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 22:05, 20 May 2006 view sourceRhobite (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,728 edits →[]: more← Previous edit Revision as of 23:02, 20 May 2006 view source Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers81,722 edits →Mel Etitis: : Was originally filed on WP:AN.Next edit →
Line 510: Line 510:
'''Comments:''' '''Comments:'''
*] stopped editing through his own account after he was blocked for a 3RR violation on May 15 (see ]). Now he is abusing open proxies and editing from public libraries and dialups in order to circumvent the 3 revert rule. He has edited from ] (tor proxy), ] (shared webhost, probably a proxy), ] (SBC DSL account in Northern California, probably his own IP), ] (verified open proxy in Korea), and ] (Berkeley, California public library). ] 21:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC) *] stopped editing through his own account after he was blocked for a 3RR violation on May 15 (see ]). Now he is abusing open proxies and editing from public libraries and dialups in order to circumvent the 3 revert rule. He has edited from ] (tor proxy), ] (shared webhost, probably a proxy), ] (SBC DSL account in Northern California, probably his own IP), ] (verified open proxy in Korea), and ] (Berkeley, California public library). ] 21:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
==Mel Etitis==

: Was originally filed on ]. --] 23:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

===]'s 1st edits===

] violation on {{Article|Chinese classic texts}}. {{3RRV|Mel Etitis}}

*
*
*

I had told him that it was a tidied up job, but he seems not to believe or understand this and I don't sees any problems with my version, unless he could point it out, unfortunately he refused. Some of the edits are really just a '''m'''inor changes, which why it doesn't required any reasons on edit summaries.

Reported by: ] 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

===]'s 2nd edits====

] violation on {{Article|Erya}}. {{3RRV|Mel Etitis}}

*
*
*

As for ], thats a Confucian classic done between Qin and Han dynasties (as which in this cases would be ] before instead of 1st century CE as claimed in his edition), you can check out zh:尔雅 Chinese wiki if you want it to (currently stand version), again I had told him before about this information. I could however cited a source or site, but it would be in Chinese, which won't be easily a satisfaction for him, since he can't read Chinese.

Reported by: ] 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

===]'s 3rd edits===

] violation on {{Article|Period of Disunity}}. {{3RRV|Mel Etitis}}

*
*
*
*

I don't see a {{tl|copyedit}} template is needed here, since there hasn't been a comprehension problems in the article for the readers there. Anyway this guy had pissed me off, after making legal threats against another contributor, and had been a bureaucrat previously, after all powers resigned to him as an admin. Which is ironically when he said "Being an admin doesn't mean that I'm in any way above Misplaced Pages policy" on ].

Reported by: ] 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

===]'s 4th edits===

] violation on {{Article|Jie (ethnic group)}}. {{3RRV|Mel Etitis}}

*
*
*
*

As simliar to the {{tl|copyedit}} template article above ], here again he changed the disambiguation page of ] into a lesser informative style in a version of his own and simply listed ] as an ethnic group there, it should be noted that there were more than a single ethnic groups named Jie at present or past. The previously version was "the Jie (Chinese: 羯) ethnic group of the 4th and 5th centuries".

Reported by: ] 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
:Both of you violated, plus this should be at ] but I'm blocking both of you. ''']''' ]|] 19:46, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
::Nevermind that... ] beat me to it. ''']''' ]|] 19:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, so this did get reported at 3RR and I did block both sides. Does anyone else feel the block on Mel Etitis is unfair? It doesn't look like reverting vandalism to me... the one I specifically blocked for was the string of reverts on ] ] 20:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
:Sort of. The problem is, "Reverted blah" doesn't always tell why you felt it necessary to revert. Also, some of his reverts I thought were the better revision, but some were not. Actually the only reason I'm here is because I noticed a "block" message on Mel Etitis' talk page, which I found highly irregular. --] | ] | ] | ] 21:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
::Not that irregular. Mel has been blocked several times for 3RR. -- ] | ] 21:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
::: I noticed :-). Anyway, I'm off to bed now - so if anyone else wishes to take this up/over, please feel free ] 21:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


==Report a new violation== ==Report a new violation==

Revision as of 23:02, 20 May 2006

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,
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)
    349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358
    359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368
    Incidents (archives, search)
    1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165
    1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175
    Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
    472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481
    482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491
    Arbitration enforcement (archives)
    328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337
    338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347
    Other links


    Violations

    User:RichardMalter

    Three revert rule violation on Bi-Digital O-Ring Test (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). RichardMalter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Philosophus 08:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    As an update to this we now have:

    • 5th revert:

    For the category reversion, I also did not notice this one:

    • 0th revert:

    --Philosophus 16:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC) Comments:

    I unfortunately was not able to warn this user in time, but as he kept telling me to read Misplaced Pages's policies, I thought he had read them. The user keeps removing any pseudoscience/quackery category, and also the assertion that the "diagnostic" has not been published in any reputable peer-reviewed journal. All other editors on the talk page seem to be in agreement with the rationale behind these additions. --Philosophus 08:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Hi Philosophus, we need to see the diffs showing his four reverts. If you put them up, I'll take a look. SlimVirgin 09:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Oops, I copied the wrong links! I've fixed that now. --Philosophus 09:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks, Philosophus. I'm going to warn him because I see he didn't revert again after your warning, and there's no indication he was made aware of the 3RR rule. We tend to give new users one warning before blocking. I see this is the only article he's edited, so I'll keep an eye on him in case he starts again, and he'll be blocked next time. SlimVirgin 09:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    This user has now reverted again, and has responded to the warnings on his talk page. I also notice that I forgot one of the earlier reversions from the last 24 hours. --Philosophus 16:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Okay, 24 hours. SlimVirgin 16:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Ptmccain 3

    Three revert rule violation on Martin Luther (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Ptmccain (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by SlimVirgin 09:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments

    Ptmccain has been revert warring over the intro for a couple of weeks, trying to delete, move, rewrite, or bury two sentences about the Nazi's use of Luther's writings about Jews. He has violated 3RR several times at this article, and has been blocked for it twice. The six reverts above are not to the same version of the intro, but he is reverting any changes that other editors make (even when correcting his errors, like repeating sentences twice), and will only allow his own version(s) to stand. The reverting is accompanied by personal attacks, calling other editors "duplicitous," "shameful and dishonest," "obnoxious," accusing someone of vandalism, and demanding that editors "state qualifications." SlimVirgin 09:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Has been blocked twice before in the last eight days. With six reverts, there's no possibility of an accident. 48 hours. AnnH ♫ 12:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks, Ann. SlimVirgin 12:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Saladin1970 also editing as User:62.129.121.63

    Three revert rule violation on Zionism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Saladin1970 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) aka 62.129.121.63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Version reverted to: 06:41 May 18

    Reported by SlimVirgin 11:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments

    Four straightforward reverts within 90 minutes to the same version. I have no evidence that Saladin1970 is 62.129.121.63 but it seems highly likely, and that IP has turned up before on this page to revert to Saladin1970's versions. SlimVirgin 11:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    He's just reverted for a fifth time, so I've added that diff above. SlimVirgin 12:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    I've blocked both for twenty-four hours. Tom Harrison 12:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks, Tom. SlimVirgin 12:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    I was hesitating, but I think Tom is right. I've seen this happen before at Christianity where IPs would suddenly turn up to help out a registered user who had run out of reverts. AnnH ♫ 13:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Saladin1970 emailed me saying he didn't do it. I invite anyone to review and act as they think best. Tom Harrison 13:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    How about unblocking Saladin, and leaving the IP blocked? If Saladin is not that IP, he'll be able to edit again, and if he is, he won't. AnnH ♫ 13:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Good idea, Ann. In the meantime, I'll request a check user, because the same IP has turned up there before, so we may as well get it sorted out for the future. SlimVirgin 13:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Yes, good idea. I've unblocked Saladin pending checkuser. Tom Harrison 13:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    • CheckUser confirms that this is the same editor. He's been playing a fair bit of pretending to be different people by logging in and then not logging in, and I see no useful edits whatsoever; it's all unsourced POV, copyright violations, and only partly comprehensible attacks on the Talk: pages. I'm blocking permanently. Jayjg 16:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Thanks for checking it out, Jay. SlimVirgin 16:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Wangoed and User:Zagozagozago Result: 4h each

    Three revert rule violation on Stadium Arcadium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Wangoed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Zagozagozago (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Jtrost ( | C | #) 16:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: Reverts were made to the first paragraph under Chart Performance. Both authors made other, minor changes throughout the article, but the cause of conflict is this first paragraph. Jtrost ( | C | #) 16:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    I left messages for this other fellow telling him to keep it to the discussion page (where I started a sub-heading for the point in question) and on his user page, linked all sources, etc. This worked & the editing from both sides stopped, but thanks for your vigilance where the rules are concerned. Wangoed 16:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Both blocked for 4 hours, first offense. Stifle (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:24.145.184.199

    Three revert rule violation on Spanish Inquisition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 24.145.184.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Stbalbach 17:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    User:Reddi

    Violation of arbcomm 1/7RR parole on Nikola_Tesla (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Reddi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    • First revert:
    • Second revert
    • Third revert

    Note: all 3 are labelled, correctly, as reverts. Reddi is limited to 1R per week, and is aware of this - see his talk page William M. Connolley 19:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    That's strange, normally WMC is enforcing this page, not reporting, and he didn't even format it correctly! (24h) Stifle (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    Oops, sorry, & thanks :-) William M. Connolley 21:48, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Avraham, TheActuary

    Three revert rule violation on Actuarial Outpost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Avraham (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Three revert rule violation on Actuarial Outpost (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). TheActuary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Comments:Might as well delete the article. The owners of the site are trying to use wikipedia as free advertising rather than an accurate historical account of what has happened there. Rather than allow balance and different points of views on events they delete any point of view different than their own. No team work. No balance. No tolerance for differences of opinion.

    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blisterino (talk • contribs)

    • Hello. User:Blisterino is also most probably User:Joe Smythe, AAAA, MAAAA, User:Kentucky Janitor, and User:Just the facts maam as well as the two IP edits. Further I suspect him of registering the User:Tom Troceen ID, and he is by no means Tom Troceen, rather, he has a personal vendetta against Mr. Troceen, Mr. Penland, and Mr. Cooke for their, belated I may say, responses to his gross insenstivity, flame-baiting, race-baiting, and other POV issues on the board under discussion. The last I checked Wiki policy, vandalism reversion is not considered a violation of the 3RR. I would request that any admin please look at the history, the talk page of the article, and the talk pages of Smythe, Blisterino, and the IPs. Further, I think that registering Tom Troceen, someone elses real name, is a clear vioaltion of wiki principles and should be sanctioned. He is engaging in sock puppetry to smear his POV over a heretofore respectible article, and measures should be taken to prevent that. -- Avi 20:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    There is no user Tom Troceen . Stifle (talk) 22:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
    It was a typo. Check the edit history: he meant User:Tom troceen William M. Connolley 22:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    I have started the sock puppetry issue here: Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Joe Smythe, AAAA, MAAAA -- Avi 21:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:MetaStar

    Three revert rule violation on Jean Grey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). MetaStar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Exvicious 21:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    • Can't verify this because firstly the original version was not filled in, and secondly, you have provided oldids and not diffs. Please read carefully the correct format and try again. Stifle (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Commodore Sloat (result:24h)

    Three revert rule violation on Juan Cole/sandbox (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Commodore_Sloat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: ←Humus sapiens 23:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: The editing is going on in Juan Cole/sandbox because Juan Cole is protected. The corresponding talk is Talk:Juan Cole. ←Humus sapiens 23:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Hganesan and suspected socks User:169.229.65.29 User:169.229.65.30 User:169.229.65.35 (resolved elsewhere)

    Three revert rule violation on Kobe Bryant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Hganesan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    I'm not sure how to fill this out correctly but there has been a lot of reverting going on from this user on that article and others, and after he was banned, from some IPs that are defending his edits. All three IPs so far have been banned for varying periods...

    See

    Reported by: ++Lar: t/c 23:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: I may have been too hasty in handing out some of these blocks, I dunno (I see User:Sam Blanning gave some out too. I wasn't intending to get involved, I was just marvelling at how well written this was and wanted to see what the fuss was about and next thing you know I'd reverted one article 3 times myself trying to get it to hold still. Oops. Sorry if this is the wrong place or format. ++Lar: t/c 23:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

    This is a dup.. see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Hganesan_.28result:_8h.29 above. Sorry. Feel free to delete if you want. I was told on IRC that a range block has been put in place to slow things down a bit. ++Lar: t/c 00:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Zer0faults

    Three revert rule violation on Iraq War (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Zer0faults (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Mr. Tibbs 02:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    Also a mediation request related to this here: . Went through this entire arguement a long time ago too: . -- Mr. Tibbs 02:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:67.159.26.65

    Three revert rule violation on Roger Needham. 67.159.26.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Rosicrucian 04:53, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    Repeated and intentional vandalism of article, stated intention to continue vandalism on talkpage.

    Thats only 3, but I've blocked the IP for incivility/vandalism anyway William M. Connolley 12:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:72.57.230.179

    Three revert rule violation on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Azeri (edit | ] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 72.57.230.179 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Telex 12:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    • Anon keeps adding a trollish inflammatory userbox to the project page. People have tried to reason with him on his talk page, but he won't listen; he calls it censorship. He has been blocked for violating the 3RR before, and has also been blocked for trolling. --Telex 12:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
    I've just warned him. I will look through the diffs now... - FrancisTyers 12:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
    Blocked for 24 hours. - FrancisTyers 12:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Deucalionite (result: 8h)

    Three revert rule violation on Illyrians (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Deucalionite (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Previous version: 5 May, 17:10

    Reported by: Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: User insists on inserting a longish section, half based on some fringy racialist study by Carleton S. Coon, half OR, trying to push the POV of a racial connection between ancient Illyrians and Greeks. Was warned about 3RR on his talk page. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    8h for a first offence William M. Connolley 15:57, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:192.197.82.153

    Three revert rule violation on Rachel_Marsden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 192.197.82.153 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Bucketsofg✐ 17:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: This is this users second time violating 3RR for this page; he's been blocked three times before for vandalizing this page.

    2006-05-19 17:50:38 Kungfuadam blocked "192.197.82.153 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 31 hours (vandalism) William M. Connolley 19:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:203.144.143.9 (result: 8h)

    Three revert rule violation on Thaksin Shinawatra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 203.144.143.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Paul C 17:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    8h as a first offence William M. Connolley 19:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Xed (result: 48h)

    Three revert rule violation on Phil Reiss (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Xed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    • Previous version reverted to: 18:27, 14 May 2006
    • 1st revert:10:01, 19 May 2006
    • 2nd revert: 13:07, 19 May 2006
    • 3rd revert: 13:27, 19 May 2006
    • 4th revert: 13:40, 19 May 2006

    Reported by: Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: User had been warned both on his personal talk page as well as the article's talk page. As you can see on his last edit summary he indicated that he was aware of the 3RR and that he was in violation of it, but chose to disregard it. He has been blocked several times before.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    48h: repeat offender, deliberate breaking of 3RR William M. Connolley 11:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:12.134.204.214

    Previously reported and blocked as User:Hganesan (see entry on this page from a day or two ago) and numerous IPs. Almost certainly a sockpuppet, judging by writing style, pages edited and actual content of edits. Requesting a substantial block here (more than just a few hours).

    Reported by: Simishag 03:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    Madchester blocked "12.134.204.214 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (npov violation, despite warnings) William M. Connolley 10:59, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:72.130.21.164 (result: 3h)

    Three revert rule violation on Wii (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 72.130.21.164 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    • Previous version reverted to:23:11, May 19, 2006
    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:

    Reported by: DivineShadow218 05:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:User keeps rverting to delet an external link is a site with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in the article. discluding these reverts, this user has less then 10 edits, I have also warned him/her/it about it.

    Poorly formatted but I'll let you off. 3h. No comment on appropriateness of content William M. Connolley 10:43, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    Checking, I realise that DivineShadow218 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has of course broken 3RR too: 3h by symmetry William M. Connolley 10:46, 20 May 2006 (UTC)... oh dear, make that 24h by virtue of having previous blocks William M. Connolley 10:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:AutumnLeaves

    Three revert rule violation on Lilian Garcia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). AutumnLeaves (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: --24.196.175.110 10:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: User continues to delete a useful and relevant link. It appears that the account has been created solely to address this page. Warning given.

    It would seem that you too have broken 3RR. I shall let you both off with a warning William M. Connolley 10:55, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Thanks for your attention. While I understand the spirit of the rule, I have conformed to "the 3RR applies to reverts after the third within a 24 hour period". --24.196.175.110 11:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Netscott

    Three revert rule violation on Fethullah Gülen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Netscott (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Netscott (talk · contribs):

    • Previous version reverted to: 07:12, 20 May 2006
    • 1st revert: 07:21, 20 May 2006
    • 2nd revert: 07:52, 20 May 2006
    • 3rd revert: 08:19, 20 May 2006
    • 4th revert: 08:54, 20 May 2006

    Reported by: Deizio talk 13:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    • This is an unmerited report as both myself and Azate were essentially combatting new user vandalism. My primary editing in this regard was to replace a repeatedly removed {{NPOV}} tag. The admin who blocked User:Mokotok and initially User:Azate agreed in as much as he/she said, unblocking. was essentially reverting what amounted to vandalism by a new user at the time he/she unblocked him. A pity that Deizio talk appears to not have researched this prior to making these reports. Netscott 16:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    • You're right, I should have noticed that Woohookitty (talk · contribs) blocked, as well as protected the page. Due to "real life" commitments there was a lag between my investigating the report on AIV and making these reports. Rest assured I don't enjoy making more work for myself and will be careful to double check this kind of thing in future. However, the edit summaries and reversions the three parties indulged in hinted at a little more than "combatting new user vandalism", rather differences over POV in a quickfire 17-revert content dispute, and there is no harm in bringing such potential flare-ups to the attention of the community, or in confirming that action was taken. Of course, Kitty has taken the necessary steps and I trust the matter is closed. Deizio talk 17:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Mokotok

    Three revert rule violation on Fethullah Gülen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mokotok (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    • Shortly followed by , , and

    Reported by: Deizio talk 13:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: Following up revert scuffle at Fethullah Gülen, users notified and warned on that talk page. Deizio talk 13:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    • Unless you're posting this report as a review, I would recommend doing full proper research to help others and yourself save time prior to actually making a report as this user is already blocked for the 3RR violation. Netscott 16:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Azate

    Three revert rule violation on Fethullah Gülen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Azate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Deizio talk 13:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments: Following up revert scuffle at Fethullah Gülen, users notified and warned on that talk page. Page protected.Deizio talk 13:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    • In the interests of saving others some time on this report User:Azate was blocked but subsequently unblocked with the reasoning: unblocking. was essentially reverting what amounted to vandalism by a new user (as I've just added in Deiz's report of my own supposed violation). Netscott 16:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    user:Jeff3000

    Three revert rule violation on Canada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Jeff3000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Reported by mav 14:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments I have not done a fourth revert, so I have not passed a 3RR. Secondly Mav never warned me. -- Jeff3000 14:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    Consider this a warning. I guess I have one more revert. --mav 15:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Mel Etitis (result: 24h each)

    Three revert rule violation on Chinese classic texts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mel Etitis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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

    I had told him that it was a tidied up job, but he seems not to believe or understand this and I don't sees any problems with my version, unless he could point it out, unfortunately he refused. Some of the edits are really just a minor changes, which is why it doesn't required any reasons on edit summaries.

    Reported by: Eiorgiomugini 18:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    As the above indicates, this user's English isn't terribly good, and it may be that the problem lies there. However, he has been insisting on removing much-needed {{copyedit}} templates from articles, adding material without citaion or source, and making a general mess. He refuses to accept that he might be mistaken, refuses to discuss the issue (aside from the repetition of the obscure "it's a tidied up job"). I'm currently asking for advice on dealing with him at WP:AN. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    I repeat, I said it was a tidied up job, but he seem not to believe or understand this, I don't sees any problems with my version, unless he could point it out, unfortunately he had refused to do so. Again he has been adding material of his claims, and making a general mess into Chinese classic texts. Eiorgiomugini 18:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    I've removed the second cases onwards. Its perfectly clear that you've both broken 3RR. Sigh. 24h each William M. Connolley 19:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Petrejo (result: 24h)

    Three revert rule violation on Friedrich Nietzsche (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Petrejo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    • Previous version reverted to:
    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:
    • 5th revert:

    Reported by: Non-vandal 04:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC) Comments:

    • There's plenty more of those from this guy. There's a lot of talk in the articles talk page under "Petrejo's changese" and "Please do not..." but this bloke doesn't discuss his changes, and is simply a vandal as dull as they come. Petrejo is also 66.143.165.1: . Looking at both user titles' contributions reveals the extent of their dirty work. I'd recommend a block of both users from the article entirely, but we'll see how it's handled. Thanks.
    • He's still at it. Non-vandal 05:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

    Thats 5R, but not in 24h or close. An awful lot of new users there... socks? On both sides? William M. Connolley 09:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

    I don't think there are socks on both sides - there's a number, at least 4, of editors reverting Petrejo's edits, but I'm pretty sure he is using sockpuppets - I noticed a new user earlier today who'd edited Petrejo's talk page and no other pages, and that account may have subsequently been used on Friedrich Nietzsche. I'm sure the faction, including myself, who've been reverting Petrejo aren't without blame, but could we get this guy blocked already, seriously? mgekelly 10:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
    BTW, I count 5R in the last 8 hours from Petrejo's own account. mgekelly 10:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
    The bloke's at it again. We may need a permanent block of this blockhead.Non-vandal 04:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Petrejo has reverted this article four times in the last four hours. mgekelly 17:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    I've resurrected this from the archive since the violator is still very active. We need some serious action undertaken. Thanks.Non-vandal 20:13, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Note: 2006-05-17 23:49:20 Shanel blocked "Petrejo (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (using IP to evade 3RR on Friedrich Nietzsche) William M. Connolley 20:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    Blocked now for 24h William M. Connolley 20:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Ilir pz (result: 24h)

    Three revert rule violation on Kosovo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Ilir pz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

    Reported by: Krytan 21:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    Ilir keeps pushing his Albanian propaganda by removing a map of Kosovo as a part of Serbia and Montenegro. As you know, the current status of the province is being discussed at Vienna, but for now, according to the UN resolution 1244, Kosovo remains a part of FRY, which has changed its name to Serbia and Montenegro in February 2003. This is clearly stated in the article (or was, maybe he removed it again). Something must be done about this. --Krytan 21:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    The time difference is over 24h. Asterion 21:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Not on the clock style I'm using. 24h William M. Connolley 21:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    Sorry, I must be totally stupid (I read 18th). I need some rest. Asterion 21:50, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Pansophia

    Three revert rule violation on Kaiser Permanente (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Pansophia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):


    Reported by: Rhobite 21:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Comments:

    Mel Etitis

    Was originally filed on WP:AN. --Tony Sidaway 23:02, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Mel Etitis's 1st edits

    Three revert rule violation on Chinese classic texts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mel Etitis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    I had told him that it was a tidied up job, but he seems not to believe or understand this and I don't sees any problems with my version, unless he could point it out, unfortunately he refused. Some of the edits are really just a minor changes, which why it doesn't required any reasons on edit summaries.

    Reported by: Eiorgiomugini 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Mel Etitis's 2nd edits=

    Three revert rule violation on Erya (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mel Etitis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    As for Erya, thats a Confucian classic done between Qin and Han dynasties (as which in this cases would be 2nd century BC before instead of 1st century CE as claimed in his edition), you can check out zh:尔雅 Chinese wiki if you want it to (currently stand version), again I had told him before about this information. I could however cited a source or site, but it would be in Chinese, which won't be easily a satisfaction for him, since he can't read Chinese.

    Reported by: Eiorgiomugini 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Mel Etitis's 3rd edits

    Three revert rule violation on Period of Disunity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mel Etitis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    I don't see a {{copyedit}} template is needed here, since there hasn't been a comprehension problems in the article for the readers there. Anyway this guy had pissed me off, after making legal threats against another contributor, and had been a bureaucrat previously, after all powers resigned to him as an admin. Which is ironically when he said "Being an admin doesn't mean that I'm in any way above Misplaced Pages policy" on User:Mel_Etitis.

    Reported by: Eiorgiomugini 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    User:Mel Etitis's 4th edits

    Three revert rule violation on Jie (ethnic group) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mel Etitis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    As simliar to the {{copyedit}} template article above Period of Disunity, here again he changed the disambiguation page of Jie into a lesser informative style in a version of his own and simply listed ] as an ethnic group there, it should be noted that there were more than a single ethnic groups named Jie at present or past. The previously version was "the Jie (Chinese: 羯) ethnic group of the 4th and 5th centuries".

    Reported by: Eiorgiomugini 18:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Both of you violated, plus this should be at WP:AN/3RR but I'm blocking both of you. Sasquatch t|c 19:46, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    Nevermind that... User:William M. Connolley beat me to it. Sasquatch t|c 19:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    OK, so this did get reported at 3RR and I did block both sides. Does anyone else feel the block on Mel Etitis is unfair? It doesn't look like reverting vandalism to me... the one I specifically blocked for was the string of reverts on Chinese classic texts William M. Connolley 20:01, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Sort of. The problem is, "Reverted blah" doesn't always tell why you felt it necessary to revert. Also, some of his reverts I thought were the better revision, but some were not. Actually the only reason I'm here is because I noticed a "block" message on Mel Etitis' talk page, which I found highly irregular. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 21:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    Not that irregular. Mel has been blocked several times for 3RR. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
    I noticed :-). Anyway, I'm off to bed now - so if anyone else wishes to take this up/over, please feel free William M. Connolley 21:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

    Report a new violation

    ===]===
] violation on {{Article|Fethullah Gülen}}. {{3RRV|Azate}}: <!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->
* Previous version reverted to:   <!-- ALWAYS FILL IN THIS FIELD! -->
* 1st revert: 
* 2nd revert: 
* 3rd revert: 
* 4th revert: 
Reported by: ~~~~
'''Comments:'''
<!-- This is an *example*! Do not leave your report here - place it ABOVE the header"!!-->
    Categories: