Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:00, 14 December 2022

• WP:AN/3
• WP:AN3
• WP:AN/EW
• WP:ANEW
• WP:AN/3RR

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

Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)

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.

User:FierakuiVërtet reported by User:NebY (Result: Page full-protected for a week)

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

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:10, 9 December 2022‎ (UTC) "Undid revision 1126519849 by Virgilanthony (talk) I am sure that the 2011 census does not contradict the 54 000 mark. Feel free to find it and prove me wrong."
2. 20:06, 9 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1126519191 by Virgilanthony (talk) nope, because the official number could be given only by Albania, the state where ethnic Greeks lives. His number are OFFICIAL. Do you understand what this means?"
3. Consecutive edits made from 20:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC) to 20:01, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
   1. 20:00, 9 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1126518368 by Virgilanthony (talk) it does not work this way. The official information must be presented always as first, then the various estimates. The 200,000 is still there."
   2. 20:01, 9 December 2022 (UTC) "Refrain from doing what you did last time."
4. 19:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1126517436 by Virgilanthony (talk) your personal opinion about the census doesn't matter. The source clearly mention that it "is difficult to say how many ethnics Greeks there are in Albania". You cannot put down an official information just beacuse you don't like it. You are disruptive editing."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:04, 9 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Greeks."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 11:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC) on Talk:Greeks "/* Jeffries quote */ Reply"

Comments:

Editor has returned to edit-warring over the infobox figure for the number of Albanains in Greece. I thought we'd reached consensus on this last month at Talk:Greeks#Jeffries quote and Talk:Greeks#Albania source quote is incorrect. NebY (talk) 20:15, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Page protected for a week, in full, so presumably this can be further hashed out on the talk page. Fortunately for Fierakui, this action was taken shortly after his third revert. Daniel Case (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: We have to hope it will be. The protection came a bit later than that, maybe prompted by an ANI report rather than these ones, and by then the two editors had made 36 edits between them, almost all reverts. NebY (talk) 22:21, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

The protection came nine minutes after the revert. That's within my definition of "shortly". Daniel Case (talk) 22:31, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: Mmm nine minutes but after FierakuiVërtet's seventh edit marked as "undid revision" in four hours ,, and at least some of their other ten edits in that time qualified too . The other editor's actions were similar, but this one had already been blocked for edit-warring back in October so it was sad to watch the editwarring continue for three hours and 22+ edits after they'd both been warned and then notified of these reports. NebY (talk) 22:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hmm ... I thought his name was familiar, and it turns out I was the one who had blocked him in October. Like I said, he is fortunate that the page was protected when it was. Daniel Case (talk) 03:48, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

User: 2a00:23c7:2b86:9801:0000:0000:0000:0000/64 reported by User:Shibbolethink (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Moorgate tube crash (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2a00:23c7:2b86:9801:0000:0000:0000:0000/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 09:50, 11 December 2022
2. 09:53, 11 December 2022
3. 10:05, 11 December 2022
4. 12:28, 11 December 2022
5. 15:31, 11 December 2022

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 12:31, 11 December 2022 plus there's this entire AN discussion about this LTA's edit warring which links the 64 range together as mostly coming from the user formerly known as SchroCat

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Special:PermanentLink/1126893640#IP reverts today (diff)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 16:48, 11 December 2022

Comments:

This user has been warned many times about edit-warring, but has done it despite all this in order to restore their preferred versions of their favorite articles, of which this is one such example. — Shibbolethink 21:49, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours since they reverted six times in the last 24 hours. Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Higg27 reported by User:Soetermans (Result: Blocked indef)

Page: Final Fantasy XVI (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Higg27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "/* External links */"
2. 23:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I have very strong suspicions that this is a block evasion by Teader (talk · contribs), who has been blocked for doing the exact same thing again and again, removing a category on Final Fantasy XVI. soetermans. 03:11, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely Daniel Case (talk) 04:29, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

User:WWE Lover Fan Forever reported by User:Czello (Result: page block)

Page: Professional wrestling (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: WWE Lover Fan Forever (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:13, 12 December 2022 (UTC) ""
2. 22:47, 11 December 2022 (UTC) ""
3. 22:14, 11 December 2022 (UTC) ""
4. 20:07, 11 December 2022 (UTC) ""
5. 10:35, 11 December 2022 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

— Czello 08:15, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments:

User has also deleted other users' talk page comments and also engaged in personal attacks. — Czello 11:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

• WWE Lover Fan Forever has been blocked indefinitely from Professional wrestling as well as its talkpage for edit warring, disruptive editing, and personal attacks. Bishonen | tålk 11:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC).

User:Tree Critter reported by User:Ippantekina (Result: 72 hours)

Page: You Belong with Me (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Tree Critter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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:

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

Comments: Though I tried to resolve the conflict by presenting my arguments at the talk page this editor seems to not understand (or at least ignore) my explanations, and went on to revert back their edits. In this case, I and Binksternet explained to them that the reliability of the source in question (Apple Music) should be examined thoroughly before use, but they somehow did not take our explanations into consideration. The same thing happened at the article Lavender Haze, for which the use of another source (All Music) is being discussed at Talk:You Belong with Me, but things happened exactly the same.. And this editor also assumed a passive-aggressive manner, as seen through their edit summaries. Ippantekina (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Ritchie333 16:41, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Bicepcurls200 reported by User:Stevie fae Scotland (Result: Blocked 72 hours)

Page: Template:2026 FIFA World Cup qualification – CONMEBOL table (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bicepcurls200 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Version from December 6 before any edit warring Version from December 11 before 3RR violation

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Warned by Eagleash

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

It was not brought up on the article talk page but has been brought up on the project page

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

Comments:
The users only contributions to date have been to remove this information from the template above and the parent article despite a reliable source being provided. Stevie fae Scotland (talk) 21:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

They are still reverting on the article and have made no reply to multiple attempts to reason with them. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 21:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 72 hours due to making 8 reverts in the last couple of days. Daniel Case (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User:165.140.54.22 reported by User:Trainsandotherthings (Result: /29 range blocked for 3 months)

Page: Rhode Island (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 165.140.54.22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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: There's been no discussion. I have not made any reverts personally.

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

Comments:

Now continuing to edit as 165.140.54.21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). – dudhhr _contribs (he/they) 16:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/165.140.54.16/29 rangeblocked 3 months by Favonian. – dudhhr _contribs (he/they) 18:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Elmenhorster reported by User:JayBeeEll (Result: Blocked)

Page: Heinrich Reuss (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "His views on debt were removed without explanation; also Misplaced Pages does not pre-judge subjects' views as conspiracy theories, or co-mingle them; Reuss has a set of views that are perfectly legal to hold; monarchism is not a conspiracy theory"
2. 22:43, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127103994 by JayBeeEll (talk)If you disagree about inclusion, seek consensus on Talk; it was included long before you came around to edit this article"
3. Consecutive edits made from 22:16, 12 December 2022 (UTC) to 22:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
   1. 22:16, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127099886 by JayBeeEll (talk)1st minute of the Youtube video of his Zurich speech (0:49)"
   2. 22:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC) ""
4. 21:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "Guys, flat tax is important; second, it is said by him in his Zurich speech (I'm pretty sure - this factoid was properly referenced from the very start of this article, more or less)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:41, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Heinrich Reuss‎."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: JBL/JayBeeEll did not try to resolve the issue on the Talk page (which was their responsibility); I started a topic for them there and look forward to their responses.Elmenhorster (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Still no response. Elmenhorster (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments:

• I've been on Misplaced Pages long and this is the first time I got reported. Seems the other party feels very strongly about the subject of flat tax and whether an alleged coup mastermind can hold bona-fide views on economics, and that Misplaced Pages should say it about him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elmenhorster (talk • contribs) 22:49, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
• It is worth noting that the reverts above are not comprehensive since Elmenhorster is almost surely the same person as 213.203.182.254, see and the discussion here where they participate together. --JBL (talk) 22:55, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Also relevant: their problems with edit-warring are not restricted to one article, at Mikhail Fridman over the last two days we have 10 December 09:56, 10 December 14:52, 11 December 18:19, 12 December 17:19 -- not a 3RR violation, but unambiguous edit-warring. --JBL (talk) 23:11, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

    Reverts on Mikhail Fridman led to me being proven right (see Talk on Mikhail Fridman article earlier today) after mediation by a more experienced Misplaced Pages editor. Elmenhorster (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

    That's a rather novel reading of a discussion in which you started by casting aspersions and (seemingly) still fail to understand WP policy and it's application with respect to the differences in basic meaning between the content of the sources and what you wrote (which was overlooked by the 3rd party). _wjemather 15:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

    I remember it was you who ran into trouble with another (more experienced) editor about your possible whitewashing (his words).

    Aspersion you're referring to was literally 2 words: "Odd, no?" Elmenhorster (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  It looks like you are posting using 2 alliases: JBL and JayBeeEll. JayBeeEll seems to have a history (on their Talk page) of aggressive editing that has led to a few disputes in the past. Elmenhorster (talk) 23:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

  No, he isn't posting using 2 alliases, that is his signature. Chip3004 (talk) 16:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Oh...ok, thanks. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Could you please address your Talk page history and why you seem to be receiving near-constant backlash for your aggressive editing tactics? Elmenhorster (talk) 22:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  Daily reminder 2: you still have not engaged with the discussion on the article's Talk page. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

• Third-party comment: Elmenhorster has not been on Misplaced Pages terribly long. However, they have managed to decided "blanking thee but not me" is an appropriate strategy, particularly for removing reliable sourcing identifying the subject of the debated article as antisemitic. I think Elmenhorster should receive a slap on the wrist for WP:SOAPBOXing and edit warring, but anything more would be excessive towards a new editor that could learn from these mostly trivial mistakes. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:46, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  @Pbritti: There's actually way more than that -- since I filed this report, they've done some Jew-tagging and some antisemitism apology (also a feature of their edits at the Reuss page, as you note). I felt like it would be poor form to open an ANI report while this is still waiting for administrator attention, but this editor should not be allowed here. --JBL (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  @JayBeeEll: If admin attention isn't given within the next couple hours, this is plenty for a full ANI. Thanks. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  I am Jewish. I have done a great deal of "Jew-tagging" on Misplaced Pages before I registered. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  I note that my edits have had nothing to do with Jews or anti-Semitism on Reuss article. On its Talk page I did say in the context of another topic-discussion that none of the references back Reuss being anti-Semitic, which is true. One reference, maybe same Reuters, says, in a veiled way, he used anti-Semitic trope, but noone has been able to locate what it is yet; in the Zurich speech he does not mention Jews even once. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  I am happy to see you are completely twisting the facts. Anybody can see following your own link my edit had nothing to do with anti-Semitism or apologizing for it. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:21, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  I asked you to clarify your baseless accusation on the article's Talk page but you are still to respond. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

• I note that the edit warring continued following the initial report, and I've added another diff above. --JBL (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  My edit stands, having been reviewed by many other users, and it is literally one sentence on Reuss economic views referenced from Reuters. Elmenhorster (talk) 22:06, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

• I have initiated a thread at ANI in case anyone who commented here wishes to comment there. It is Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Elmenhorster. --JBL (talk) 23:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – User:Elmenhorster 31 hours for edit warring at Heinrich Reuss. EdJohnston (talk) 01:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Freoh reported by User:Jtbobwaysf (Result: Stale; malformed)

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

User Freoh is undergoing apparent WP:SEALION on an array of pages. I first noticed it at Acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk and then took a look at the user's edits on a few other articles, and noted he is in similar battles with editors on those talk pages. Most seem to be related to adding WP:FRINGE interpretations and repeated (again and again) violations of WP:BRD. Freoh is a somewhat new editor and I have held off on this per WP:BITE, but ErnestKrause left a message on my talk page today also conveying they felt it had gone on too long as well. I would say the user has had some support from other users

Freoh was warned by General Ization back in August for a 3RR on Democracy and again by me in December on Acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk. It doesnt seem to me that any change any behavior has come about, other than to an increase in what I view as WP:SEALION. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:46, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

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

Comments:

• Not sure why I was notified of this discussion, since I am not a party to the editing history at the article or the debate on this article's Talk page and, as noted, my only contact with Freoh — an EW3 warning and followup discussion still available for review on that editor's Talk page — concerned a different page 4 months ago. General Ization 03:55, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
• This report is both stale and malformed.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Jattlife121 reported by User:113.193.45.26 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Amritpal Singh Khalsa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Jagraj Singh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Jattlife121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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:

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

Comments: I asked user Jattlife121 multiple times to stop reverting edits that they don't like but the user is keep removing contents by giving baseless comments. I suspect they are here to promote Amritpal_Singh_Khalsa and related articles by adding biased content using unreliable sources. 113.193.45.26 (talk) 09:45, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I also want to point out that the user accused me of citing "false sources" without providing any evidence Diff. 113.193.45.26 (talk) 09:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

"Amritpal Singh Sandhu (born 1993) is a Khalistani separatist who is known for spreading hatred towards Hindu and Christian communities. He currently heads the Waris Punjab De, an organisation founded by Punjabi actor, lawyer and Khalistan sympathizer Deep Sidhu. Sandhu was based in Dubai where he had been working as dispatcher in the family-owned transport business. He returned to Punjab, India months after the death of Deep Sidhu and joined Waris Punjab De. He is the 2nd and current leader of the Punjabi-centric social organisation, Waris Panjab De" - Hi wikipedia, this user made this edit ? is this appropriate. This is complete vandalising of the page, he has been told of many times for poor use of grammar and using bias as shown above. He changes his IP address to get his way. We need the page to be extended protected to stop vandalisim. Jattlife121 (talk) 12:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Also keep accusing me of "vandalism" for my valid and sourced edits diff this is harassing. 113.193.45.26 (talk) 09:56, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

They again accused me of vandalim on Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism/TB2 and I'm not able to reply there so I would reqeust admins to take strict action on his repeat harassment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.193.45.26 (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

First of all, my IP has been changed due to server rest. I notice this user used canned edit summary to remove the same contents they don't like. I asked them not to remove sourced contents yesterday but I don't see any success on that (diff of canned edit summary). Their behavior is selective that can be verified through their comments on their talk page. Thanks 1.23.250.183 (talk) 12:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Sir, can someone please tell this gentleman to stop bullying me? He's now personally attacking me by mocking me for my English skills (this is not the first time) . I don't appreciate his constant harassment sorry. 1.23.250.183 (talk) 12:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Stop lying, you aren't making the correct edits using correct english grammar. I have changed them multiple times and you are reversing edits made on the article. You have constantly been harassing me on other articles such as the Jagraj one. You have serious issues and I recommend that the admin looks into your account. Jattlife121 (talk) 12:49, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You can keep reporting me, I've done nothing against the rules. You throw your toys out of the pram when you can't get your way. I've clearly highlighted to you where your English has been applied incorrectly but your stubbornness to remove it is deeply concerning.

You have constantly vandalised the article, you claim to respect wikipedia neutrality but include buzz words which goes against these terms of policies. Not only that, you come onto this page for edit warring and constantly harass the admin with false statements against me. You made a wikipedia account one day ago and spam edits out of nowhere, now you have a whole new IP Address so you can start from scratch. Seriously, grow up ! Jattlife121 (talk) 12:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank God you are finally here. So first of all, I correctly removed unreliable sources from Jagraj Singh as per WP:RS and WP:RSP (diff) but you reverted my edit so I had to undo your addition of unreliable sources in the same article. The notability of Jagraj Singh is also questionable and Draft:Jagraj Singh was declined in October by user User:DoubleGrazing. You have not yet provided any evidence of my wrong English but keep harassing me even here on this page. You failed to provide any evidence of my edits that you believe are "vandalism" but keep accusing me so I request you again please provide evidence where I made spam edits, vandalism, or spelling mistakes and if you can't provide any evidence I would like you to apologize. 1.23.250.183 (talk) 13:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

They were reliable sources. You obvious have been looking through my edits and deliberately harassing me because you can't get your way. The notability is questionable, lol what. He's literally respected by every Sikh worldwide. He started the biggest sikh platform and is known by Sikh organisations to be one of the pioneers in the 21st century. You need to stop your anti-sikh remarks. It's obvious you are constantly attacking Sikh related pages when your IP is in southern india (a non-sikh area). I am concerned Misplaced Pages is allowing an account like yours to be on here when you've got an Anti-Sikh Agenda. I literally gave you the spelling mistakes stop with blatant lies. You couldn't even spell controversies properly and you acknowledged it. You couldn't even spell Bhindranwale properly yet you still reverse the edits. Your first edit on the Amritpal article was this "Amritpal Singh Sandhu (born 1993) is a Khalistani separatist who is known for spreading hatred towards Hindu and Christian communities. He currently heads the Waris Punjab De, an organisation founded by Punjabi actor, lawyer and Khalistan sympathizer Deep Sidhu. Sandhu was based in Dubai where he had been working as dispatcher in the family-owned transport business. He returned to Punjab, India months after the death of Deep Sidhu and joined Waris Punjab De. He is the 2nd and current leader of the Punjabi-centric social organisation, Waris Panjab De". < do you think this is appropiate to edit on a wikipedia article. I am very confident Misplaced Pages will be taking down your account and making this an extended protected article soon.

Your anti-Sikh agenda is kinda obvious and you're aren't the only one on wikipedia. I have even included and removed any glorification of individuals on the article yet you have still put bias words and remarks. You seriously need to get a life and do something productive with your day. Jattlife121 (talk) 13:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Admins I can't take this harassment anymore so I won't be replying to his comments. His comments above prove he has a selective point of view. I would finally request an admin to review their edits as they keep citing unreliable sources and removing sourced information such as these edits at Sikhism in the United Kingdom. If any admin has a question for me please feel free to ask and I'll reply as soon as possible. Thank you 1.23.250.183 (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Honestly you are clutching at straws. Absolutely pathetic. You do realise there was a 2021 Census in the UK, therefore the information I removed was relating to 2011 which is now in table form. Also the 2021 was census information was updated using the official gov census statistics. The pathetic attempt to highlight perfectly fine edits just shows your agenda. Secondly, The British Sikh Report edit was removed because it has been referenced in this wikipedia article over 15 times. You say I have a selective point of view a) I make edits on Sikh pages b) I told you to make a controversies section which a well respected wikipedia editor has made changes saying you went against their terms of policy for neutral point of view for the words "neutral" and "distasteful". They also said your formatting was wrong which is was clearly edited by myself before you reversed it. Therefore, you have been proven wrong. c) Selective point of view is a joke. I told you to make a controversy section. I've even contributed to that section myself. Your first edit on that article was a complete mess as per the quoted sentence above. Stop with the lies and nonsense. I've had enough and so have other wikipedia editors. Jattlife121 (talk) 14:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't think I have to tolerate you anymore. Regarding Sikhism in the United Kingdom article, You made around 15 edits to the article but you did not update the page with the latest information nor provided a single reliable source instead you removed a bunch of information along with official reliable sources without any explanation. If something has changed you don't need to remove it but update it with sources. Regarding the use of the word "radical" I still don't agree with user Czello who removed the word stating "NPOV" the word is widely used on Misplaced Pages and is important to clarify what kind of remarks the subject has made. Just saying "remarks" does not make any sense. Regarding my first edit on the article, it was well sourced and the statements I added are widely published in major news platforms. Your comment above that "your IP is in southern india (a non-sikh area), I am concerned Misplaced Pages is allowing an account like yours to be on here when you've got an Anti-Sikh Agenda." clearly shows your selective point of view and is disrespectful. What do you mean by a non-Sikh area? what you are trying to say? 1.23.250.183 (talk) 15:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

STOP LYING. Honestly, are you normal or something. I made 15 edits. I can list every single one of them out if you want. I literally gave you National Gov Stastics. The edit I made today was from 2011 to 2021 as there was a new 2021 Census. You are a lost cause honestly. You just constantly lie through your teeth on wikipedia. Seek help my friend. Czello, proved you wrong on both edits. "remarks" is more than fine, it's because your English grammar in that paragraph was completely worded wrong. Therefore, your ability to use certain words without the meaning of them is concerning.

Yes, you are obviously have come on wikipedia to antagonise Sikhs. It is more than likely, you are a non-sikh yourself. I could tell from the way you disrespected Jagraj Singh. Not one Sikh on this earth has a bad thing to say about him. Now, have a good day and seek help because you need it.

Good luck. This is the last time I am responding you and wikipedia knows who's in the right anyway. My account would have been blocked by now + stop lying on here. It's not good. Jattlife121 (talk) 15:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Can you list just one edit you made on Sikhism in the United Kingdom where you added a single reliable source instead of removing information without an explanation? Here is the list of your 15 edits on that page. I'm a Sikh or a non-Sikh that is not your business nor do I have to prove my faith to you. Everyone has equal rights to improve Misplaced Pages it's not anyone's personal property. I would have nominated the article Jagraj Singh for deletion but unfortunately, the nomination namespace is protected to logged-in users only. That article contains no real source that supports notability under WP:N and that was the reason why User:DoubleGrazing declined the submission. 113.193.45.185 (talk) 15:53, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Stop being ridiculous, you are a liar and manipulative person spreading fake information to admins to try and tarnish my account and contributions. Misplaced Pages requires a minimum of three sources for an article. Jagraj Singh's article has plenty of credible sources. You've obviously done this to antagonise myself. Nothing will happen to the Jagraj Singh, Misplaced Pages page. The sources are perfectly fine. Also other admins have checked and made some edits already. The first draft of Jagraj Singh, had a lack of sources, therefore this time I have included them.

Sikhs in UK Edits (now what sources do i need to provide lol. I've listed them all now and exposed your lies. Admins can see for themself):

1) Edit on 4th December: I updated the information as per the 2021 Census of Sikhs in the UK as at 524,140 (the source is not required for the table) as this number is referenced earlier in the page.

2) Edit on 4th December: The number wouldn't update correctly on Misplaced Pages and appeared as blank.

3) Edit on 4th December: The revision was still blank

4) Edit on 4th December: The edit of census number in table didn't work so I just undid everything.

5) Edit on 11th December: The 2011 census data had been removed as there was a UK census for 2021 providing religious statistics. The info therefore was used in the table and 2021 information has been written out.

6) Edit on 11th December: Basics of Sikhi (it is also a registered charity) has been included and replaced by City Sikhs (works as a professional sikh business org, not specifically on sikh issues)

7) Edit on 11th December: Pictures have been reduced as it included the same individual multiple times posted by the same wikipedia account. Obviously highlighting bias.

8) Edit on 11th December: Picture I initially used was too big therefore it had to be changed to thumb to make it smaller. This is to do with Kirpan laws in the UK and is a free image from wikipedia commons.

9) Edit on 11th December: Kirpan picture now used from wikipedia commons ( no source needed)

10) Edit on 11th December: I removed 2011 census pictures as this is misleading and doesn't align with the 2021 census data in the article.

11) Edit on 11th December: I used my own picture i created myself and uploaded to wiki commons for the geographical distribution of sikhs in the UK.

12) Edit on 11th December: I had to shift the picture to the correct spot edit.

13) Edit on 11th December: Update to spelling.

14) Edit on 13th December: British Sikh report has been referenced an extraordinary amount of times in the article. I minimised this when repeated twice in same paragraph or as an when necessary. No new info was added.

15) Edit on 13th December: I updated Slough for 2021 census as it said 2011.

Now, as i have proven you lied. Tell me where what information i have included need sources or what sources have actually been removed. Now stop this nonsense. Jattlife121 (talk) 16:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

No need to keep pinging me, I'm not involved with this. Ta, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

The onus is on you to explain why you removed the information without adding additional details along with the sources. You removed a lot of sourced content that could have been updated instead see here and then you failed to provide a citation for your changes in this edit? FYI if other editors made changes to a page that does not make the subject notable. 113.193.45.185 (talk) 16:31, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

The second point, the table doesn't have sources as the number is referenced earlier as I said. The number of UK Sikhs in 2021 is already mentioned. No second source is required. Also the 2011 info, that has been replaced with is the source of the UK official government statistics. What type of second source in more credible than the government census stats ? If you have the govermennt sources for a census you don't need 2,3,4 more. Look at other countries. Honestly, its like talking to a toddler. Jattlife121 (talk) 16:35, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Because you find it difficult to understand how census data works, https://en.wikipedia.org/Sikhism_in_Canada - There is ONLY 2021 data mentioned in the introduction, Old information is used in the table form as a way of compare different periods. Why on earth you would make an introduction with old data is beyond me. Also look at the source. Official Canada Gov Census data. Only one is required. Give it a rest lol. Jattlife121 (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

• Result: The page in dispute, Amritpal Singh Khalsa, is fully protected three days. These editors both seem inexperienced. If it weren't for that, blocks for both users would have been logical. EdJohnston (talk) 17:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

  Surely, making this extended protected would be better going forwards in regards to the edits. Jattlife121 (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

It's hard to choose between the two of you to see who is worse at following our policies. An EC protection would stop the IP but allow you to continue making your own changes. You question the anonymous editor because 'your IP is in southern india (a non-sikh area).' Another option for the closing admin would have been blocking you for personal attacks on this very noticeboard ('seek help because you need it', 'liar', 'toddler'). EdJohnston (talk) 17:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

If someone has constantly berated me and claimed I didn't do something when I did and proved them wrong is not fair to use the context of "liar". Especially when his whole agenda is to take down my account. I told him to seek help, because he is constantly reporting my account, as per above claiming X and Y when I listed out every edit I made on that page. Also, the context of Sikh area is in fair regards considering his edits were heavily one sided despite myself adding to a controversies section. Obvious, it comes to a point where I am frustrated when he someone is making accusations against me to block my account especially when they are false. Jattlife121 (talk) 17:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

If someone has made an edit on a page calling a person "anti hindu and anti christian" by vandalising it, is that not a personal attack. Considering to another community, by many he is held in high regard. Jattlife121 (talk) 17:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Shadowwarrior8 reported by User:Ecrusized (Result: No violation)

Page: Template:Syrian civil war infobox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Shadowwarrior8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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:

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

Comments:
Violation of 1RR. No response to the dispute resolution at article talk page. No response to the 1RR violation warning at their talk page. Ecrusized (talk) 13:50, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User was warned by five other users for adding original research , , , content and making personal attacks. Ecrusized (talk) 14:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

• Shadowwarrior has self-reverted. No violation.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

  @Bbb23 It seems Ecrusized is unfortunately in a hurry to make ad-hominem attacks against me; by having no respect for the disputing editor aggressively mining against me years back and doing everything to not discuss the topic at hand.

  Just to clarify regarding my erroneous conduct in that 1 edit :

  I only wanted a genuine discussion in a positive, academic tone; which the aggressive nature of the account's response in the talk page alarmed me. Hence, I immediately reverted their edit which i deemed unconstructive here . ( and since it was spontaneous I forgot 1R/24 hr policy in the Template page)

  But this doesnt mean I wasnt responding in the talk with the account. Rather I was posting my response here which was posted at 13:53. (a response with sources). They notified all their warnings, reports quickly and agressively in a span of around 6 minutes without giving me time for my response. Their report was posted at 13:50; (when I was writing my response in the talk page).

  Even in their latest response in talk; they dont seem to care about any sources; rather than aggressively throwing wild accusations and making ad-hominem Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 14:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Shadowwarrior8 has self reverted. It would still be appropriate for an administrator to inspect Shadowwarrior8's edits as they seem keen to continue reverting once 24 hours has passed, without citing sources. As I have stated above Shadowwarrior8 was warned by multiple users about original research yet still continues to add it. Ecrusized (talk) 14:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

If you have issues with the user beyond the now-removed violation of 1RR, you need to take those issues to a different noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User:TurkicEtymology reported by User:Semsûrî (Result: Indef)

Page: Samsat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Urfa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127270580 by Semsûrî (talk)"
2. 20:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127270420 by Semsûrî (talk)Explain why an unofficial survey from 1998 = today's modern population? Just stop."
3. 20:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127270256 by Semsûrî (talk)?"
4. 20:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Source is from 1998 and unreliable, you can't just use a survey from 25 years ago and try pass it as the city's current demographics."
5. 20:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127268424 by Semsûrî (talk) Not every URL = reliable source fyi"
6. 20:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127267851 by Semsûrî (talk) You are the one unwilling to explain why it deserves to be there when I clearly and concisely explain why it doesn't, you take it to the talk page."
7. 20:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127267110 by Semsûrî (talk) I just explained what is wrong with it. The first source was by someone who referred to the area as Kurdistan even after 1923, and second was by someone was dozens of papers with the sole purpose of bashing Turkey. Sources are meant to be reliable and content is supposed to be relevant."
8. 19:57, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Demographics */ For concision. Was completely irrelevant to the city, more relevant to Edessa if anything. On top of that, both sources were extremely unreliable and biased. Since when do city pages contain "demographic history" of their predecessors anyway? Keep it on their main page."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:26, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Samsat."
2. 20:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: User:Semsûrî, don't add two reports for the same user. Yes, TurkicEtymology should be blocked (indefinitely, as everything about the user screams WP:NOTHERE), but you should have filed one report and mentioned the edit warring in both articles. Edit warring reports are for users, not for articles. Jeppiz (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely – by User:El C for ethno-nationalist battleground editing. EdJohnston (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

User:AMomen88 reported by User:A.Musketeer (Result: Block, Warning)

Page: Sheikh Hasina (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: AMomen88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC) ""Undid revision 1127275852 by LucrativeOffer (talk) The status quo ante bellum should be maintained until consensus is met on the talk page. I have decided not to add content, you should do the same while discussion continues on the talk page Please refrain from taking premature unilateral measures."
2. 18:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127230512 by LucrativeOffer (talk) consensus has not been reached"
3. 14:30, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Reverted to status quo ante bellum, contentious edits under discussion on talk page"
4. 23:06, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "removed POV cited with opinion pieces which are not reliable sources"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Sheikh Hasina."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: User has been edit warring to remove sourced content critical of the subject. A warning has been posted in his talk page while a discussion has been started but didn't stop the edit war by the user. Additionally, the user has also been making personal attacks against other editors. A.Musketeer (talk) 22:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

The edit war began when LucrativeOffer removed my cited content and added material which was bias as it was derived from opinion pieces. I did not remove the content because it was critical of the subject, in fact if you read my edit summaries I have stated on numerous occasions there should be negative content about the subject, but it should be balanced. I have not made personal attacks against any users I have criticised the nature of the edits the said user made. The attached reversions I made were after the talk page discussion began, I reverted the article to its state prior to when me and the said user edited it until after the discussion on the talk page concluded. It seems odd reporting me for edit warring when LucrativeOffer has done the same and has reverted the cited content I inserted on moot grounds. An ongoing discussion is occurring on the talk page, everyone is welcome to comment.—AMomen88 (talk) 23:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – 31 hours for edit warring. User:AMomen88 has removed material several times but these removals are not protected by any exception to the edit warring policy. User:LucrativeOffer is warned to observe WP:3RR. EdJohnston (talk) 17:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Elkhiar reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: )

Page: Fantasia (performance) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:58, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "The modification is arbitrarily cancelled by Mr. Bitton without any concrete explanation. The mention of the Tbourida inscription (which is the performance of the Fantasia, subject of this article) exists in the majority of the other versions of the same article, and it is essential that a mention of such importance appears in the summary. I invite those who do not necessarily agree with this to share their reasoning with us so that we can better understand and arrive at an unbiased solution)"
2. 23:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Hello. I reorganized the countries' order since an alphabetical order makes more sense. But I don't think why shouldn't a crucial information figure on the summary? It does for other languages such as French, Arabic & German, why not in the English version. Have a good night, and once again if you're not okay with it request a 3rd party commentary."
3. 23:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1127261488 by M.Bitton (talk) Hello again. We can request a 3rd party opinion if you think this is POV. I believe that a very important information should figure on the page's summary."
4. 19:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1125398920 by M.Bitton (talk) Because the UNESCO inscription wasn't in the summary (the part that 99% of Misplaced Pages readers read of an article) like the same Misplaced Pages page in other languages. This is completely unbiased, but Morocco should be the first mentionned as it is recognized by UNESCO, the largest and most reputatable organization in these matters as Moroccan. Please do not start an unnecessary editing war."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 23:38, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Fantasia (performance)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:M.Bitton#Fantasia

Comments:

• Fully aware of what edit warring is (see their first edit summary), they continued to revert after blanking the 3R warning on their talk page, while pretending to ask questions on my talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 00:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
• I won't be surprised if they're using an open proxy or vpn (given that they're obviously not new). M.Bitton (talk) 00:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I feel that what I was trying to do was a BLD, but you were far from collaborative, although I think you were acting with good intent and misunderstood the meaning of my edit.

I openly admit that I am acting on Misplaced Pages in an effort to preserve my country's culture and heritage, but I do not do so under any circumstances without using irrefutable sources. The cancellation of your recurring edits was in no way abusive in my opinion, but it was an attempt to discuss and exchange in order to come to a solution that suits the users of Misplaced Pages, and that will allow the readers to get a MAXIMUM of information from the article - To do this, it is essential to put the crucial information (objectively) in the summary of the article, which is the part most consulted by the readers and which allows these readers to form an idea Elkhiar (talk) 00:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

BRD* Elkhiar (talk) 00:21, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I see that you know about WP:BRD too (something you clearly weren't interested in when you were edit warring to push your country's interest). M.Bitton (talk) 00:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, how is it possible for you to know if I know something or not? Why are you making this assumption with such confidence? Elkhiar (talk) 00:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

You mentioned edit warring (in your first edit summary) and BRD (above). It's fair to assume that you knew both right at the start (quite an achievement for someone who theoretically has made 5 edits). M.Bitton (talk) 00:37, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I never mentioned edit warring. It is clear that it is now impossible to collaborate with you. While waiting for the moderators' answer, have a nice evening. Elkhiar (talk) 00:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Please do not start an unnecessary editing war. is what you wrote in your first edit summary. It directly contradicts this lie. M.Bitton (talk) 00:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@EdJohnston: Would you mind having a look at this case? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 17:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

User:Mishary94 reported by User:Spike 'em (Result: )

Page: FIFA World Cup records and statistics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Mishary94 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC) ""
2. 23:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC) ""
3. 17:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC) ""
4. 09:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "Go to page talk first"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on FIFA World Cup records and statistics."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 14:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ new section"
2. 12:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */"
3. 12:47, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */"
4. 18:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ Reply"
5. 23:31, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ Reply"
6. 23:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ Reply"
7. 00:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ Reply"
8. 07:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ Reply"
9. 07:55, 14 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */ Reply"
10. 08:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC) "/* Excessive records / lack of sources */"

Comments:

persistent reverts in violation of WP:V, WP:OR, WP:LISTCRIT Spike 'em (talk) 09:01, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring