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

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

Revision as of 06:43, 27 January 2019 editEdJohnston (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,210 edits →User:Ljuvlig reported by User:Ktrimi991 (Result: Blocked): Closing← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 19:02, 30 December 2024 edit undoDaniel Case (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators224,507 edits →User:36.228.143.128 reported by User:StephenMacky1 (Result: ): declined
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Short description\|Noticeboard for edit warring}}
	<!--Adds protection template automatically if semi-protected--><noinclude>{{#if:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}\|{{pp\|small=yes}}}}</noinclude>__NEWSECTIONLINK__{{no admin backlog}}{{/Header}}] ]
			<!--Adds protection template automatically if semi-protected--><noinclude>{{#if:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}\|{{pp\|small=yes}}}}__NEWSECTIONLINK__{{no admin backlog}}{{/Header}}] ]
			{{pp-move\|small=yes}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|archiveheader = {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}		\|archiveheader = {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
	\|maxarchivesize = 250K		\|maxarchivesize = 250K
	\|counter = ~~383~~		\|counter = 490
	\|algo = old(~~48h~~)		\|algo = old(2d)
	\|key = 0a3bba89e703569428f2aab1add75bd7d7d1583d2d1f397783aee23fda62b06f		\|key = 0a3bba89e703569428f2aab1add75bd7d7d1583d2d1f397783aee23fda62b06f
	\|archive = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive%(counter)d		\|archive = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive%(counter)d
			}}</noinclude>
	}}</noinclude><!--<?xml version="1.0"?><api><query><pages><page pageid=" ns="4" title="Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring"><revisions><rev>=Reports=>
			<!-- NOTE: THE BOTTOM IS THE PLACE FOR NEW REPORTS. -->

	NOTE: THE BOTTOM IS THE PLACE FOR NEW REPORTS. -->
	== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked) ==

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked indefinitely for now) ==
	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Peter Lemongello}} and {{pagelinks\|The Crests}}<br />
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Plemongello}}

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Trisha Krishnan}}
	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|TheHappiestEditor}}
	'''Diffs of the user's reverts on ]:'''
	#
	#
	#
	#
	#

	'''Previous version reverted to:'''		'''Previous version reverted to:'''

	'''Diffs of the user's reverts ~~on ]~~:'''		'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265432813\|22:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) She works in Malayalam cinema.There are two upcoming Malayalam films of Trisha. The total number of Malayalam films is not two."
	#
			# {{diff2\|1265165246\|13:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* top */She works in Malayalam films too. There are two upcoming Malayalam films of Trisha."
	#
	#
	#
	#

			*Diffs from other articles (language POV and edit war)
	'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			#
			#
			#

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

			# - putting fake sources/infomation
	<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
			# - putting fake sources/infomation
			# - putting fake sources/infomation

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	A COI warning was given as well as requests to use the talk page to request edits and as well as comments in edit summaries <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small>
			#
	:Blocked both this user and IP 68.169.210.168 for 24 hours for 3RR violation — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 23:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
	::Follow-up: ] has just had their account renamed to ]. That editor ] that he is not the subject of the article (Peter Lemongello) but is just a fan. ] (]) 18:24, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
	::: The editor, now named BillyB1950, has again broken the ] on ], re-adding the same content which has been disputed and reverted by three other editors. ] (]) 07:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked) ==

	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Safavid dynasty family tree}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|Pikermerle}}

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	;Previous version reverted to:

			POV pushing/cherry-picking "Malayalam" and edit warring in a lot of articles. Apart from the above listed, the user has been pushing "Malayalam" as one of the languages in which "actor XYZ" has acted 'predominantly' in but in actuality the entries are only a few . The editor has received multiple warnings for being disruptiove and a recent one for from {{u\|Krimuk2.0}}. - ] (]) 10:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
	# {{diff2\|880002250\|18:51, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "why are you deleting sourced content that I have taken the time to write? I don't understand the hostility"
	# {{diff2\|880001518\|18:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} ""
	# {{diff2\|879999295\|18:34, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "well, the long standing content is based on early 20th century "academia" and was disproven by modern day researchers"
	# {{diff2\|879998817\|18:31, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Everything that I've said is sourced. You have a problem with it, you take it to the talk page"

			:{{u\|TheHappiestEditor}}, please respond to these allegations. ] (]) 22:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
	# {{diff2\|879998790\|18:31, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Caution: Unconstructive editing. (])"
	# {{diff2\|880002555\|18:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule. (])"

			{{u\|TheHappiestEditor}} has engaged in further edit-warring, with the same "Malayalam" language POV pushing, with {{u\|19Arham}} . ] (]) 06:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

			:{{ping\|ToBeFree}} Apparently, they do not want to respond , but would very much continue with their POV . Also note removal of sources . - ] (]) 13:14, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			:@] and I spoke on my Talk page where they said the following: "The information regarding ] has been removed multiple times despite being supported by reliable sources, such as </nowiki>]. This violates ]'s verifiability policy. Could we discuss this further to reach a consensus?" ] (]) 14:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			::The removal of content isn't a violation of the verifiability policy; restoring content against ] or ] is. Dealing with other editors' concerns about one's editing isn't optional if the editing continues, and {{u\|TheHappiestEditor}} had the chance to respond here. ] (]) 16:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			*{{AN3\|b\|indef}} for now. ] (]) 16:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Page protected) ==
	;<u>Comments:</u>

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Hariprasad Chaurasia}}
	"Brand new" account (created ), trying to change long-standing well sourced content on numerous articles through sheer edit-warring. Even though I and others ({{ping\|HistoryofIran}}) have requested him, on numerous occassions, to refer to the talk page (per ] and ]]), he does not care at all. Looking at the evidence, in combination with the fact that he ''instantly'' removed the 3RR warning from his talk page, I think its safe to say that this account is here on a ] ]. - ] (]) 18:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
	:Your absolute first interaction with me consisted in deleting everything that I've written, dismissing it as "historical revisionism" (despite me actually attempting to correct early twentieth-century historical revisionism with modern-day research) and attacking me for being a new user. I only deleted the "warnings" that you posted on my talk page, because you deleted those that I put on yours. I am here to complement outdated and disproven content with new, academically-backed material. Please try to be civil, and don't be of bad faith. ] (]) 19:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
	::It appears that Pikermerle has already broken ] at ]. Their version of the article always includes the unqualified claim that 'the Safavids were ]', while the prior version used more cautious language. They have now made this replacement five times, which gives them a total of four reverts. They may be able to avoid a block if they will agree to wait for consensus before making any more edits about the Safavids. ] (]) 19:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
	:::Unfortunately Pikermerle went on to make a further revert, even after this olive branch. I have blocked for 24 hours. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 22:54, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
	::::What "further revert" and which "olive branch" are you referring to? I stopped editing these articles the moment I received a warning about the 3rd revert rule. The fact that you would block me after I stopped editing the articles and moved the discussion to the talk page is either a stupid mistake or highly ill-intentioned. ] (]) 23:32, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|103.84.130.238}}
	== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked) ==

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Venezuela}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|Gutterball1219}}

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	;Previous version reverted to:
			# {{diff\|oldid=1262480024\|diff=1265542339\|label=Consecutive edits made from 12:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC) to 12:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}}
			## {{diff2\|1265541681\|12:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
			## {{diff2\|1265542339\|12:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}} ""https://www.hariprasadchaurasia.com" check the site pandit is part of his name , the site is run by him, also there are other similar cases too on wikipedia "
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#

	;Diffs of ~~the~~ ~~user's~~ ~~reverts~~:		'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			#
	# {{diff2\|880078017\|05:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880077753 by ] (]) Last edit claimed to fixed grammar, vandalized information instead"
			#
	# {{diff2\|880077332\|05:28, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880077256 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880076335\|05:17, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880076205 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880076175\|05:16, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880076064 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880076026\|05:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880075926 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880075854\|05:12, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880075825 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880075777\|05:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880075691 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880075658\|05:10, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880075582 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|880075518\|05:08, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880075367 by ] (])"

	;Diffs of ~~edit~~ ~~warring~~ / ~~3RR~~ ~~warning~~:		'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	# {{diff2\|880077511\|05:30, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Warning: Disruptive editing. (])"

	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
	*]

	;<u>Comments:</u>		<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	Ongoing talk this editor has not engaged in

			Keeps on adding (edit wars) honorifics despite explanation about ] and ] in edit summaries and warnings ] (]) 14:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	;<u>Rebuttal:</u>
			:The IP was initially reported to AIV, since disruptive edits continued after a warning, but was to report it here. - ] (]) 14:44, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	*Ban me, you cowards. ] (]) 06:02, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
	*~~Blocked~~ ~~Gutterball1219 and Knowledgekid87 for clear 3RR violations — Martin <small>(~~]~~ · ~~])~~</small>~~ 08:55, 25 ~~January~~ ~~2019~~ (UTC)		*{{AN3\|p}} ] (]) 22:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
			*:@] Sadly, the IP is now doing the exact same thing over at the article ] (]). — ] ] 07:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			*::Blocked, thanks. ] (]) 16:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

	== ] reported by ] (Result: ~~Both~~ blocked) ==		== ] reported by ] (Result:Indefinitely blocked) ==

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|~~Ras~~ ~~el hanout~~}} ~~<br />~~		'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Angelo Rules}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|AZSH}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Johnny test person}}
	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

	'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''		'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265621270\|21:02, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	# 14 january, 02:40
			# {{diff2\|1265402736\|19:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	# 15 january 01:24
			# {{diff2\|1265399005\|19:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	# 15 january 02:19
			# {{diff2\|1265395466\|18:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	# 15 january 03:01
			# {{diff2\|1265394604\|18:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	Four reverts within 25 hours 10 days ago, and now :

	# 25 january 01:40
	# 26 january 00:19
	# 26 january 01:23
	# 26 january 01:30

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' and several other users warned AZSH in recent times :

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

	<u>'''Comments:'''</u~~> <br /~~>		<u>'''Comments:'''</u>

			Back from an edit warring block with an additional personal attack (]) ] (]) 21:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	This user edit-warred against another user some 10 days ago (see the above diffs) with 4 reverts within 25 hours, now he's edit-warring against me, with 4 reverts within 24 hours and refuses to give a legit explanation for his removal of sourced content. Moreover, he told me that "''they don't need me''" for the thread, thus refusing to engage in a constructive discussion : . I would welcome the eye of an admin in order to stop the disruption caused by the reported editor. Best regards.<b><span style="color:orange">---Wikaviani </span></b><sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 02:03, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
			* {{AN3\|b\| indef}} Two day old account with 19 edits, a block, and that personal attack? Bye. <b>]</b><sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 21:15, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked 24h) ==
	* {{AN3\|bb\|24 hours}} ], ], ] 02:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Automotive industry in China}} <br />
	== ] reported by ] (Result: Protected) ==
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Infinty 0}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Jagdish Tytler}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|103.204.87.39}}

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	;Previous version reverted to:
			#
			#
			#
			#

	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
	# {{diff2\|880232144\|05:32, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Restore last good, no BLP vio"
	# {{diff2\|880231113\|05:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880230474 by ] (]) notable event relevant to investigation details"
	# {{diff2\|880226536\|04:28, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880207862 by ] (]) I hear you are tag teaming and has no prior history here but ].."
	# {{diff2\|880141192\|16:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 880034627 by ] (]) no consensus for this"
	# {{diff2\|879978253\|16:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "remove undue information per talk page, a CBI statement needs no separate section"

	;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

	#

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
	# {{diff2\|880040775\|23:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)}} "/* Undue weightage to the accusations and removal of the subjects statement */ re"

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' ]
	;<u>Comments:</u>

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
	This IP user is showing ] issues and repeatedly reverting to his of the article. He has thrice removed reliably sourced content citing frivolous reasons and has twice restored ] violations (poorly sourced statements attributed to a living person) ''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 06:12, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	* This IP is clearly a sock of somebody or other, not to mention the clear ] in the diff 3. What do they mean by "{{tq\|I hear}}". Hear from whom? They have no prior interaction with me. (By the way, the subject, ], is in the news. Plenty of people with "no prior history" would be watching this page.) -- ] (]) 13:05, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	* I ~~also~~ ~~notice~~ ~~that~~ ~~the~~ IP ~~has~~ ~~full~~ ~~protection~~ of ~~the~~ page, ~~repeating~~ ~~the~~ ~~same~~ ~~ridiculous~~ ] ~~naming~~ ~~me,~~ ~~'''and~~ ~~then'''~~ ~~did~~ a ~~revert:~~ ~~{{diff2\|880232144\|05:32,~~ 26 ~~January~~ ~~2019}}.~~ A ~~clear~~ ~~effort~~ to ~~game~~ ~~the~~ ~~system~~. -- ] (]) 14:07, 26 ~~January~~ ~~2019~~ (UTC)		This user continued to even ''after'' a 3RR warning was on the user's talk page. The user does not seem to want to address substantive issues on talk to reach consensus and instead prefers to engage in NPOV, ], ] behavior and ad hominem attacks. - ] (]) 17:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
	* Also It would be interesting to know how this IP and Qualitist reached this page in the first place, immediately after I edited it, and only to revert my edits. (], ], ])--''<span style="text-shadow:0px 0px .3em LightSkyBlue;">]]</span>'' 15:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	::{{AN3\|p}} – 3 days by ]. ] (]) 17:21, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	:::The IP 103.204.87.39, who has certainly made a lot of reverts, has that may be of interest. ] (]) 17:27, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

			:Ironically, the user @] made a substantial change to the article without explanation or consensus (as can be clearly seen from the article edit history) before any useful discussion took place. He had always emphasized that edits should be made based on discussion, but his actions were exactly the opposite. If someone is instigating an edit war, I think it is clear which side started it first. ] (]) 17:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
	== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked 24 hours) ==
			::All my edit explanations are in the relevant ]. If any ] is missing in my edits to the article, please feel free to provide diffs. - ] (]) 00:38, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			:And ad hominem attacks? This is a very serious accusation, and I do hope you have enough evidence to support it, otherwise it is just malicious prosecution and frame-up. All our communications and opinion exchange is clearly visible on the talk page and edit history. ] (]) 18:01, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
			::{{AN3\|b\|24 hours}} ] (]) 07:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked one week) ==
	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Emma Sulkowicz}} <br />
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Indygirl15}}

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Hephthalite–Gokturk raids of 614–616}} <br />
	'''Previous version reverted to:''' (in a bio of a person who uses "they" pronouns)
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|وقت الصلاة}}

	'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''		'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	#		#
	#		#
	#		#
	#		#
	#
	#
	#
	#
	#
	# (continued edit warring even after being warned on their talk page by me and by another user)

	'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' and		'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''

	<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />		<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />

			Bonus ]/]; . Also very high likelihood of sock/meatpuppetry, I'll file an SPI later just to be sure its not the former. --] (]) 18:31, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
	Clear case of ] (and DIDNTHEARTHAT)? ] (]) 06:12, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
			*{{AN3\|b\|one week}}. ] (]) 18:47, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
			:* Also '''ECP protected''' (I edit-conflicted with Bbb23 here) I was going to block the editor concerned, but instead I have reverted their latest edits and ECPd the article; they can discuss their edits on the talk page rather than edit-warring when they are unblocked. ] 18:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
			:*:Big thanks to you both! ] (]) 21:39, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: No violation) ==
	The comment is a clear indication that the editor intends to continue with these edits, as they have. ] (]) 06:15, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	*{{AN3\|blocked\| 24 hours}} and warned of discretionary sanctions. ] (]) 07:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Justice}} <br />
	== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked per SPI) ==
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Remsense}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Jean Wyllys}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|Damonshady}}

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	;Previous version reverted to:
			#
			#
			#
			#

	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
	# {{diff2\|880266643\|12:19, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Check the talk page"
	# {{diff2\|880265221\|12:03, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "What are you talking about?? And why are you reverting to a version full of typos and outdated information? Nothing new was added so no need for sources!"
	# {{diff\|oldid=880260538\|diff=880264910\|label=Consecutive edits made from 11:42, 26 January 2019 (UTC) to 12:00, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}}
	## {{diff2\|880263191\|11:42, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Previous revert was disrespectful to people who spent time making good faith, productive edits. No reason to revert at all!"
	## {{diff2\|880263941\|11:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Wording"
	## {{diff2\|880264523\|11:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Repositioning // This section still need some work done in order to achieve a neutral point of view"
	## {{diff2\|880264869\|11:59, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "/* Controversies */ can someone more experienced fix this section? It gives to much weight to one side and doesn’t have sources"
	## {{diff2\|880264910\|12:00, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "/* Controversies */ fixed typo"

	;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
	# {{diff2\|880265685\|12:08, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule on ]. (])"

	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	;<u>Comments:</u>

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
	Invloved in large dispute with ] - has been reported to SPI by them. ] (]) 12:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	:I refuse any involvement in sockpuppetry and I’m sorry if I violated any rule. I made good faith, productive edits and this guy is reverting me for no reason! Can someone be reasonable and check my contributions? I have no intention at all to disrupt Misplaced Pages. I didn’t add any new information that requires a source. I even tried to get reasonings from him but nevertheless, I’m being accused of using multiple accounts? I’m not even pov pushing, I don’t have any agenda! Just tried to contribute to WP but it seems I’m not welcomed here. Actually I don’t even care about being blocked, I just ask you please to check my edits and decide for yourself if they’re disruptive. --] (]) 12:32, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	*{{AN3\|ab}} at SPI as a sock. ]<sup>]</sup> 16:52, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	==] reported by ] (Result: Page protected) ==
			Guilty as charged. None of my justifications matter, since 3RR doesn't care that IPs can just slip into the night instead of actually engaging in discussion on talk, leaving a highly visible article in a broken state for hours because my hands are tied to fix it. Can't ask anyone else to fix it because that's canvassing. I've been given a lot of wiggle room here over the past couple months, so if this earns me a week then so be it. It's extremely frustrating trying to protect the most important articles on the site, so maybe after this I should just give up. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 20:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

			:{{reply to\|Remsense}} Your accusation that I left {{tqi\|a highly visible article in a broken state for hours}} is a completely baseless ] and should lengthen your block. Any administrator can read the article's diffs and confirm that at no point did I do such a thing. You're the one who deleted well-referenced material. ] (]) 20:46, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Jean Wyllys}}
			:As a related side note, it does not seem that the IP editor really cares to follow ] in this instance. - ] (]) 00:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|Coltsfan}}

			Add to the above the following ] by Remsense on the article's talk page: . ] (]) 20:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Previous version reverted to:

			:Additionally, when I Remsense with the appropriate user warning for this personal attack, they {{tqi\|get the hell off my page}}. This is a clear violation of ]. Add it to the list. ] (]) 20:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
			::I would like to back up the complaint against Remsense here, as he also recently failed to assume good faith in edits I posted and attacked me personally as an editor. He then followed me and deleted another edit I had posted on an unrelated page afterward after I questioned his conduct on his talk page (which he then deleted.) I question whether his temperament is suitable to be a moderator on Misplaced Pages.
	# {{diff2\|880265015\|12:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "changes made ignoring or extrapolating the sources; ] and ]"
			::] (]) 04:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	# {{diff\|oldid=880229587\|diff=880260538\|label=Consecutive edits made from 11:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC) to 11:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}}
			:::There is no such thing as a moderator on Misplaced Pages, Remsense is a Normal Editor like you and not an Admin Either. ] (]) 04:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	## {{diff2\|880260517\|11:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "non constructive changes that don't agree with the sources or don't have any"
			::::Thank you. I stand by my comments on his temperament and conduct regardless.
	## {{diff2\|880260538\|11:14, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} ""
			::::] (]) 04:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	# {{diff2\|880213956\|02:28, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} ""
			:::::It is not reasonable to take someone's actions in good faith when they lie, both straightforwardly and by omission, in their representation of said actions to others. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 04:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::No one lied, I made what I felt was a minor edit. You then jumped to incorrect conclusions, insulted me after I criticized your uncivil and unprofessional conduct and then stocked my editing history to an unrelated article. Your conduct in my view continues to be as I described, and I continue to hold your temperament to be ill-suited for editing here. I ask that you show humility and engage in much needed introspection and improve yourself if you intend to continue posting here. ] (]) 04:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::::It was not a "minor clean up", and you know it. I don't have to pretend I don't also know it, so don't bother. FWIW I have ] on my watchlist, but you're not entitled to your contribution history being immune from scrutiny when one instance belies the clear possibility of more. That's why it's there. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 04:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::::As I said, humility and introspection would serve you well, but I see no benefit in further interaction with you. Take care. ] (]) 04:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::Another way of stating this would be to say that you didn't follow the date format rules (why doesn't really matter), used misleading/uninformative edit summaries experienced editors have seen countless times before with BCE->BC and CE->AD transforms like 'Minor clean up' and 'Minor grammar cleanup', and Remsense left you an informative message to help you avoid repeating these kinds of errors. ] (]) 04:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::{{AN3\|no}} Remsense smartly reverted his last revert, so ]. However, this has not been Wikipedians at their best. The IP's that the cited source does not mention this has not been addressed; instead this edit war broke out over something entirely procedural which is not even policy. Further discussion should, I think, focus on the issue around the sourcing of "equitable" and whether that word should be cited in the intro. ] (]) 18:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::{{reply to\|Daniel Case}} A violation ''did'' occur. happened long ''after'' the violation was reported here at ]. You cannot exempt a user from punishment just because they self-reverted long ''after'' being reported to try to avoid said punishment. Furthermore, Remsense . ] (]) 17:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::Blocks are not a punishment, but a way to end and prevent disruption. By self-reverting, they recognized they erred, meaning the risk of further disruption is low. If you wish to pursue a grievance against another user's alleged broad pattern of behavior, that's not done here, but at ]. ] (]) 18:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::::{{+1}} ] (]) 18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Refer to AN/I) ==
	;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
	# {{diff2\|880265718\|12:08, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule on ]. (])"

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Crunchyroll}} <br />
	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|72.134.38.53}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	;<u>Comments:</u>
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#

	As per my report a moment ago - this is the other user invloved. ] (]) 12:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	:{{ping\|RhinosF1}} Three changes were made by me (only two being me reverting someone, no 3RR here) and then things were taken to the talk page. You even put in the diffs there that were about spacing in the paragraphs, not changes in the content. That's hardly a EW, under any light. ] (]) 12:39, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	::You seem to be trying to discuss but I've added information on yourself to allow the full case to be seen. ] (]) 12:42, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	:::{{AN3\|p}} – 5 days. ] (]) 17:46, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

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

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Greta Thunberg}} <br />
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|1Goldberg2}}

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

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

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

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> The IP has repeatedly removed languages within the infobox website on Crunchyroll's page explicitly citing that the streaming service only has 14 languages available according to its official website; specifically it has English, German, Dutch, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Galician, Turkish, Russian, Japanese, Arabic and Hindi when in reality there are 20 the number of anime series and movies available in its complete catalog with audio original Japanese and with subtitles, only that Sony, the owner of this platform or Crunchyroll itself, have not officially made the announcement of the possibility of it expanding to more territories, more countries and more languages without waiting for this to happen next. ] (]) 00:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			:{{AN3\|d}} This looks a little too complex for the scope of this noticeboard; I think AN/I would be better. But, since infoboxes are ], I have put a notice to that effect on the talk page. ] (]) 08:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked from article for a week) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|1917 (2019 film)}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|MapReader}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

	'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''		'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265946281\|10:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) It's a long-standing descriptor that has been in the article since early 2020, not that long after the film was released, that has been discussed extensively at least twice. You challenge it by going to the talk page."
	* and ] violation in which ed changed ] from saying she's a "climate activist" to a "climate prostitute"
			# {{diff2\|1265894186\|04:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) The page carries the full discussion from 2020 and 2023, which includes reference to the relevant guidelines and the necessary citations. You don’t just wade in a year later and change the article without resuming the talk."
	* to restore "prositute"
			# {{diff2\|1265827012\|21:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) There was no consensus for your removal, which referred to talk page discussions that didn’t exist, or at least weren’t contemporary"
	* to restore "prositute"
			# {{diff2\|1265757721\|14:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Per RS, restoring the consensus position prior to the autumn edit"
	* to restore "prositute"
	* to restore "prositute"
	* to restore "prositute"
	* Other vandalism, not 3RR shortly after the last diff above first sentence of the lead at global warming to "Global warming is fake..."

	'''~~Diff~~ of edit warring / 3RR warning''' ~~and '''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page'''</br> </br>~~		'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265942155\|10:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule on ]."
	Due to the vandalism and BLP vio I did not bother issuing a 3RR notice before filing this report. I did, however, leave a . <del>I don't think they have any contribs after I left the DS notice.</del> DONTBITE is great when inexperienced users make oopsies but this case presents abundant objective evidence of bad faith, so I skipped the handholding. After posting the DS alert, this user added an inflammatory comment in this thread (see below, or if it later disappears see ). ] (]) 13:17, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	*:That was not mistake. I politically attacked this disgusting left for her lies. And there is no global warming--] (]) 13:07, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	* {{AN3\|b\| indef}} I can't see that as anything but a severe BLP violation and simple vandalism. Blocked until they can return to rationality. ] ] 13:29, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked) ==
			# {{diff2\|952190013\|00:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC) on Talk:1917 (2019 film)}} "/* Country? */ r"

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Accession of Macedonia to NATO}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|Ljuvlig}}

			There is no consensus for this inclusion that this editor has restored 4 times in the past day, despite multiple prior talk page discussions. – ] (]) 10:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	;Previous version reverted to:

			:: This editor has repeteadly endeavoured to force a change in an article that has twice been subject to lengthy prior discussion, ignoring all my requests for him to raise this on the talk page in the normal way. The diff he or she provides as an "attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page" is four and a half years old, and not from the same account name, and doesn't represent any attempt to resolve the issue since it was a contribution to a discussion that both left the article unchanged and has been superseded by a longer more recent one, in 2023, that established consensus. Pitching up four years later and trying to force a change after a discussion in which you took part - under a different account name - simply because you disagree with the outcome and without resuming the conversation or taking any account of a lengthy further discussion in which this editor apparently did not take part, is disruptive editing.
			:] (]) 10:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::{{AN3\|b\|one week}} from the article. This was a tough one to call. I thought seriously about declining it as all the discussion has been civil and it seems everyone is not only acting in good faith but ] (well, there is as of now ]). Had I decided to decline, I would have done so on the basis of the edit being reverted to being rather old ... we have no policy guidance on how old that edit has to be; sometimes people here have cited year-old edits as the basis of their complaint. But at the same time I would commend MapReader's attention to ]: "''... a lack of response to an edit does not necessarily imply community consent''", contrary to .<p>The underlying problem is, as IN notes , is that this dispute falls neatly into a gap that FILMCOUNTRY fails to address, an issue as noted best resolved at the policy level. In the meantime, though, policy shortcomings cannot be allowed to justify edit wars, and in the meantime I read LOCALCONSENSUS as, by implication, deferring to the decision made here on the talk page.<p>MapReader is acting in good faith when they point out the lack of clear guidance. All the same ... while they are correct again to note the deficiency of citing the 2020 discussion as a basis for consensus when the 2023 discussion exists, I read that 2023 discussion as, in the noted absence of clarity at the policy level, establishing a consensus for following FILMCOUNTRY and leaving the countries of production out of the lede entirely while noting them in the infobox. MapReader's good-faith skepticism about Lumiere's methodology notwithstanding, it does not give them the right to revert the current lede.<p>Since, as it turned out, I have previously partially blocked MapReader before for similar conduct, and there has been an intervening sitewide block, I am doing it again, this time for longer. ] (]) 19:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::Thank you for the explanation. Just to be clear, the lead was stable between 2020 and late summer this year, 2024, on the basis of the 2020 and 2023 discussions. It was the other editor - who appears to have contributed briefly to the 2020 discussion but under a different username - who intervened to make a change late this summer, without revisiting the talk page at all, and after I restored the status quo, has attempted to force this through today without discussion. While I realise I made one revert too many, his/her gaming 3RR to force through an edit that runs contrary to previous discussion, and citing a four year old comment as evidence of being willing to talk about it, was having a laugh, IMHO. ] (]) 22:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::Like I said, this is best addressed at the policy level. ] (]) 18:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

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

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|2024 Wisconsin Senate election}} <br />
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Stormy160}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#




			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''

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

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

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />I have repeatedly tried to discuss it with the editor, posting a long response to each thing reverted in the article but to no avail, as the user read my response, disagreed, and then reverted back to their desired change, claiming I said something I did not. I have no idea hoe else to resolve this conflict because the table me and other editors built has had 0 issue until this one editor came in and started claiming issues existed with it (that don't exist by the way). <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Xsign -->
			:Yes, that is edit-warring. PS - We should have a link to the ''consensus'' being mentioned. ] (]) 16:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			::This user will not engage at all. I gave examples of what I was talking about, only to be called “dense”. They clearly just want full control over the page, nobody is allowed to edit their previous work. So yes, I did try to explain the precedent. I engaged on the talk page to no avail, which of course the user did not mention in their report. ] (]) 21:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			*{{AN3\|p}} ] (]) 16:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Page full-protected for three days) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Pooja Hegde}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Thesanas}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266008901\|17:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Restoring the last version by User:Charliehdb"
			# {{diff2\|1265919879\|07:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]): WP:ONUS applies to those who adds contents. I only replaced with reliable sources. Please stop WP:EDITWAR here"

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265915618\|06:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265915247\|06:55, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* GA article */"

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>

			Additional warring is and . User erased previous warning from their talk page and was warned numerous times about getting consensus on the talk page. Has been reverted by three different editors at this point but user still does not seem to get it. ] (]) 00:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

			:I restored user:Charliehdb last edit . What is the mistake in restoring other users edits? I am here to expand and make this article with reliable sources. Why are you removing my edits with reliable sources and making this article with unreliable sources? ] (]) 02:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Pretty sure {{u\|Charliehdb}} is a ]. ] (]) 06:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::Wouldn't surprise me but I am not sure I would get much reception at SPI at this point with as many filings I have done recently on Indian film related UPE, SOCKS, and MEAT.--] (]) 07:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::They obviously do not care about ] and likely UPE based on the continued . I will let them continue to bludgeon and just roll back once they are blocked. Not worth the stress of trying to clean up the page when they don't seem to want to work within a collaborative community. --] (]) 07:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::{{AN3\|p}} in full for three days, since while the submitted diffs do not constitute a violation as there aren't enough, we clearly can't let this go on. With the allegations of socking and meating, this really should go to AN/I ... or SPI, CNMall's reservations notwithstanding. ] (]) 18:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

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

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|United States men's national junior ice hockey team}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Stevencocoboy}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266124850\|05:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* IIHF World Junior Championship */ Hide it first because ]"
			# {{diff2\|1266122972\|05:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Please stop the edit war, I want to edit and update result only"
			# {{diff2\|1266121493\|05:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Why? we can update the result which the events are finish"
			# {{diff2\|1266118183\|05:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* IIHF World Junior Championship */"

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''


			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266124147\|05:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC) on User talk:Stevencocoboy}} "/* Respecting consensus of your fellow editors */ new section"

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>

			Look at his person's talk page. They have been warned over and over and over. Just at they must be 10x reverts. I didn't report that because he promised me he would be better, but it hasn't stopped him. ] (]) 07:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:Sorry it's because I don't know a consensus in ]. I'm not American and my english is poor. I don't know we can't update a result and we need until the event was completed. Also I need using some times to translate what is talking about. After I translate it, I'm stopped edit in the page. Thanks. ] (]) 07:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::Here's the thing... you have been warned of this many times on multiple subjects, and you've been editing here for 10 years now. I count that you have been warned 11x since September 2024... most of which you didn't answer on your talk page. In October you were told by an editor "Please ensure you are familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges." On December 24 I told you to "Self-revert or I WILL report you, and you will get blocked" for 8 reverts of Template:U.S. Figure Skating Championships. The same day I told you "You are also dangerously close to being blocked for your edits at "U.S. Figure Skating Championships." Yesterday a third editor told you to stop vandalizing "United States men's national ice hockey team". You were told about edit warring and to read up on consensus by editors at WP:Hockey. And then again a warning for "United States men's national junior ice hockey team".

			::This has gone on long enough. For your own good you need to be blocked a couple days to think about things and you really should be doing one edit and then move on to another topic. As soon as another editor reverts your new edit that should be a huge red ringing warning not to edit that page again until given the go-ahead by other editors on the talk page. This has to stop NOW before your privilege of editing here gets revoked. I was stern with you on your talk page about your 8 reverts, but you stopped and we came to a compromise, and I did not report you. Since then your talk page has been filled by five more minor and major warnings. ] (]) 08:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::I can promise stop editing about ice hockey pages in recent days and calm down more because I've make a controversial. I'm sorry again. Thanks. ] (]) 08:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::{{AN3\|d}} with leave to re-report if reported user breaks his promise above. ] (]) 18:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

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

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Huaynaputina}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Atsee}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266208513\|16:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) don't revert for no reason. If you disagree with my reasons for making an edit, you need to explain why."
			# {{diff\|oldid=1266205410\|diff=1266205775\|label=Consecutive edits made from 15:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC) to 15:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}}
			## {{diff2\|1266205683\|15:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) first one doesn't need to be a footnote; second is not necessary; third is not relevant; fourth doesn't even make sense."
			## {{diff2\|1266205775\|15:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) there is no citation where the fact tag has been placed. place the relevant citation there. that is all that needs doing."
			# {{diff\|oldid=1262695206\|diff=1266185442\|label=Consecutive edits made from 13:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC) to 13:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}}
			## {{diff2\|1266184197\|13:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "removed a lot of footnotes which are redundant. there is no need for a definition of a term when the term is linked."
			## {{diff2\|1266185193\|13:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "doesn't need a dictionary link"
			## {{diff2\|1266185442\|13:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* Caldera collapse */"

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266205992\|15:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* Your edits on Huaynaputina */ new section"

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266206482\|15:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* Footnotes */ Reply"

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>

			Discussion at ], user repeatedly deleting footnotes without a valid reason on a Featured Article ''''']''''' (]) 16:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:This user clearly wanted an edit war. Witness their utterly unhelpful edit summaries in their three reverts:
			:* - there is no inline "right there"; that's the precise reason I put a "fact" tag there.
			:* - no other interpretation than reverting for the sake of reverting is possible.
			:* - again reverting without any attempt to provide a rationale.
			: There was no need to file this report. There is discussion on the talk page. The user evidently wanted an edit war, and evidently wanted to make a fuss about it. ] (]) 16:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::It took you multiple reverts before you actually even replied to the talk discussion, even after explaining in the FA and your talk pages, you continued to insinuate you are in the right. While the discussion was active, after Mike Christie's reply, you continued your reverts. ''''']''''' (]) 16:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::I noticed the didn't trigger the undo tag but the edit summary suggest a revert and subsequent changes before publishing. It would count to three reverts. ''''']''''' (]) 16:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			*Indefinitely blocked along with their IPs for 3 months (]).--] (]) 17:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

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

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Matriarchy}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|36.228.143.128}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266181569\|13:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} ""
			# {{diff2\|1266162425\|10:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} ""
			# {{diff2\|1266057097\|22:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} ""
			# {{diff2\|1266056003\|22:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} ""

	;Diffs of ~~the~~ ~~user's~~ ~~reverts~~:		'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266184214\|13:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."
	# {{diff2\|880324164\|20:16, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "It's not balanced having two pics saying "fuck", "kill" nato, atleast one pro and one con if a of the photos is gonna be up."
	# {{diff2\|880287628\|15:54, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "It's no idea to threaten by writing on my talk page, you are changing your story, first you say a majority are against then you say some are, based on what? Nothing, no sources, just cause you feel that Nato isn't good for Macedonia doesn't mean grafiti is acceptable."
	# {{diff2\|880286590\|15:43, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Where are the sources that you say are true, that the majority are anti-Nato. The Wiki text says otherwise."
	# {{diff2\|880286067\|15:38, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "No they are not, it says a bit further up that "NATO membership in general is supported by 85.2% of the population." This is anti-nato propaganda. And makes the article not neutral."
	# {{diff2\|880285192\|15:30, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "Not relevant, graffiti from some random person(s) shouldn't take up the articles points."

	;Diffs of ~~edit~~ ~~warring~~ / ~~3RR~~ ~~warning~~:		'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	*
	*


			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
	# {{diff2\|880307793\|18:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC)}} "/* Pics in article */Cmt"

			IP has persistently inserted extraordinary claims and violated the three-revert rule. ] (]) 16:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
	;<u>Comments:</u>
			:{{AN3\|d}} as user has not edited since the last warning they got ten hours ago (of course, if they resume ...). I ''will'' leave a CTOPS notice on the talk page. ] (]) 19:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
	*Made another revert . ] (]) 20:48, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
	::{{AN3\|b}} – 24 hours. ] (]) 06:42, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:02, 30 December 2024

Noticeboard for edit warring

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

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard Shortcuts

Update this page

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

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

You must notify any user you have reported.

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

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

Additional notes

When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.
The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from.
Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection.
Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed.

Definition of edit warring

Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring.

Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions.

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

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

Click here to create a new report

Noticeboard archives
Administrators' (archives, search)
348	349	350	351	352	353	354	355	356	357
358	359	360	361	362	363	364	365	366	367
Incidents (archives, search)
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)
471	472	473	474	475	476	477	478	479	480
481	482	483	484	485	486	487	488	489	490
Arbitration enforcement (archives)
327	328	329	330	331	332	333	334	335	336
337	338	339	340	341	342	343	344	345	346
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

User:TheHappiestEditor reported by User:Fylindfotberserk (Result: Blocked indefinitely for now)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

22:35, 26 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265170057 by Fylindfotberserk (talk) She works in Malayalam cinema.There are two upcoming Malayalam films of Trisha. The total number of Malayalam films is not two."
13:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC) "/* top */She works in Malayalam films too. There are two upcoming Malayalam films of Trisha."

Diffs from other articles (language POV and edit war)

- putting fake sources/infomation
- putting fake sources/infomation
- putting fake sources/infomation

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

POV pushing/cherry-picking "Malayalam" and edit warring in a lot of articles. Apart from the above listed, the user has been pushing "Malayalam" as one of the languages in which "actor XYZ" has acted 'predominantly' in but in actuality the entries are only a few . The editor has received multiple warnings for being disruptiove and a recent one for edit-warring from Krimuk2.0. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

TheHappiestEditor, please respond to these allegations. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

TheHappiestEditor has engaged in further edit-warring, with the same "Malayalam" language POV pushing, with 19Arham here here. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Apparently, they do not want to respond here, but would very much continue with their POV . Also note removal of sources here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:14, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@TheHappiestEditor and I spoke on my Talk page where they said the following: "The information regarding Wamiqa Gabbi has been removed multiple times despite being supported by reliable sources, such as . This violates Misplaced Pages's verifiability policy. Could we discuss this further to reach a consensus?" 19Arham (talk) 14:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

The removal of content isn't a violation of the verifiability policy; restoring content against WP:ONUS or WP:BURDEN is. Dealing with other editors' concerns about one's editing isn't optional if the editing continues, and TheHappiestEditor had the chance to respond here. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely for now. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

User:103.84.130.238 reported by User:Fylindfotberserk (Result: Page protected)

User being reported: 103.84.130.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Consecutive edits made from 12:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC) to 12:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
1. 12:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1262480024 by Fylindfotberserk (talk)"
2. 12:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC) ""https://www.hariprasadchaurasia.com" check the site pandit is part of his name , the site is run by him, also there are other similar cases too on wikipedia "

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Keeps on adding (edit wars) honorifics despite explanation about WP:NCIN and MOS:HON in edit summaries and warnings Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

The IP was initially reported to AIV, since disruptive edits continued after a level 4 warning, but was asked to report it here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:44, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
@ToBeFree Sadly, the IP is now doing the exact same thing over at the article Shivkumar Sharma (diff). — AP 499D25 (talk) 07:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Blocked, thanks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:04, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Johnny test person reported by User:ToBeFree (Result:Indefinitely blocked)

User being reported: Johnny test person (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

21:02, 27 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265440086 by ToBeFree (talk)"
19:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265401281 by Codename AD (talk)"
19:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265395978 by Codename AD (talk)"
18:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265395008 by Aoidh (talk)"
18:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265382744 by Aoidh (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Back from an edit warring block with an additional personal attack (Special:Diff/1265613452) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely Two day old account with 19 edits, a block, and that personal attack? Bye. Jauerback/_dude. 21:15, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Infinty 0 reported by User:Amigao (Result: Blocked 24h)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 3RR warning given

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Automotive_industry_in_China#EU_technology_transfer_demand

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

Comments:
This user continued to revert even after a 3RR warning was provided on the user's talk page. The user does not seem to want to address substantive issues on talk to reach consensus and instead prefers to engage in NPOV, WP:OWNBEHAVIOR, WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior and ad hominem attacks. - Amigao (talk) 17:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Ironically, the user @Amigao made a substantial change to the article without explanation or consensus (as can be clearly seen from the article edit history) before any useful discussion took place. He had always emphasized that edits should be made based on discussion, but his actions were exactly the opposite. If someone is instigating an edit war, I think it is clear which side started it first. Infinty 0 (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

All my edit explanations are in the relevant WP:ES. If any WP:ES is missing in my edits to the article, please feel free to provide diffs. - Amigao (talk) 00:38, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

And ad hominem attacks? This is a very serious accusation, and I do hope you have enough evidence to support it, otherwise it is just malicious prosecution and frame-up. All our communications and opinion exchange is clearly visible on the talk page and edit history. Infinty 0 (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Daniel Case (talk) 07:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

User:وقت الصلاة reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Blocked one week)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Comments:

Bonus WP:NPA/WP:ASPERSIONS; You may hate Turkish people.. If you Look the userpage of "HistoryofIran" you can clearly see she is obsessed with turkish people.. Also very high likelihood of sock/meatpuppetry, I'll file an SPI later just to be sure its not the former. --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:31, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 18:47, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Also ECP protected (I edit-conflicted with Bbb23 here) I was going to block the editor concerned, but instead I have reverted their latest edits and ECPd the article; they can discuss their edits on the talk page rather than edit-warring when they are unblocked. Black Kite (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Big thanks to you both! HistoryofIran (talk) 21:39, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Remsense reported by User:2001:569:7FEA:2900:D124:450:C36:AF27 (Result: No violation)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments: Guilty as charged. None of my justifications matter, since 3RR doesn't care that IPs can just slip into the night instead of actually engaging in discussion on talk, leaving a highly visible article in a broken state for hours because my hands are tied to fix it. Can't ask anyone else to fix it because that's canvassing. I've been given a lot of wiggle room here over the past couple months, so if this earns me a week then so be it. It's extremely frustrating trying to protect the most important articles on the site, so maybe after this I should just give up. Remsense ‥ 论 20:38, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

@Remsense: Your accusation that I left a highly visible article in a broken state for hours is a completely baseless attack and should lengthen your block. Any administrator can read the article's diffs and confirm that at no point did I do such a thing. You're the one who deleted well-referenced material. 2001:569:7FEA:2900:D124:450:C36:AF27 (talk) 20:46, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

As a related side note, it does not seem that the IP editor really cares to follow WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY in this instance. - Amigao (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Add to the above the following personal attack by Remsense on the article's talk page: . 2001:569:7FEA:2900:D124:450:C36:AF27 (talk) 20:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, when I notified Remsense with the appropriate user warning for this personal attack, they replied with get the hell off my page. This is a clear violation of WP:CIVILITY. Add it to the list. 2001:569:7FEA:2900:D124:450:C36:AF27 (talk) 20:55, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

I would like to back up the complaint against Remsense here, as he also recently failed to assume good faith in edits I posted and attacked me personally as an editor. He then followed me and deleted another edit I had posted on an unrelated page afterward after I questioned his conduct on his talk page (which he then deleted.) I question whether his temperament is suitable to be a moderator on Misplaced Pages.

MrJ567 (talk) 04:21, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

There is no such thing as a moderator on Misplaced Pages, Remsense is a Normal Editor like you and not an Admin Either. Untamed1910 (talk) 04:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I stand by my comments on his temperament and conduct regardless.

MrJ567 (talk) 04:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

It is not reasonable to take someone's actions in good faith when they lie, both straightforwardly and by omission, in their representation of said actions to others. Remsense ‥ 论 04:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

No one lied, I made what I felt was a minor edit. You then jumped to incorrect conclusions, insulted me after I criticized your uncivil and unprofessional conduct and then stocked my editing history to an unrelated article. Your conduct in my view continues to be as I described, and I continue to hold your temperament to be ill-suited for editing here. I ask that you show humility and engage in much needed introspection and improve yourself if you intend to continue posting here. MrJ567 (talk) 04:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

It was not a "minor clean up", and you know it. I don't have to pretend I don't also know it, so don't bother. FWIW I have Indiana on my watchlist, but you're not entitled to your contribution history being immune from scrutiny when one instance belies the clear possibility of more. That's why it's there. Remsense ‥ 论 04:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

As I said, humility and introspection would serve you well, but I see no benefit in further interaction with you. Take care. MrJ567 (talk) 04:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Another way of stating this would be to say that you didn't follow the date format rules (why doesn't really matter), used misleading/uninformative edit summaries experienced editors have seen countless times before with BCE->BC and CE->AD transforms like 'Minor clean up' and 'Minor grammar cleanup', and Remsense left you an informative message to help you avoid repeating these kinds of errors. Sean.hoyland (talk) 04:40, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

No violation Remsense smartly reverted his last revert, so 3RR has not been violated. However, this has not been Wikipedians at their best. The IP's observation that the cited source does not mention this has not been addressed; instead this edit war broke out over something entirely procedural which is not even policy. Further discussion should, I think, focus on the issue around the sourcing of "equitable" and whether that word should be cited in the intro. Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: A violation did occur. That self-revert happened long after the violation was reported here at WP:AN3. You cannot exempt a user from punishment just because they self-reverted long after being reported to try to avoid said punishment. Furthermore, Remsense has committed the same violation before. 2001:569:7FEA:2900:8049:8F17:E1E:C306 (talk) 17:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocks are not a punishment, but a way to end and prevent disruption. By self-reverting, they recognized they erred, meaning the risk of further disruption is low. If you wish to pursue a grievance against another user's alleged broad pattern of behavior, that's not done here, but at WP:AN. 331dot (talk) 18:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

+1 Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

User:72.134.38.53 reported by User:190.167.0.99 (Result: Refer to AN/I)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 9

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

Comments: The IP has repeatedly removed languages within the infobox website on Crunchyroll's page explicitly citing that the streaming service only has 14 languages available according to its official website; specifically it has English, German, Dutch, French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Galician, Turkish, Russian, Japanese, Arabic and Hindi when in reality there are 20 the number of anime series and movies available in its complete catalog with audio original Japanese and with subtitles, only that Sony, the owner of this platform or Crunchyroll itself, have not officially made the announcement of the possibility of it expanding to more territories, more countries and more languages without waiting for this to happen next. 190.167.0.99 (talk) 00:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Declined This looks a little too complex for the scope of this noticeboard; I think AN/I would be better. But, since infoboxes are a contentious topic, I have put a notice to that effect on the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 08:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

User:MapReader reported by User:Notwally (Result: Blocked from article for a week)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

10:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265942060 by Notwally (talk) It's a long-standing descriptor that has been in the article since early 2020, not that long after the film was released, that has been discussed extensively at least twice. You challenge it by going to the talk page."
04:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265836072 by Notwally (talk) The page carries the full discussion from 2020 and 2023, which includes reference to the relevant guidelines and the necessary citations. You don’t just wade in a year later and change the article without resuming the talk."
21:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265821239 by Notwally (talk) There was no consensus for your removal, which referred to talk page discussions that didn’t exist, or at least weren’t contemporary"
14:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC) "Per RS, restoring the consensus position prior to the autumn edit"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

10:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on 1917 (2019 film)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

00:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC) on Talk:1917 (2019 film) "/* Country? */ r"

Comments:

There is no consensus for this inclusion that this editor has restored 4 times in the past day, despite multiple prior talk page discussions. – notwally (talk) 10:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

This editor has repeteadly endeavoured to force a change in an article that has twice been subject to lengthy prior discussion, ignoring all my requests for him to raise this on the talk page in the normal way. The diff he or she provides as an "attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page" is four and a half years old, and not from the same account name, and doesn't represent any attempt to resolve the issue since it was a contribution to a discussion that both left the article unchanged and has been superseded by a longer more recent one, in 2023, that established consensus. Pitching up four years later and trying to force a change after a discussion in which you took part - under a different account name - simply because you disagree with the outcome and without resuming the conversation or taking any account of a lengthy further discussion in which this editor apparently did not take part, is disruptive editing.

MapReader (talk) 10:50, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week from the article. This was a tough one to call. I thought seriously about declining it as all the discussion has been civil and it seems everyone is not only acting in good faith but reciprocally assuming it of the other parties (well, there is as of now only one on one side). Had I decided to decline, I would have done so on the basis of the edit being reverted to being rather old ... we have no policy guidance on how old that edit has to be; sometimes people here have cited year-old edits as the basis of their complaint. But at the same time I would commend MapReader's attention to WP:WEAKSILENCE: "... a lack of response to an edit does not necessarily imply community consent", contrary to what you suggest here.

The underlying problem is, as IN notes here, is that this dispute falls neatly into a gap that FILMCOUNTRY fails to address, an issue as noted best resolved at the policy level. In the meantime, though, policy shortcomings cannot be allowed to justify edit wars, and in the meantime I read LOCALCONSENSUS as, by implication, deferring to the decision made here on the talk page.

MapReader is acting in good faith when they point out the lack of clear guidance. All the same ... while they are correct again to note the deficiency of citing the 2020 discussion as a basis for consensus when the 2023 discussion exists, I read that 2023 discussion as, in the noted absence of clarity at the policy level, establishing a consensus for following FILMCOUNTRY and leaving the countries of production out of the lede entirely while noting them in the infobox. MapReader's good-faith skepticism about Lumiere's methodology notwithstanding, it does not give them the right to revert the current lede.

Since, as it turned out, I have previously partially blocked MapReader before for similar conduct, and there has been an intervening sitewide block, I am doing it again, this time for longer. Daniel Case (talk) 19:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Just to be clear, the lead was stable between 2020 and late summer this year, 2024, on the basis of the 2020 and 2023 discussions. It was the other editor - who appears to have contributed briefly to the 2020 discussion but under a different username - who intervened to make a change late this summer, without revisiting the talk page at all, and after I restored the status quo, has attempted to force this through today without discussion. While I realise I made one revert too many, his/her gaming 3RR to force through an edit that runs contrary to previous discussion, and citing a four year old comment as evidence of being willing to talk about it, was having a laugh, IMHO. MapReader (talk) 22:41, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Like I said, this is best addressed at the policy level. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Stormy160 reported by User:Talthiel (Result: Page protected)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
I have repeatedly tried to discuss it with the editor, posting a long response to each thing reverted in the article but to no avail, as the user read my response, disagreed, and then reverted back to their desired change, claiming I said something I did not. I have no idea hoe else to resolve this conflict because the table me and other editors built has had 0 issue until this one editor came in and started claiming issues existed with it (that don't exist by the way). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talthiel (talk • contribs) 15:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is edit-warring. PS - We should have a link to the consensus being mentioned. GoodDay (talk) 16:15, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

This user will not engage at all. I gave examples of what I was talking about, only to be called “dense”. They clearly just want full control over the page, nobody is allowed to edit their previous work. So yes, I did try to explain the precedent. I engaged on the talk page to no avail, which of course the user did not mention in their report. Stormy160 (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Thesanas reported by User:CNMall41 (Result: Page full-protected for three days)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

17:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "Restoring the last version by User:Charliehdb"
07:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1265915480 by CNMall41 (talk): WP:ONUS applies to those who adds contents. I only replaced with reliable sources. Please stop WP:EDITWAR here"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

06:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Pooja Hegde."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

06:55, 29 December 2024 (UTC) "/* GA article */"

Comments:

Additional warring is here and here. User erased previous warning from their talk page here and was warned numerous times about getting consensus on the talk page. Has been reverted by three different editors at this point but user still does not seem to get it. CNMall41 (talk) 00:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I restored user:Charliehdb last edit . What is the mistake in restoring other users edits? I am here to expand and make this article with reliable sources. Why are you removing my edits with reliable sources and making this article with unreliable sources? Thesanas (talk) 02:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Pretty sure Charliehdb is a WP:MEAT. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Wouldn't surprise me but I am not sure I would get much reception at SPI at this point with as many filings I have done recently on Indian film related UPE, SOCKS, and MEAT.--CNMall41 (talk) 07:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

They obviously do not care about WP:ONUS and likely UPE based on the continued edit war. I will let them continue to bludgeon and just roll back once they are blocked. Not worth the stress of trying to clean up the page when they don't seem to want to work within a collaborative community. --CNMall41 (talk) 07:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Page protected in full for three days, since while the submitted diffs do not constitute a violation as there aren't enough, we clearly can't let this go on. With the allegations of socking and meating, this really should go to AN/I ... or SPI, CNMall's reservations notwithstanding. Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Stevencocoboy reported by User:Fyunck(click) (Result: Declined)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

05:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "/* IIHF World Junior Championship */ Hide it first because WP:HOCKEY"
05:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "Please stop the edit war, I want to edit and update result only"
05:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "Why? we can update the result which the events are finish"
05:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "/* IIHF World Junior Championship */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

05:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC) on User talk:Stevencocoboy "/* Respecting consensus of your fellow editors */ new section"

Comments:

Look at his person's talk page. They have been warned over and over and over. Just at US Figure Skating Template they must be 10x reverts. I didn't report that because he promised me on my talk page he would be better, but it hasn't stopped him. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry it's because I don't know a consensus in WP:HOCKEY. I'm not American and my english is poor. I don't know we can't update a result and we need until the event was completed. Also I need using some times to translate what is talking about. After I translate it, I'm stopped edit in the page. Thanks. Stevencocoboy (talk) 07:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Here's the thing... you have been warned of this many times on multiple subjects, and you've been editing here for 10 years now. I count that you have been warned 11x since September 2024... most of which you didn't answer on your talk page. In October you were told by an editor "Please ensure you are familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges." On December 24 I told you to "Self-revert or I WILL report you, and you will get blocked" for 8 reverts of Template:U.S. Figure Skating Championships. The same day I told you "You are also dangerously close to being blocked for your edits at "U.S. Figure Skating Championships." Yesterday a third editor told you to stop vandalizing "United States men's national ice hockey team". You were told about edit warring and to read up on consensus by editors at WP:Hockey. And then again a warning for "United States men's national junior ice hockey team".

This has gone on long enough. For your own good you need to be blocked a couple days to think about things and you really should be doing one edit and then move on to another topic. As soon as another editor reverts your new edit that should be a huge red ringing warning not to edit that page again until given the go-ahead by other editors on the talk page. This has to stop NOW before your privilege of editing here gets revoked. I was stern with you on your talk page about your 8 reverts, but you stopped and we came to a compromise, and I did not report you. Since then your talk page has been filled by five more minor and major warnings. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I can promise stop editing about ice hockey pages in recent days and calm down more because I've make a controversial. I'm sorry again. Thanks. Stevencocoboy (talk) 08:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Declined with leave to re-report if reported user breaks his promise above. Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Atsee reported by User:Dora the Axe-plorer (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

16:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266205860 by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk) don't revert for no reason. If you disagree with my reasons for making an edit, you need to explain why."
Consecutive edits made from 15:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC) to 15:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
1. 15:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266201041 by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) first one doesn't need to be a footnote; second is not necessary; third is not relevant; fourth doesn't even make sense."
2. 15:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266205410 by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk) there is no citation where the fact tag has been placed. place the relevant citation there. that is all that needs doing."
Consecutive edits made from 13:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC) to 13:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
1. 13:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "removed a lot of footnotes which are redundant. there is no need for a definition of a term when the term is linked."
2. 13:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "doesn't need a dictionary link"
3. 13:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "/* Caldera collapse */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

15:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "/* Your edits on Huaynaputina */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

15:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "/* Footnotes */ Reply"

Comments:

Discussion at Talk:Huaynaputina#Footnotes, user repeatedly deleting footnotes without a valid reason on a Featured Article Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 16:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

This user clearly wanted an edit war. Witness their utterly unhelpful edit summaries in their three reverts:

literally an inline right there - there is no inline "right there"; that's the precise reason I put a "fact" tag there.
Enough disruption, you are nearing 3R - no other interpretation than reverting for the sake of reverting is possible.
again, you cannot rv without discussing, you have already reached 3RR FYI - again reverting without any attempt to provide a rationale.

There was no need to file this report. There is discussion on the talk page. The user evidently wanted an edit war, and evidently wanted to make a fuss about it. Atsee (talk) 16:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

It took you multiple reverts before you actually even replied to the talk discussion, even after explaining in the FA and your talk pages, you continued to insinuate you are in the right. While the discussion was active, after Mike Christie's reply, you continued your reverts. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 16:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I noticed the first revert didn't trigger the undo tag but the edit summary suggest a revert and subsequent changes before publishing. It would count to three reverts. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 16:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked along with their IPs for 3 months (Special:contributions/2A00:23C8:D30A:4600:0:0:0:0/64).--Bbb23 (talk) 17:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

User:36.228.143.128 reported by User:StephenMacky1 (Result: Declined)

User being reported: 36.228.143.128 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

13:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Matriarchy."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

IP has persistently inserted extraordinary claims and violated the three-revert rule. StephenMacky1 (talk) 16:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Declined as user has not edited since the last warning they got ten hours ago (of course, if they resume ...). I will leave a CTOPS notice on the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: