets is evidence for existence, not notability. Misplaced Pages isn't the place from every minor practice some group of 100 people invented one day"
16:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC) "Don't reinsert without an argument for notability"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

05:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Passover Seder plate."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

17:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC) on Talk:Passover Seder plate "/* Olive */ new section"

Comments:

See relevant discussion Assem Khidhr (talk) 05:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Lm6886 reported by User:Bilorv (Result: 1 week)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Permalink/1011536074

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: three warning templates, one custom warning: Special:Diff/1014578059, Special:Diff/1014567800, Special:Diff/1014306695, Special:Diff/1014976449

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: consensus for the pre-revert version was established by this RfC

Comments:

Slow-burn reversion of consensus established at a well-attended RfC without discussion, despite three users (including myself) trying to engage the user in discussion. Note that the first edit was an act of edit warring because the user removed a hidden comment which explained where the consensus was obtained and urged discussion rather than removal, so this is four edits where the user should have known that they were going against consensus, roughly once a day, and there's no sign of them stopping. — Bilorv (talk) 10:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 1 week from editing the article. Ritchie333 21:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:76.180.123.71 reported by User:AndreCarrotflower, 2nd offense (Result: Blocked)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: See Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive430#User:76.180.123.71 reported by User:AndreCarrotflower (Result: Blocked). User received a 24-hour block then picked right up where he left off after it expired. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 12:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Acroterion (talk) 12:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Crossroads reported by User:Smerus (Result: Page protected)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User:Crossroads also tried giving me a 3 revert warning (although he had already carried out 3 reverts himself) - }}--Smerus (talk) 21:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Page protected for a period of 24 hours. If you're having difficulty getting consensus, consider dispute resolution. Ritchie333 21:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Smerus should if anything be reporting himself. He is reverting back in material from this version and before about Chopin possibly being attracted to his friend Woyciechowski. After an RfC, it was found there was no consensus for it and it was removed. Today Smerus ran up against the 3RR in reverting this material back in ()()() (I am counting each parentheses as one edit since he took two edits the first time). This is against the clear direction of WP:ONUS that he has to get consensus for material before it can be included; it is clear from the ongoing talk page discussion that there is not a consensus for this material. I have more grounds to report him than he does me. Neither of us violated 3RR and he is the one disregarding WP:ONUS. Crossroads 21:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

] reported by User:Mikeblas (Result: )

Previous version reverted to: previous version

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: talk page

Comments:

I'm just trying to keep the material in this article referenced, and keep the references error-free. Mikeblas (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Categories: