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 12:03, 15 February 2019 edit175.137.72.188 (talk) →user:Wikaviani, user:LouisAragon user:Oshwah reported by user:175.137.72.188 ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 22:14, 30 December 2024 edit undo331dot (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators182,636 edits →User:Remsense reported by User:2001:569:7FEA:2900:D124:450:C36:AF27 (Result: No violation): ReplyTag: Reply
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 = ~~384~~		\|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: ~~Both~~ ~~warned~~) ==		== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked indefinitely for now) ==

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|~~Maximiliano~~ ~~Meza (footballer, born 1992)~~}} ~~<br />~~		'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Trisha Krishnan}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Fcbjuvenil}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|TheHappiestEditor}}
	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

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

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


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

			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)

			:{{u\|TheHappiestEditor}}, please respond to these allegations. ] (]) 22:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

			{{u\|TheHappiestEditor}} has engaged in further edit-warring, with the same "Malayalam" language POV pushing, with {{u\|19Arham}} . ] (]) 06:27, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

			:{{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)
	Fcbjuvenil believes this footballer, ], left his ex-club, Independiente, in 2018 but joined his new club, Monterrey, in 2019. That's despite it being a direct transfer, therefore he'd have to of left/joined at the same time; i.e. the same year. My POV was that he left/joined in 2018, as that's when the transfer was announced. However, I get that's arguable as some editors believe its when the transfer window opens (2019). Fcbjuvenil thinks it should be: left in 2018, joined 2019. Which doesn't make sense. However, I'm willing to compromise at 2019 both ways. Fcbjuvenil continues to blindly revert, avoiding a discussion despite my attempts (see above). ] (]) 14:56, 9 February 2019 (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)
	*'''Result:''' Both ] and ] are warned for edit warring. Since both parties broke 3RR, action won't be taken here. Neither side has used the article talk page which would be the best place to resolve this. ] (]) 02:31, 11 February 2019 (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)
	::That hardly solves the issue, does it? You honestly believe the user would hold a conversation via the article's talk page when they didn't even respond to direct contact, nor respond here. Interesting. You could probably class Fcbjuvenil's edits as vandalism; therefore making the 3RR void. However, I was willing to find a better solution than that by coming here hoping to resolve the issue in some way. I will open a discussion on the article's talk page, which will likely be futile but hopefully I am wrong! ] (]) 09:04, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
			*{{AN3\|b\|indef}} for now. ] (]) 16:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
	:::Please don't use the term ] unless you are confident that the other party is actually trying to damage the encyclopedia and make it worse, which doesn't seem to be the case here. If a transfer was recorded as of 31 December (as suggested by ) there might be an ambiguity as to which year he started with the new team. ] (]) 14:08, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
	::::Fcb is still engaging in edit warring at multiple articles. ] (]) 08:29, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Page protected) ==
	*{{nacc}} I believed both parties did not use the talk page very much, despite members of WikiProject Football had preferred their own version or MoS on these transfer (See ]), it can be solved by one side of the edit war to start a thread in the player's article talk page or in the project. ] (]) 15:38, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	::'''Apologies''' for not using the article's talk page at the beginning, likewise with the 3RR. I should've used the talk page earlier, I will do in the future. However, I feel you can understand why I thought it would be rather futile - as it evidently has been, no response whatsoever from ] in three different locations (here, ], ]) which is a shame. It seems Koncorde has seen similar issue(s) with this user. ] (]) 16:51, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Hariprasad Chaurasia}}
	== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked) ==

	'''~~Page~~:''' {{~~pagelinks~~\|~~Gjon Kastrioti~~}} ~~<br />~~		'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|103.84.130.238}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Skylax30}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	'''Previous version reverted to:''' ] -- Skylax30's initial addition of his sources claiming that Albanian medieval nobleman and national hero Gjon Kastrioti was "Greek"

	'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''		'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff\|oldid=1262480024\|diff=1265542339\|label=Consecutive edits made from 12:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC) to 12:12, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}}
	# revert of {{u\|Cinadon36}} ]
			## {{diff2\|1265541681\|12:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	# revert of {{u\|Resnjari}} ]
			## {{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 "
	# revert of {{u\|Ktrimi991}} ]
			#
	# second revert of Ktrimi ] (reinstating this edit ] reverted by Ktrimi ])
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#
			#

	'''~~Diff~~ of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' ]		'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			#
			#

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

	<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	With this user it is in fact a chronic problem of using outdated sources, generally in attempts to deny the existence of an Albanian people. He has been previously blocked for such behavior three times, and one more for personal attacks ]. He is also a subject of some of the densest and most frequent sanctioning I've ever seen, on his native Greek wikipedia for behavior in the same vein ]. On the page ] he has a particular history demonstrating a long-term fixation with portraying him as non-Albanian, although in terms of what he should be instead, Skylax30 has proved to be rather flexible. He is now arguing the man was Greek, but earlier he was aiding the efforts of a now-banned sockpuppet to claim the man was a Serb.--] (]) 18:31, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
	:A clear violation of the rules. It is not the first time though. ] (]) 18:37, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
	::@Skylax30's edits clearly demonstrate a prolonged pattern of ] behavior.] (]) 19:23, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	The usual accusations and lies by the group of 3 guardians (plus one who never adds anything to an article but only assists in deleting) of the Albanian national myths, who prevent the improvement of relevant articles. I am not "claiming" something about a person being Greek. Articles are written on sources, not on users' opinions. I expanded the article by adding sourced material, which they delete because they don't like. The "outdated" sources mentioning Gjon Kastrioti as Greek are of 2017 and 1968, both published in academic journals. At the same time, the above team of guardians, is preserving in the same article a "fresh" source from 1899 (now number 4) and an obscure source in Russian first published in 1931 (number 3). I added a tag "citation needed" for the claim that he is Albanian (no question there are such sources) and they erase it, with the argument that this is "obvious" (Is the sky blue? Source). See talk . In the talk, Calthinus is personally attacking me with ironies and suggestions to "talk about my feelings in a safe place", with ironies about the Greek WP. The above 3-4 users are acting as a team, not to improve articles but to force an isolated user to "edit war" if he/she tries to change the articles they are patroling. Btw, I would like an opinion by adminis if pointing to previous "sunctioning" of a user (especially in another WP) is accepted as civil behaviour. If the admins board see that I am wrong on the above, I will never edit those "Albanian" articles again. 1899 was not a bad year, after all. --] (]) 19:44, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
	:Casting ] on other editors with comments such as {{tq\|The usual accusations and lies by the group of 3 guardians (plus one who never adds anything to an article but only assists in deleting)}} just highlights your ] editing. There is much more out there, but as the report is on Gjon Kastrioti article, the focus is on that in here.] (]) 20:16, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

			Keeps on adding (edit wars) honorifics despite explanation about ] and ] in edit summaries and warnings ] (]) 14:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
	:The most frustrating part is not the breaking of 3RR, but the unwillingness to use the Talk Page and follow consensus. When I removed the {{tl\|citation needed}} template, I didn't cite obviousness, I wrote: "''Removing<nowiki> {{citation needed}}</nowiki>. It is deduced from the main body of the article. ie "In 1386, like many other noblemen from Albania, Gjon became an Ottoman vassal". See also "titles" section. As far as I can understand from the Talk Page, Skylax30 is questioning Kastrioti's origins. Origins do not translate to ethnicity or nationality though"''(<small>spelling fixed</small>). In the article one can read at the section "titles"His different titles used in sources include Lord of Emathia and Vumenestia or simply Lord of Mat. In Venetian sources he was also referred to as "lord in Albania" (dominum in Albania), and "lord of the part of Albania" (dominus partium Albanie)." I also checked the article ], at section "Noble families", Kastrioti's family name is there. I also explained my reasoning at the Talk Page . As of now () I didn't get a respond. I am not tag teaming with nobody. Occam's razor says that if you try to insert fringe opinions in an article and get reverted by 3 other users, it is most probable you are inserting inappropriate material rather than there is a conspiracy.] (]) 20:31, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
			: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)
	*I have blocked for 3RR violation. Last block duration was 2 weeks, so 1 month is the standard escalation. If any admin feels this is too harsh, they may reduce. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 09:18, 13 February 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: ~~No violation~~) ==		== ] reported by ] (Result:Indefinitely blocked) ==

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|~~Child's~~ ~~Play (2019 film)~~}} ~~<br />~~		'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Angelo Rules}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Rusted AutoParts}}

			'''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 ] (])"
	# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Child%27s_Play_(2019_film)&oldid=883056398
			# {{diff2\|1265402736\|19:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Child%27s_Play_(2019_film)&oldid=883073259
			# {{diff2\|1265399005\|19:05, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	#
			# {{diff2\|1265395466\|18:40, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
	#
			# {{diff2\|1265394604\|18:34, 26 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"

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


	'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Child%27s_Play_(2019_film)
			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''


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

			Back from an edit warring block with an additional personal attack (]) ] (]) 21:04, 27 December 2024 (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) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Automotive industry in China}} <br />
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Infinty 0}}

			'''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 />		<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
			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)
	I simply informed the other party (Rusted AutoParts) that 'title' and not 'name' is the proper term for films and books. His response was to revert my edit and accuse me of being pedantic in the user comments. He was combative and irrational.(] (]) 03:43, 13 February 2019 (UTC))
	:Oh wow are you serious? Not only did you report me for one revert you didn’t even feel obliged to inform me of said report. I’ve addressed your issues in the article’s talk page and you’ve yet to respond, so I’m feeling this may just be some attempt to pick a needless fight. ] 19:01, 13 February 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)
	* {{AN3\|noex}} —''']''' (]) 04:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
			::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: ~~protected~~) ==		== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked one week) ==

	;Page: {{pagelinks\|~~Iftikhar~~ ~~Ahmed~~ ~~Khan~~ ~~Babar~~}}		'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Hephthalite–Gokturk raids of 614–616}} <br />
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|~~Usmannoormalik~~}}		'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|وقت الصلاة}}

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

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
	# {{diff2\|883152157\|16:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 883151660 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|883142699\|15:13, 13 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 883136460 by ] (])"

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
	# {{diff2\|883151602\|16:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Caution: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on ]. (])"
	# {{diff2\|883152702\|16:21, 13 February 2019 (UTC)}} "/* February 2019 */ re"

			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)
	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
			*{{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) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Justice}} <br />
	;<u>Comments:</u>
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Remsense}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	This newbie adding OR (such as DoB) despite being advised not to do so. And trying to engage in edit warring. ] (]) 16:23, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	*'''Comment''' in my opinion, the 'newbie' feels like ]. Instead of reverting the full change (''blanket undo''), removal of only unsourced content might have prevented this ''edit-war''. <span style="border:1px solid #e2a000;padding:1px;"> ]]</span> 16:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	*Article protected for 1 week. Concur with Samee to some extent. If ] is edit warring then so is ]. I don't want to block both of you at this stage. Suggest discussion at ] which is currently empty. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 17:14, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	*Yesterday, I was adding stuff with proper references and ] was reverting everything I was editing. Even when I put references from official websites of government, he changed it and replaced the reference with a different reference of a private media channel saying later reference was more authentic. So govt. reference isn't authentic enough for him? He just likes to revert everything anyone else writes and then writes same with a few modifications claiming his own contribution. ] (]) 17:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)Usman
	**Your comment reminded me of this . Anyhow, {{u\|Usmannoormalik}} this isn't a valid excuse for edit-warring on your part as it disrupts the encyclopaedia. In future, get yourself involved on talk page rather than un-doing edits otherwise you may be blocked and lastly, please avoid ] and ]. Happy editing! <span style="border:1px solid #e2a000;padding:1px;"> ]]</span> 18:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked) ==
			#
			#
			#
			#

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse}} <br />
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|95.93.201.166}}


	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''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>
			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)
			: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)

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

			: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)
			::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.
			::] (]) 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. ] (]) 04:28, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::Thank you. I stand by my comments on his temperament and conduct regardless.
			::::] (]) 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. <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)
			:::::::{{reply to\|331dot}} {{reply to\|Daniel Case}} That's what punishment does: Deterrence. By letting Remsense get away with this violation, you're breaking your own rules and encouraging similar behavior in the future.
			:::::::Do you have any personal connection with Remsense? ] (]) 21:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::::It's funny this happened on ], given how frivolous and easily superseded this line of argumentation is. In cases as transparently explicable as this, unmediated claims of conspiracy truly are the last refuge of the scoundrel. Bless. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 21:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::::{{reply to\|331dot}} {{reply to\|Daniel Case}} To clarify, are you saying that if someone self-reverts long ''after'' being reported for a violation, they are exempt from any kind of consequence? ] (]) 21:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::::Given you have safely proven yourself a scholar of counting to 4, I recommend the remainder of ] to expand your horizons even further. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 22:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::::::This wasn't really helpful. ] (]) 22:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::::I have nothing to say beyond what I already said. If you have evidence that they have truly not recognized their errors, or have a long pattern of behavior that requires evaluation and action by the community, AN is the proper forum. ] (]) 22:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			::::::::And no, I have no connection with this user. ] (]) 22:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Refer to AN/I) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Crunchyroll}} <br />
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|72.134.38.53}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

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




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

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

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
	<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	This is an IP editor with a long history of repeated disruptive editing, tying down multiple editors daily in dealing with edits that continue regardless of any discussion or consensus on the page. As an IP editor it hasn't been possible to communicate or post any warning. ] (]) 07:48, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	:Blocked. But what do you mean "''it hasn't been possible to communicate or post any warning''"? They have a talk page. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 21:10, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	::Thanks. And, yes, so they do. Now I feel dumb; I just assumed IPs didn't, because it comes up 'do you want to create the userpage' when you click on the user. I never went further. sorry. ] (]) 07:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	:::p.s. And you'll have noticed no shortage of warnings from others already there! ] (]) 07:52, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

			<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)
	== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked 31 hours) ==
			:{{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\|Falooda}} <br />
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|175.137.72.188}}

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|1917 (2019 film)}}
	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''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."
	#
			# {{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."
	#
			# {{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"
	#
			# {{diff2\|1265757721\|14:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Per RS, restoring the consensus position prior to the autumn edit"
	#

	'''~~Diff~~ of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''		'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			# {{diff2\|1265942155\|10:05, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule on ]."

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

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

			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)
	This IP is actively edit-warring against several users (LouisAragon, Oshwah and me), refuses to admit that the sources proposed are reliable, and fails to discuss in a civil manner with others. Please take a look at what Oshwah told him on their talk : . I think that admins attention is required. Thanks.<b><span style="color:orange">---Wikaviani </span></b><sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 19:25, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	: i strongly believe that removal of my RS from and refusing to discuss the matter on the talk page and inserting non reliable RS from india today, indianexpress and a persian blog on ] which is irrelevant to the another article ] and reinstating a irrelevant, non RS, is a violation of wikipedia rules, i have repeatedly asked, why my RS from shudhganga been removed even though its an RS, no replies have been made, the users are from persian backgrounds, i feel that as persians, they are trying to change the indian article in order to make it more persian biased, i have argued that persian ] is a dessert while ] is milk based beverage which has got persian faloodeh noodle influence in the mughal periods, so i have mentioned falooda vermicelli milk based percursors by referencing the RS i have just mentioned above, which has been removed by persian users without providing any reason, and they keep adding non reliable RS from india today, indianexpress, regards. ] (]) 19:34, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
	::Add massive violations of ] to that as well;
	::* "'' (...) by persian users such as Wikaviani, LouisAragon, {{u\|Oshwah}} (...)"''
	::* "''(...) the users are from persian backgrounds, i feel that as persians, they are trying to change the indian article (...)''"
	::Clearly ]. Also, FYI, this "user" is IP hopping since a long time. Compare IP 175.137.72.188 with this other IP. ''Exact'' same geolocation,- same POV, same concerns, not using edit summaries. Pinging {{u\|Bishonen}}, who's aware of this. - ] (]) 19:49, 13 February 2019 (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.
	*{{AN3\|b\|31 hours}}. ] \| ] 20:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
			:] (]) 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) ==
	{{ping\|Bishonen}} Thanks for your swift intervention to put an end to the disruption. Take care.<b><span style="color:orange">---Wikaviani </span></b><sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 21:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

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

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	== ] reported by ] (Blocked) ==
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Doctor Who (series 11)}}
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Twice Upon a Time (Doctor Who)}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|67.135.148.177}}

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

	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
	; Doctor Who (series 11)
	# {{diff2\|882900384\|01:02, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882899820 by ] (]) (talk) please be constructive"
	# {{diff2\|882899765\|00:55, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882899385 by ] (]) (talk) please, no sockpuppeting"
	# {{diff2\|882899351\|00:50, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882898452 by ] (]) status quo? wiki is always in flux"
	# {{diff2\|882898342\|00:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882898097 by ] (]) please take it to the talk page"
	# {{diff2\|882897541\|00:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882897206 by ] (]) Please take it to the talk page rather than edit warring."
	# {{diff2\|882897121\|00:31, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882896883 by ] (]) please stop vandalizing, take it to the talk page"
	# {{diff2\|882896812\|00:28, 12 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 882896714 by ] (]) please stop vandalizing"

	;<u>Comments:</u>
	*Blocked 1 week and article semi protected — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 08:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

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

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	;Page: {{pagelinks\|Accession of Macedonia to NATO}}
	;User being reported: {{userlinks\|Ljuvlig}}

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	;Previous version reverted to:

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
	;Diffs of the user's reverts:
	# {{diff2\|883279083\|12:15, 14 February 2019 (UTC)}} "It's not vandalism, stop saying that, I'm not a vandalist, this picture has no references and is not appropriate, it's graffitti."
	# {{diff2\|883278096\|12:04, 14 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 883275933 by ] (])"
	# {{diff2\|883275537\|11:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)}} "It's not edit war and I have been blocked not fairly, you have misused wiki and tricked the people so they block me."
	# {{diff2\|883272879\|10:59, 14 February 2019 (UTC)}} "Removed unnecessary picture that doesn't help the context."

			<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 -->
	;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
			: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}}
	;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

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

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	This editor has received 2 recent blocks for the same edit-warring, & was warned again today. ] (]) 12:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
			# {{diff2\|1266008901\|17:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Restoring the last version by User:Charliehdb"
	:@Ljuvlig's behavior via ] editing on ] reasons is disruptive to the Misplaced Pages project. The article in question is covered under ].] (]) 12:38, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
			# {{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"
	::Those 2 recent blocks where made unfairly and manipulative by Resnjari's lead. Stop lying Resnjari, it has nothing to do with ] or ]. It's not neutral with that picture and there is no source that there is widespread Anti-Nato feelings in the article, it's weird how people believe your word when you have no evidence for it. I want to say that me being blocked was unfair and wrong, I'm not a vandalist, I don't think the picture should be there cause it doesn't give the article a neutral account. And I don't see how graffitti is relevant in this case to portray this article. ] (]) 13:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	::I think Resnjari should get some warning for the lying and manipulate behaviour he has done to me.] (]) 13:31, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	:::I suggest to Ljuvlig to stop editing that article for some time. After reflecting on the issue and gaining experience, they could return to the dispute and seek a stable solution. A good solution would be having two pics on the article, one showing pro-NATO sentiments and one showing anti-NATO sentiments. ] (]) 13:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	::::Also, I suggest to Ljuvlig to not make personal attacks. ] (]) 13:45, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	*Blocked 1 week. Clear violation of 3RR. — Martin <small>(] · ])</small> 16:36, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	== ] reported by ] (Result: Agreed to revert to status quo ante, no action) ==
			# {{diff2\|1265915618\|06:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Brugada syndrome}} <br />
			# {{diff2\|1265915247\|06:55, 29 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* GA article */"
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Yanping Nora Soong}}

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

			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:'''		'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
			# {{diff2\|1266124850\|05:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* IIHF World Junior Championship */ Hide it first because ]"
	# (Feb 13th 16:10)
			# {{diff2\|1266122972\|05:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Please stop the edit war, I want to edit and update result only"
	# (Feb 13th 20:00)
			# {{diff2\|1266121493\|05:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Why? we can update the result which the events are finish"
	# (Feb 14th 00:55)
			# {{diff2\|1266118183\|05:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "/* IIHF World Junior Championship */"
	# (Feb 14th 22:28)
	# (Feb 14th 22:34)
	# (Feb 14th 22:39)

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' (Feb 14 22:34)

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

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

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	So what we have here 6 reverts without gaining consensus on the talk page to valid concerns raised by two editors (myself one of them). ] (] · ] · ]) 23:02, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

			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)
	They're not all reverts. I am adding new material and new sources each time, and it was easier for me to restore the material and then add the sources, because I was making my edits piecewise. Two editors isn't consensus. I would appreciate wider viewpoints on the matter. I am also editing from class. ] (]) 23:16, 14 February 2019 (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)
	:{{ping\|Yanping Nora Soong}} But they're partial reverts. You can't do that either, both for legalistic reasons (the policy says "in whole or in part"), and realistic ones (otherwise, one could '''always''' insert whatever they wanted to just by tweaking it slightly each time). Please self-revert, and gain consensus on the talk page. Generally when there's a content dispute, consensus is needed for the new material to be added, not for its removal. p.s. I don't understand what "editing from class" means, or what it has to do with this. --] (]) 23:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	:: I'm ~~not~~ ~~sure~~ ~~what~~ to ~~revert.~~ I ~~also~~ ~~have~~ to ~~pack~~ my ~~laptop~~ ~~soon.~~ ~~I'll~~ ~~defer~~ to ~~uninvolved~~ ~~administrator~~ ~~decisions~~ ~~but~~ I am ~~not~~ ~~sure what self-revert to carry out~~. ] (]) 23:26, 14 ~~February~~ ~~2019~~ (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)
	:::I ~~mean~~ ~~just revert~~ to ~~the status quo ante, and then discuss. Your edits are all saved in history, and will be easy to get back~~ if ~~you~~ ~~gain~~ ~~consensus~~ on ~~the~~ ~~talk page~~. --] (]) 23:27, 14 ~~February~~ ~~2019~~ (UTC)		::::{{AN3\|d}} with leave to re-report if reported user breaks his promise above. ] (]) 18:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
			:::::Thanks, that's good enough for me. ] (]) 22:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
	:::: Can you linked me to the preferred revision and I will revert to that? I'll defer to the whatever you think is the preferred, conservative revision because I will not be online again until I get home. ] (]) 23:29, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	:::::] It would be this version
	:::::] (] · ] · ]) 23:39, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	::::::Actually, if we're doing ''status quo ante'', let's do it right, not incorporating some of Doc James' comments from today. I've reverted to the version from yesterday that was stable for 2 weeks. If some of the intermediate changes are sure to be uncontroversial, they can be re-added, but anything with any chance of having disagreement should be discussed on the talk page. Since YNS agreed to the revert, I'm closing this with no action. --] (]) 23:59, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
	::::::::] perfectly reasonable. Thanks. ] (] · ] · ]) 00:09, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

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

	'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|~~Falooda~~}} ~~<br />~~		'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Huaynaputina}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Wikaviani}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|LouisAragon}}
	'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Oshwah}}

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Atsee}}
	'''Previous version reverted to:'''

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''

	'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''		'''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 */"

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

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

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

			Discussion at ], user repeatedly deleting footnotes without a valid reason on a Featured Article ''''']''''' (]) 16:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
	These users have reverted my RS in ], i have tried to engage in them in the discussion by leaving a message on their talk page, but these users have not, ] has has used nationalist argument that
			: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) ==
	{{talkquote\| '''Faloodah was invented in Persia more than 2500 years ago''', how could the Mughals invent it 2000 years later ? Please check what this Indian paper says about this : '''"Even the concept of sweetmeats after the main meal was introduced by the Persians. The most common being kulfi and falooda, eaten in tall glasses in Iran. Even jalebi found its way to our hearts from Persia! Sherbet, served during Indian summers, originated in Persia.".'''

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Matriarchy}}
	Faloode was introduced by Persians.

			'''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 edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	'''The beverage is also of Persian origin'''. Also, you seem to think that only you can identify what a RS is. Edit-warring against 3 other editors before waiting for the discussion to conclude is not the solution. Best regards.}}
			# {{diff2\|1266184214\|13:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	these assertions are without credible RS, i have tried to make a logical argument and in reply, the user has only inserted nationalistic POV and has not provided credible source, ], ] have removed my RS from without any reasonable explanation, there is also an issue of persian blog post which is irrelevant to the article being used to assert this nationlist POV,

	] ] have not even engaged in the discussion depite calling them to state their reasons.

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	regards. ] (]) 07:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

			IP has persistently inserted extraordinary claims and violated the three-revert rule. ] (]) 16:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
	: '''Comment''' Another report was made about this : . IP user, please keep in mind that Misplaced Pages works primarily with ]. So far, you've been reverted by 3 users (the three you reported here), this is far from any consensus. In such cases, it's better to try to solve the dispute constructively and without attacking other users like you did above with me. I'm not a Persian nationalist and the sources i provided on the talk page were '''Indian''' papers, not Persian blogs. Best regards.<b><span style="color:orange">---Wikaviani </span></b><sup><small><b>] ]</b></small></sup> 11:44, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
			:{{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)
	:: revert has been made without seeking any consensus, the other two users have made reverts without bringing discussion on the table, all three users clearly are working together with nationalist motivation which can be observed in the comments, and which can be seen in their reluctance to participate in the discussion, otherwise there would have been proper discussion before reverts been made, removal of RS still has not been addressed, as well as non reliable RS persian blog which specifically targets ] of persia and irrelevant to Falooda. regards. ] (]) 12:00, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:14, 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)

@331dot: @Daniel Case: That's what punishment does: Deterrence. By letting Remsense get away with this violation, you're breaking your own rules and encouraging similar behavior in the future.

Do you have any personal connection with Remsense? 2001:569:7FEA:2900:8049:8F17:E1E:C306 (talk) 21:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

It's funny this happened on Justice, given how frivolous and easily superseded this line of argumentation is. In cases as transparently explicable as this, unmediated claims of conspiracy truly are the last refuge of the scoundrel. Bless. Remsense ‥ 论 21:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

@331dot: @Daniel Case: To clarify, are you saying that if someone self-reverts long after being reported for a violation, they are exempt from any kind of consequence? 2001:569:7FEA:2900:8049:8F17:E1E:C306 (talk) 21:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Given you have safely proven yourself a scholar of counting to 4, I recommend the remainder of Misplaced Pages:Edit warring to expand your horizons even further. Remsense ‥ 论 22:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

This wasn't really helpful. 331dot (talk) 22:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

I have nothing to say beyond what I already said. If you have evidence that they have truly not recognized their errors, or have a long pattern of behavior that requires evaluation and action by the community, AN is the proper forum. 331dot (talk) 22:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

And no, I have no connection with this user. 331dot (talk) 22:14, 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)

Thanks, that's good enough for me. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:01, 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: