Misplaced Pages

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

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:40, 14 January 2008 editB (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators63,958 edits →User:Bosnianjustice reported by User:JdeJ (Result: )← Previous edit Revision as of 15:10, 14 January 2008 edit undoRoadcreature (talk | contribs)4,347 editsm →User:Djma12 reported by User:Guido den Broeder (Result: ): timesNext edit →
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 817: Line 817:
The user is on Misplaced Pages with an agenda, most obvious in this edit Has a long history of edit warring on the page even before yesterday, as can be seen from the page history. Also attacking other users . His accusations of vandalism directed at others appear to be unsubstantial. ] (]) 08:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC) The user is on Misplaced Pages with an agenda, most obvious in this edit Has a long history of edit warring on the page even before yesterday, as can be seen from the page history. Also attacking other users . His accusations of vandalism directed at others appear to be unsubstantial. ] (]) 08:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
:I have blocked the user and protected the page. Talk it out - figure out if there are any legitimate objections to the map. --] (]) 13:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC) :I have blocked the user and protected the page. Talk it out - figure out if there are any legitimate objections to the map. --] (]) 13:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

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

*] violation on
{{Article|Fibromyalgia}}. {{3RRV|Djma12}}: Time reported: 14:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

*Previous version reverted to: <!-- This is MANDATORY. -->

<!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert
and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to.-->

<!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. See Help:Diff if you do not know what a diff is. -->

Previous revert: 04:18, 8 January 2008

*1st revert: 20:09, 13 January 2008
*2rd revert: 13:15, 14 January 2008
*3th revert: 14:07, 14 January 2008

*Diff of 3RR warning:

] is repeatedly re-adding a text that was removed before because it is not supported by the sources. He claims that he has consensus for this text, but this is not the case. The text differs significantly from the quote that he put forward for RFC, and no consensus was reached on the original quote either. Note that the source is already mentioned elsewhere in the text with a different (correct) interpretation. ] (]) 14:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


= Example = = Example =

Revision as of 15:10, 14 January 2008

Do not continue a dispute on this page. Please keep on topic.
Administrators: Please do not hesitate to move disputes to user talk pages.
Your report will not be dealt with if you do not follow the instructions for new reports correctly.

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
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
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.

    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


    Violations

    Please place new reports at the BOTTOM. If you do not see your report, you can search the archives for it.


    User:Nubula reported by User:English as tuppence (Result: both are blocked to stop mutual revert warring)

    Primeval (TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Nubula (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 15:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    I removed an external link from Primeval (TV series) which hosted material copied from various professional publications without any assertion that they had permission to do so (as advised in Misplaced Pages:External links). User:Nubula objected to this, reverting all attempts to remove this copyright violating site, requesting "proof" that the publications or writers held copyright on said articles. English as tuppence 15:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Ghanadar galpa reported by User:Relata refero (Result: Both blocked)

    Communist Party of India (Marxist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Ghanadar galpa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 19:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


    Refusing to engage on talkpage, saying "things are too heated". Well aware of 3RR; has in fact violated it already on this article in the previous 24 hour period, and on another article in the same time period (see his user talk). My involvement limited to responding to an incident report at AN/I; was accused instantly of collusion with Communists. A cool-down block to think about using talkpages to defuse "heatedness" rather than reverts might be in order. Relata refero (talk) 19:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    Both editors are blocked for revert warring. The "involvement" of Relata refero was three reverts/blanking of a huge chunk of text (I assume, disputed). I consider this to be an attempt of gaming of system rather than dispute resolution. `'Míkka>t 20:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    I agree and have warned User:Ghanadar galpa and User:Conjoiner who have been involved in the incident. But only User:Ghanadar galpa has been blocked so far. This does not seem to be a fair decision.Biophys (talk) 22:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    It seems that Mikka blocked another person (who was less involved in the warring) by mistake. Sorry if I am wrong. Could anyone review this please?Biophys (talk) 22:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    I was warned not to revert by you and Míkka not to engage in reverting. I took this on board and in fact have not made any edit to any article since let alone revert anyone's edits, while User:Ghanadar galpa has ignored you and Mikka and continued reverting. You can look at my contributions record. So why now push for me to be blocked when I have fully complied with these requests?--Conjoiner (talk) 00:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    Just to clarify, I do not suggest to block anyone. But it seems that Mikkolai has made a technical mistake by blocking User:Soman instead of User:Relata refero. He left a notice to Relata but blocked Soman. Sorry for misunderstanding.Biophys (talk) 02:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    Thanks for the clarification. Regarding Soman, it appears his block is the result of a clerical error. Relata refero appears to be a very recent entrant to the debate and I don't think there is any evidence that he "gamed the system", but was trying to remove some highly POV content. Perhaps he began to experience the same level of frustration as everyone else in dealing with a difficult editor who continually attacks those he disagrees with as "Communist vandals/trolls/paid propagandists/etc" (for example, this accusation that I, Relata and Soman are members of a "cabal" of editors belonging to or supportive of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)) ), apparently in a bid to antagonise rather than resolve issues.--Conjoiner (talk) 02:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    • This is not a place for discussion. If there are issues with the block, take it to WP:AN or Mikkalai's talk page. If there are issues with the page, take it to its talk page. This report is closed. Stifle (talk) 09:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:TTN reported by User:Maniwar (Result: Page Protected)

    A Tree Grows In Elmo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). TTN (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:

    Refusing to engage on talkpage. I'm in the process of doing some updates and all he is doing is reverting. This user has been guilty of this on numerous articles and a quick history review will quickly show how typical this is for him. When I did my second revert, it was because I was editing and ran into an edit conflict, I reverted then went right back to editing. --Maniwar (talk) 21:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    Since posting this, editor reverted a fourth time. I've added the info above. --Maniwar (talk) 21:33, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    TTN in order to avoid another 3RR , as his history will show, gained help from User:Eusebeus. Again, looking at the history of TTN's edit will show that Eusebeus is there to help ] when he is at or around two reverts. A look at this history page will show yet another close possible 3RR (two reverts) violation. And a look here here , here , and here , show aother 3RR violation, as well as here , and here , here . This is the rampant attitude this user takes with all of wikipedia. --Maniwar (talk) 23:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    I would also like you all to scrutinize User:Eusebeus because he and TTN engage in Tag Team 3RR. I know that sounds ridiculous, but this is their way around violating the rule. See examples here , here , here , here , and there are more which show the two of them working in sync to avoid breaking 3RR. However, in spirit both are guilty of such. --Maniwar (talk) 00:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Your wider complaints belong elsewhere. Since you were also edit warring you are also liable to a block. I have protected the article for 24 as an alternative to blocking you both. Spartaz 00:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:CBFan reported by User:Collectonian (Result: One month)

    List of Crash Bandicoot characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). CBFan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    • Diff of 3RR warning: 15:25, 10 January 2008 (given warning, but he is not a new editor and has received several 3RR warnings before, so he knows the rules)

    As part of a clean up effort, I did some massive edits to the List of Crash Bandicoot characters article, including rewriting several sections that had the same paragraph repeated multiple times, cleaning up the references and sources, and removing minor characters. I left a message on the talk page (where consensus had already been reached that clean up was needed in addition to some merges), explaining what I did, and asking if I removed any characters who I thought were minor but were not, to either add them back or bring them up for discussion. Instead, CBNFan reverted the entire edit as blatant vandalism and has been repeated redoing his reverts when I and another editor undoes them. He was reported to ANI over issues related to the articles about this game, but it was allowed to drop after he promised to discuss not just revert war and to be more careful about his being uncivil with other editors (see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive346#Blocking discussion and vandalizing AfD). He was also reported in November for his uncivil behavior and edit warring as well. Collectonian (talk) 21:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    You are to blame for this little incident and you know full well you are. CBFan (talk) 21:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    I am recusing myself from this one, because I've had previous encounters with CBFan, even though I don't believe that disqualifies me from acting. However, given his tendencies, it's best that someone else handle this report. I would point out, though, that an anon removed it from the board immediately after CBFan commented on it (and I reverted it back onto the board). I would also point out the frequency of 3RR violations for this account, and a tendency to refer to any edits (good faith or not) that he does not agree with as vandalism. - Philippe | Talk 21:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    I had reasons for refering to that edit as vandalism. It was certainly not constructing the encyclopedia very well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CBFan (talk • contribs) 22:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    Note: The anon IP that vandalized this report, 79.74.10.90, traces back to CBFan's general location, and is very similar to the vandalism of the AfD referenced in the ANI report above. And, for extra fun, CBFan is now 3RRing on my talk page to put a 3RR notice about the same article (per is vindictive report below) even though he deleted the same notice from his own user page, and I reverted 3 times, and stopped to avoid violating 3RR (so its also a false warning). Collectonian (talk) 21:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    Oh, so you've had to resort to telling lies, have you? Sad, so sad. It's obvious that you're wrong. CBFan (talk) 22:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Blocked for a month. The block log for this user is riddled with 3RR blocks (this is block 7 or 8) and I seriously considered an indef at this point. The exceedingly uncivil edit summaries and agressive editing should not be tolerated and a firm signal is required. Spartaz 00:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Collectonian reported by User:CBFan (Result:no violation )

    List of Crash Bandicoot characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Collectonian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    • Diff of 3RR warning:

    Collectionian has blatantly removed characters from the List of Crash Bandicoot characters page for apparantly no reason and little logic (removed characters with developed personalities, yet kept those with none at all). He did mention on the talk page this idea, yet he went ahead and edited without any fors or againsts. After seeing this, I reverted back to the last edit before he wrecked it and set about trying improve the article myself. However, despite removing a lot of "garbage" from before, C blatantly refused to accept it and continually reverted back to HIS edit, despite the fact that he had removed characters for no reason AND he had made the article very un-encyclopediac. Furthermore, he refuses to accept blame for this as shown above AND that he posted a warning about my revert war thing, yet when one was posted on his talk page, he deleted it. He is clearly more to blame than I am and a lie-teller at that. CBFan (talk) 21:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    I'd also like to add that he has now refused to accept blame for being involved in the edit war for the third time now, as par his talk page, as seen ], ], ], ], ] and ]. Furthermore, he is refusing to accept blame in any way, blaming the incident solely on me as seen here ]. CBFan (talk) 22:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:65.0.115.11 User:68.199.235.190 User:70.149.163.213 reported by User:UnclePaco (Result: no vio )

    Dominicans Don't Play (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 65.0.115.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) 68.199.235.190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) 70.149.163.213 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)  : Time reported: 01:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    Sockpuppet of 74.230.195.78 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previously blocked for vandalism http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:68.199.235.190

    3rr violation and using sockpuppets

    http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:74.230.195.78


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    Annonymous user with history of using IP's and history of editing same articles has on many occasions engaged in edit wars and violated 3rr on a number of occasions. Requesting page protection as well UnclePaco (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    The others you gave are all from Baton Rouge, LA. 68.199.235.190 is from New York and presumably unrelated. --B (talk) 05:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Go Down, Moses reported by User:BQZip01 (Result: Indefblocked)

    Hornfans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Go Down, Moses (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)



    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    New user continues to do nothing but vandalize said talk page over and over in the same manner; violation of WP:3RR. — BQZip01 —  01:53, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User blocked: For obvious trolling, please report it to WP:AIV. It isn't necessary to bring it here, but please note that the criticism section that he blanked in a few of his edits was absolutely 100% inappropriate to have in the article. We don't source things to opponents' message boards - that's just plain nonsense. Message boards are not reliable sources and Misplaced Pages is not the place to bring the sports rivalry. I'm a Tech fan, but I have blocked Tech fans for trolling UVA articles. The rivalry needs to be checked at the door. --B (talk) 06:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Coloane reported by User:Miyokan (Result: 24 hours)

    Russia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Coloane (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 03:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    Not a new user, blanks his talk page.

    User continues to add the tag in bad faith. After I exposed his lying on another issue, User:Coloane declared - "OK! go ahead! I just don't care! I already illustrated my point. I am not going to revert it. RIght now I will try to make sure your article Russia fail and die from FAC. That is the most important thing." and "whenever you nominate Russia or Russian article, I will surely vote OPPOSE or take them to FAR. This is the heavy price you have to pay". He has made similar disruptive WP:POINTy edits on other pages, see User_talk:Coloane#Stop_the_disruption Miyokan (talk) 03:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    I would also like to direct administrators' attention the user's contributions. He is heavily drawn into FAC discussions. Upon further investigation, it is evident that he started some kind of FA revenge war with Indonesia, when its primary contributor voted negatively on Macau's FAC. This user's mainspace edits are very sparse. And what he does contribute, are mostly reverts. I strongly question this user's intentions on Misplaced Pages. Regards, Bogdan 04:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    I would add to my concern as to whether the sum total of Coloanes' contributions add or hinder making a better encyclopedia. If he can not learn a more collegiate style a one month block for reflection might be appropriate. Alice 04:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    I've blocked Coloane for twenty-four hours for edit-warring. I think you might have a case for general disruption, but I feel it would be better to raise this matter at WP:ANI so you can get a broader opinion and so you can explain the issue in greater detail. -- tariqabjotu 04:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    Yes, his nomination for Indonesia to FAR (and other countries?) while he's pushing his hometown Macau FAC are disruptive - if he was genuine about improving Indonesia (all of a sudden), he'd make the changes himself or use that article's talk page. --Merbabu (talk) 04:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    Please place a note on my talk page if a "General disruption case" is raised, as I may wish to contribute pertinent diffs. Alice 04:47, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:XLR8TION reported by User:UnclePaco (Result: 2 weeks)

    Dominican Day Parade (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). XLR8TION (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 03:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    One revert where his reverts are based from is 01:45, 2 January 2008


    No need for warning has been blocked many times in the past for 3rr.


    Was let off of block early if he behaved, but immediately enters into an edit war. Has been blocked many times for incivility as well as 3rr violations . UnclePaco (talk) 03:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    FYI to whoever reviews this, checkuser has confirmed that the IPs reverting the article are not UnclePaco, however suspicious as those reverts may be. XLR8TION's prior block was in part based on what was possibly a misunderstanding - see everyone's comments at Misplaced Pages:RFARB#Anti-Dominicanism if interested. UnclePaco's version is somewhat of a WP:COATRACK as it is taking a couple of sentences at the end of articles and making it sound like the parade was nothing but violence (in other words, quite a lot of POV to it). But, on the other hand, reverting POV is not an exception to 3RR. --B (talk) 05:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User was noted on wikipedia ediquette here and noted that his attack on me stating English isn't my first language but his and thus i should allow him to edit. . Violated 3rr here but was warned , later he was placed on put on a week block for continuous posting of a white power website ]. The RFARB was started by an individual right after Xlr8tion was blocked (quite unusual) demanding the unblock of Xlr8tion, after I replied with much evidence. That person never replied again. UnclePaco (talk) 05:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    User:SqueakBox reported by User:Lawrence Cohen (Result: no violation)

    User:Jimbo Wales (edit | ] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). SqueakBox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 16:20, 11 January 2008

    No need for warning has been blocked many times in the past for 3rr.

    Reverting vandalism is not 3rr and this report is not acceptable. Itw as clear vandal;sim of Jimbo's page and I reverted it as such. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    SqueakBox is right; no violation. Keep up the good work! Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 16:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    The text the IP was trying to add shouldn't be there, but I see no evidence that it's vandalism per se. Still, on Wales' userpage, he can describe himself as founder, co-founder, or ham sandwich, as he (not the IP) chooses, so reverting is (IMO) justified. --SSBohio 17:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    I am happy to assume good faith in that Cohen muddled User:Jimbo Wales with Jimmy Wales. Reverting nasty vandalism (which this clearly was) on peoples user pages is a number one priority on this project. Thanks, SqueakBox 00:24, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:86.153.35.1 reported by User:Lawrence Cohen (Result: 24 hours)

    User:Jimbo Wales (edit | ] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 86.153.35.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 16:25, 11 January 2008

    New IP, warning left.

    Hopefully, the warning will stick. I see that the warning didn't do the trick. The text the IP was trying to add shouldn't be there, since the userpage is someone else's; I see no evidence that it's deliberate vandalism per se. It is, however, rather POINTy. Any relation between this user and past advocates of similar points of view? --SSBohio 17:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:1993.J and 86.132.9.116 reported by User:Rocksanddirt (Result: Warned; next revert will result in block)

    Bonus Pastor Catholic College (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 1993.J (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 86.132.9.116 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    Editor created an article that may be speedy deletable, but assuming there was more to it I tagged it for references, and advertising. In addition, I removed some of the clearly unencylcopedic content (phone numbers, address, dress code, etc.) and formated it a wee bit more wiki'ish. Since, then it has been a nearly constant reversion from the named user and ip above. Rocksanddirt (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    • I don't see any reverts since the warning was placed. Now that the user has been warned, if he continues to edit-war please let me know or bring it back here. MastCell 22:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
    User appeared to take the warning seriously. The article is now not in a position that I would edit war over all the tags. I might re-add the ref's tag later. Or I might go watch a movie. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 04:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:144.232.153.118/User:GRANDEXTRAV reported by User:Yilloslime (Result: 24 hours)

    Jesse Helms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 144.232.153.118 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)/GRANDEXTRAV (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 22:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    User repeated inserting unsourced material into LEAD in violation of WP:BLP: "He is also known as a symbol of Bigotry." He has been reverted by several different editors, and attempts were made on the article's talk page and the user's talk page to reason with. Note: User:144.232.153.118 is User:GRANDEXTRAV as evidenced by User:144.232.153.118 signing his posts with "Alvin A Harris" and User:GRANDEXTRAV stating on his user page, "Hi my name is Alvin A. Harris."Yilloslime (t) 22:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Blocked for 24 hours (named account only). The autoblock should catch the IP; if the IP is being used to continue edit-warring, then let me know and I'll block it. MastCell 22:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Jkaradell reported by User:PhGustaf (Result: 24 hours)

    David Ortiz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Jkaradell (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 22:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:
    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    • Diff of 3RR warning:

    There are several further deletions, all of the same material. Both topics have been discussed and (more or less) resolved on the talk page. The poster refuses to enter edit summaries, discuss changes on the talk page, or acknowledge entries on his talk page. PhGustaf (talk) 22:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Tqbf reported by User:Duchamps_comb (Result: No block)

    Ron Paul presidential campaign, 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Tqbf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


    • 1st revertRevision as of 17:56, 10 January
    • 2nd revertRevision as of 21:20, 11 January
    • 3rd revert Revision as of 19:48, 11 January
    • 4th revertRevision as of 16:50, 11 January
    • 5th revertRevision as of 18:27, 12 January 2008

    --Duchamps_comb MFA 02:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    • No block — improper report. Please include "previous revision reverted to", so we can see what the desired version is. As it is, all we can see are random changes. Crum375 (talk) 02:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


    Hi, please look again: here are four reverts just from the history.

    18:27, 12 January 2008(Undid revision 183871662 by Duchamps comb criticism sourced to the daily show is less notable than hotties 4 ron paul?) (undo)

    21:20, 11 January 2008 Tqbf (Talk | contribs) (128,716 bytes) (Undid revision 183709143 by Buspar (talk)PLEASE DON'T EDIT DIRECT QUOTES FROM MAGAZINES.) (undo)

    17:22, 11 January 2008 Tqbf (Talk | contribs) (126,505 bytes) (Undid revision 183659906 by Terjen that's your opinion; IMO, what's newsworthy is the overt critique under Houston Chron masthead) (undo)

    17:56, 10 January 2008 Tqbf (Talk | contribs) m (123,683 bytes) (Reverted 1 edit by Duchamps comb; It already says he's an advisor to Rudy. It's still notable. . (TW)) (undo)


    --Comment left on my talk page:

    If you really want to report me for a 3RR violation --- and I think that's petty and unproductive, and won't go where you want it to either with admins or with the article you're editing --- then you're going to want to actually warn me on my talk page first.

    As it stands, you've gone behind my back and tried to ambush me with a 3RR warning on a page where something like 5 other editors are also over their "revert limit" for the day. But 3RR doesn't work that way. You have to actually be in an edit war, and you yourself have to actually demonstrate that you are trying and failing to resolve it.

    Next time, count edits, and then send the 3RR template warning, and then file your case, noting that you've posted your warning and that I have (as I likely will) ignored you. You will get further. Though, I suspect, not much.

    --- tqbf 03:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    --Duchamps_comb MFA 15:38, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Jagged 85 reported by User:Arrow740 (Result: 24 hours)

    Apostasy in Islam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Jagged 85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 05:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    • 1st revert: 23:17, 11 January 2008 Reverts back to this (22:57, 11 January 2008) version of the intro after I had moved some of it to a better place.
    • 2nd revert: 23:33, 11 January 2008 Reverted back to this (23:23, 11 January 2008) version of the lead after I had moved other excessive details from the lead.
    • 3rd revert: 02:18, 12 January 2008 Reverted my previous two edits back to this version (23:33, 11 January 2008).
    • 4th revert: 04:45, 12 January 2008 Again restored the excessive details in the third paragraph. He also restored the source Ghamidi I had objected to in previous edit summaries.
    • 5th revert: 04:53, 12 January 2008 Restored content that had been removed by User:Aminz with this edit; a straight revert. I had also objected to this material in December.

    He's trying to turn the lead into a list of all dissenting scholars on the issue of execution, and that doesn't reflect the article as a whole, so there are WP:LEAD problems as well as the edit-warring. Note that Aminz and I rarely see eye-to-eye but we agree on at least one issue here. There is only one person edit-warring, and that against consensus. He was previously warned and not blocked for 5RR (5 in 24 hours, 6 in 27): . Arrow740 (talk) 05:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    It seems to me that this report is simply made to have another user blocked rather than to prevent an edit war. The intro matter seems to have been already settled. --User:Aminz (talk) 06:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    The user has not been using the talk page or justifying his sources as requested. He's already been edit-warring. How does it "seem" to have been already settled? Arrow740 (talk) 06:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    Blocked for twenty-four hours, per the evidence above. -- tariqabjotu 06:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Lipton1995 reported by User:Tomj (Result: 24 hrs)

    Quebec (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Lipton1995 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 18:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


    • Necessary for newer users: A diff of 3RR warning issued before the last reported reversion.

    Your report will be ignored if it is not placed properly.

    The status of English as an official language in the province of Quebec, as well as the definition of "official" is this context is controversial beyond the limits of Misplaced Pages. It has been established on the talk page that, based on reliable sources ,"quasi-official" was an acceptable word to qualify the status of English. Still, User:Lipton1995 is engaged in the reversion of this wording. Tomj (talk) 18:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Hereward77 reported by User:Arthur Rubin (Result: 31 hours)

    Alex Jones (radio) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Hereward77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 19:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)



    The latter 2 reverts were only reverts in regard the same section. I reverted 3 times, self-reverted a 4th revert before anyone could comment, and made a separate change to the section, adding "according to Jones". I suppose, rather than reinserting the {{unreferenced|section}}, I could insert, instead, {{refimprove|section}}, but that would be gaming 3RR. Also, he was previously blocked for 3RR 04:26, November 26, 2007. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 19:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    So the fact that you personally disagree with his political beliefs means that he is a "liar", does it? Your actions are entirely biased here. Hereward77 (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    Both users blocked for thirty-one hours. — madman bum and angel 20:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Tankred reported by User:Squash Racket (Result: )

    Magyarization (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Tankred (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 20:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


    • No need for 3RR warning, old user already blocked for 3RR and made reports himself.

    User:Tankred broke 3RR on the article Magyarization deleting relevant material (describing Andrej Hlinka as a controversial figure) and inserting POV information while deleting my contribution to change the meaning of my words. Also has been disruptive at the article Battle of Rozhanovce. I do not want to break the rule, so please look into this. Squash Racket (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    I guess user Squash Racket is misleading you because of our content dispute in the article he mentioned. Only two first edits were reverts. The third edit was simple copyediting and addition of a citation. The fourth edit was expansion of a sentence based on a source cited in the article. These edits are not the same and only two of them were reverts. As to the article Battle of Rozhanovce, I am the original author and I do not understand how writing an article can be considered disruptive. Squash Racket is more than welcome to contribute to it in a constructive way. Tankred (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    Reverting another editor's edit more than three times is breaking this rule. Squash Racket (talk) 20:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    Only two edits were reverts. Tankred (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    Earlier I tried to resolve the dispute at the talk page (see section "Černová event as a proof of the 'violent' Magyarization"), but received no answer from him. Squash Racket (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    You have never replied to a comment by another user at that page. Anyway, the 3RR noticeboard is not a dispute resolution procedure. Tankred (talk) 18:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    At the time of my talk page attempt I had a dispute with Tankred (see dates and diffs), not an anonymous IP. Squash Racket (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Jéské Couriano reported by User:V-Dash (Result: No block)

    User talk:Jéské Couriano (edit | ] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Jéské Couriano (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 20:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    A short explanation of the incident. He has reverted 3 edits on his page within the span of an hour. V-Dash (talk) 20:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    You need evidence. -Jéské 20:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    You ain't gonna get out of this one Couriano.V-Dash (talk) 20:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    Reading over it, I see two mitigating circumstances here. Any admin will reject this out-of-hand as incomplete and inactionable because it's my own TP - just as you are immune from 3RR on your TP, so am I on mine. -Jéské 20:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    ONJECTION! When I kept deleting Wandering's comments off my talk page, you warned me for 3RR. Contradiction..V-Dash (talk) 21:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    MelicansMatkin (talk · contribs) brought you up here for a 3RR violation on your own TP last month. It was summarily rejected. -Jéské 21:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    No block. Immunity isn't (but great latitude is) given in userspace. Users are allowed to remove bad faith comments from their talk pages, and anyone who's even had ANI on watchlist knows that you've being antagonising Jeske for weeks. Will 21:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    (ec) Concur with Sceptre. User has commented several times without actually providing diffs, leading me to believe that he has none. Finally, Jéské was either removing personal attacks (which he has every right to do) or removing messages that he has read (which he has every right to do as well.) Ergo, no violation. Keilana 21:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Cocoliras reported by User:Seicer (Result:1 week )

    North America (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Cocoliras (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 22:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


    User continues to insert unreferenced or text that contridicts an official UN source at North America. Information user adds is relevant to Central America regarding a top-10 city list, however, the UN article clearly states that no Central America city makes the list. The strong bias towards the region was noted here, where the user stated that "Central America currently has more influence and popularity than North America." Sorry, original research in articles isn't favored. The insertion of the text also goes against consensus and discussion.

    The user was previously reported only a few days ago here. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 22:36, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User blocked although in the diffs above the user has "only" reverted three times, they subsequently added a fourth revert in 24 hours. Given that the user continued to revert after being warned, was blocked for 24 hours earlier this week for the same revert and has continually to place that edit into the article in the days between, I have blocked this user for 1 week. Gwernol 23:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
    Oops. Thanks for catching that. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 23:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Nubula reported by User:Anaxial (Result:72 hours)

    Primeval (TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Nubula (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 11:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


    Repeated reversion to include external link to copyvio site in violation of WP:EXT - discussed ad nauseum on Talk:Primeval (TV series). Anaxial (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    Edit: This user was blocked for the same 3RR violation just three days ago. (There has now been a 5th revert, details above).Anaxial (talk) 11:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Clearly excessive reverting, and Nubula's comment "BECAUSE, MAKE NO MISTAKE, I'LL KEEP REVERTING IT UNTIL YOU DEBATE THE MATTER TO SOME FORM OF CONCLUSION" (capitalisation as original) is a concern. I've given him 72 hours to think again. Further editwarring will need increasing blocks. Sam Blacketer (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Baseball_Bugs reported by User:Arcayne (Result: Page protected )

    The Natural (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Baseball_Bugs (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 16:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:
    • Baseball Bugs is an experienced user who is well aware of 3RR, as he has been blocked twice before (the last block was December 7) before for making personal attacks and disruptive editing behavior. The last block was five days in length.

    The user Baseball Bugs has been arguing in favor of the inclusion of a section composed of almost entirely unreferenced (and likely OR or synthesized) information. User JimDunning spent two days calmly and clearly explaining the problems with the inclusion of uncited information. Baseball Bugs was abusive and made personal attacks towards both JimDunning and myself when I came to the page (at JimDunning's request, so as to evaluate whether his explanations of policy were clear). He's accused us of OWNing the page and of 'forcing him off the page'; this despite the fact that yesterday was my first day on the page, and Jim has been there less than a month. Bugs had been there since August of last year.
    Clearly, some of the personal attacks are more appropriate for inclusion in AN/I, but arguing regarding bad behavior is sometimes like grabbing at smoke. The 3RR violation, on the other hand, is quite clear indicated, and the block log for the user indicates that he/she is not learning from the previous blocks for bad behavior and disruptive editing practices. - Arcayne () 16:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    I was not paying close attention to the clock, obviously, as I have seldom fallen into the 3RR trap. The frustrating thing in this case is that they kept reverting for different reasons. For every argument I answered, they came up with yet another reason. Ultimately, they got their way with the page on a false premise: They claimed the information is not sourced, when it plainly IS verifiable in most cases. They finally owned up to "not liking it", under the official explanation of "fancruft". Every time I've been blocked it's been over frustration at dealing with this kind of behavior. Go ahead and suspend me. I've had enough of this frustration for awhile. Baseball Bugs 17:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    Point of fact (not making a final determination since I wouldn't be considered unbiased): the four reverts your referencing fall well outside the 24-hour span stipulated by WP:3RR. I added the times above to clarify. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    With respect, i think you mixed up a date there. the last one was within the 24-hour limit on the 12th, not the 13th. I am aware you are operating from a different time zone than I, but the diffs are all within a 24 hour period. - Arcayne () 17:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    Wait, am I doing time math wrong here? (I almost never pay attention to this page) What is 19:04, January 12, 2008 minus 09:36, January 11, 2008? I get more than 33 hours. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Since its over 16 hours since the revert war ended on the wrong version, I think it is better to protect the page for a week to allow tempers to cool and for discussion to take place. Baseball Bugs, I suggest that you concentrate in discussing the edits and not the editor and try and resolve your concerns by discussing as opposed to revert warring. You have lots of different places to go to get extra opinions and advice. Spartaz 17:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    (edit conflict) As well, as a few points of clarification, Baseball bugs is somewhat mistaken; no one has "owned up to" or reverted his edits because they "didn't like" his edits. In point of fact, the numerous points of what policies and guidelines were being violated were spelled out in this edit. That the user considers 3RR a "trap" is telling indeed; for him, it appears to be the proverbial electric fence.
    However, Spartaz' advice is good. A warning works just as well. - Arcayne () 17:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    Protecting the page is fine. I took it off my watch list after their final reversion. I had intended to look for information and reviews I had saved at the time the film came out, to bolster some of the "citation needed" items. Maybe I will still do that, eventually. Baseball Bugs 17:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    I think Wknight94 is technically correct that I did not violate 3RR, although this situation was accelerating into an edit war until I abandoned the page yesterday. Here is what I'm showing for my edits the last couple of days, using the actual UTC's instead of converting. The highlighted items are the ones cited by the complaining user:

    00:04, 13 January 2008 - Straight revert.
    18:17, 12 January 2008 - Change of headings in the section in question and some rearrangement to fit the headings.
    14:36, 11 January 2008 - Straight revert.
    06:52, 11 January 2008 - Straight revert.
    06:19, 11 January 2008 - Normal edits.
    06:17, 11 January 2008 - Normal edits.
    06:01, 11 January 2008 - Straight revert plus some normal edits.

    Baseball Bugs 17:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    Rogereeny. Baseball Bugs 18:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Brandeks reported by User:Bignole (Result: No block)

    Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Brandeks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 19:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:
      • I warned him after his 5th revert (believing that it was his 4th). Upon inspection, when I was going to correct myself and state that he had reverted 5 times (but still wasn't going to report him on the grounds that he might not know about the three revert rule), I found this edit. I think maybe, at least a stern warning from an Administrator for his actions and uncivil remarks is probably what is best.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    Warned — warned @ 1913. If he keeps at it, simply update this stating so. I'll momentarily leave a civility warning. --slakr 19:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Since the warning, an Anon has come to the page and reverted the page to versions that Brandeks was trying to revert the page to. I don't know if it's the same person or not but I figured I'd leave it here in case an Administrator had some time to check the IP to see if it really was. It's suspicious that an Anon would come at that moment to revert back to Brandeks. Here are the threefour reverts.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Manacpowers reported by User:RogueNinja (Result: Both blocked 24h)

    Karate (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Manacpowers (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 20:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • Diff of 3RR warning:

    A short explanation of the incident. He keeps adding in ungrammatical comments, that while not quite nonsense, are still not quite english. I admit I also have violated 3RR in defending the page from him, except my edits were really just grammar correction. I warned him about 3RR in relation to a different page. Another editor also warned him about 3RR earlier. RogueNinjatalk 20:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    You're both well over four reverts but you're even reverting other changes made by Manacpowers. The offending word appears to be "the" so why didn't you just remove it? —Wknight94 (talk) 20:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
    I have already spent enough time running around fixing User:Manacpowers English, and to be quite frank, it gets bored quickly. RogueNinjatalk 21:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:RogueNinja also violated 3rr rule.

    also his diff 3rr warning is not made by him. and it is not diff 3rr warning. just 'concern'.

    his action is not english fixing. he is a POV pusher. This is reason that i think ] is a POV pusher. for example, Song Duk-ki‎ 1. His arts became the basis of the original form of Taekwondo. -> he changed this sentence like this, Later, his style helped inspire Taekwondo. 2. thus clearly distinguishing Taekwondo from the Japanese karate. -> He deleted this sentence. 3. He major delete imortant article. At that time 14 terms of techniques were used, representing 5 kicking patterns, 4 hand techniques, 3 pushing-down-the-heel patterns, one turning-over kick pattern and 1 technique of downing-the-whole-body. Also noteworthy is the use the term "poom" which signified a face-to-face stance preparing for a fight. The masters of Taekkyondo were also under constant threat of imprisonment, which resulted in an eventual of Taekkyondo as popular games. This is important article. It is cleary Karate JPOV pushing edit.(he try to hide TKD influenced by tekkyon) not english matter.(it is an ostensible reason) Plase, check my edit from reference source. my edit based on fact. his changing is not based on fact. also he did not offer counterpart source or FACT.Manacpowers (talk) 20:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    + diff 3rr warning to RogueNinja by other user. Manacpowers (talk) 21:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    I am not hearing any convincing explanations so I am blocking both parties for 24 hours. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:13, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Metal man666deth reported by User:Funeral (Result: 31 hours)

    Megadeth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Metal man666deth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 00:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:
    • Diff of 3RR warning:

    The user is constantly adding uncited, unverifiable rumours about the band. Funeral 00:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    Blocked 31 hours for adding unsourced rumors concerning living people / 3RR. --B (talk) 02:32, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Taiketsu reported by User:MelicansMatkin (Result: 31 hours )

    List of Pokémon: Diamond & Pearl episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Taiketsu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to: 18:11


    • Diff of 3RR warning: 00:04

    Seems to be a pretty standard edit war with the user, Taiketsu, ignoring WP:CON on the talk page. Four reverts, not including the first, in six hours, including one after a 3RR warning posted on their talk page. This user appears to have a history of edit warring, and was once blocked for a previous 3RR violation. MelicansMatkin (talk) 01:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    User blocked for 31 hours. Keilana 01:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Historian born 1975 reported by User:Dupree3 (Result: 24 hours)

    Tajikistan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Historian born 1975 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 05:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


    This user is not only edit warring and violating the 3RR rule on this article and many others... he is also providing false citations. He has been caught using false citations already and again I've checked his source and it does not mention that Afghans ever conquered Tajikistan. He has been warned about the 3RR rule more than once already. Dupree3 (talk) 05:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Bosnianjustice reported by User:JdeJ (Result: blocked 31 hours, page protected)

    Žepče (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Bosnianjustice (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 08:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


    The user is on Misplaced Pages with an agenda, most obvious in this edit Has a long history of edit warring on the page even before yesterday, as can be seen from the page history. Also attacking other users . His accusations of vandalism directed at others appear to be unsubstantial. JdeJ (talk) 08:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    I have blocked the user and protected the page. Talk it out - figure out if there are any legitimate objections to the map. --B (talk) 13:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    User:Djma12 reported by User:Guido den Broeder (Result: )

    Fibromyalgia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Djma12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 14:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


    Previous revert: 04:18, 8 January 2008

    • 1st revert: 20:09, 13 January 2008
    • 2rd revert: 13:15, 14 January 2008
    • 3th revert: 14:07, 14 January 2008

    User:Djma12 is repeatedly re-adding a text that was removed before because it is not supported by the sources. He claims that he has consensus for this text, but this is not the case. The text differs significantly from the quote that he put forward for RFC, and no consensus was reached on the original quote either. Note that the source is already mentioned elsewhere in the text with a different (correct) interpretation. Guido den Broeder (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

    Example

    <!-- COPY FROM BELOW THIS LINE -->
== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==
*] violation on
{{Article|ARTICLE NAME}}. {{3RRV|NAME_OF_USER}}: Time reported: ~~~~~
*Previous version reverted to:  <!-- This is MANDATORY. -->
<!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert
and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to.-->
<!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. See Help:Diff if you do not know what a diff is. -->
*1st revert: 
*2nd revert: 
*3rd revert: 
*4th revert: 
*Diff of 3RR warning: 
A short explanation of the incident. ~~~~
<!-- COPY FROM ABOVE THIS LINE -->
    Categories: