Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:44, 25 May 2010

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

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

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

You must notify any user you have reported.

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

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

Additional notes

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

Definition of edit warring

Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)

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

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

Click here to create a new report

User:Linguisticgeek reported by User:Tej_smiles

Page: Namadhari naik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Lingisticgeek (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• 1st edit:
• 2nd edit:
• 3rd edit:
• 4th edit:
• 5th edit:

Attempt to resolve the matter amicably.

3RR Warning:

Comments:
The user started out by editing out info from the page claiming it didnt have reliable info. Even after proiding with the link,discussing about it and repeatedly reasoning the user is bent on editing out the page as he thinks its contrary to his interests. The user was offered neutral adjudication and the page put up for peer review. But still the user continues with his editing under the false claims of 'hoax' and 'unverifiable facts' which clearly amounts to war-editing. The user has even served up a warning for putting up 'wrong facts' though the info has been absolutely verifiable and from dependable sources, hence harassing and hounding the editor. Certain ideas put up by the user on the talk page shows his 'racial'and narrow bent of mind devoid of scientific logic, which doesnt augur well for wiki.

Tej smiles (talk) 13:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

is this some sort of a joke Tej smiles has only been editing the page namadhari naik and related pages and has been invovled in pushing naga/scythian origin pOv in articles when clearly the community has different origins.his citations are pretty much unverifiable blogs to be precise.secondly his edits pushing this scythian pov or hoax on article ahichatraand ] has been reverted by other known contributors too check the edits history and he has reverted them too.now this does not qualify as edit warring.i understand the three revert policy so i wouldn't revert anymore and charging me of racial bias well the man is himself not ready to accept the racial origins of the namadhari naik community which i think he belongs to and his hence pushing the pov of being scythian.he also clearly admits in my talkk page that his addition on pages indo-scythian were wrong.15:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

1rst. There are no blogs as citations at all on the page.They are all authentic books, mostly govt. publications (how can one miss it?!!!) 2nd. The Naga-Scythian theory has been mentioned as just one of the three theories in 'Origin' section and NOT as an accepted theory, unlike the Users page (and with wrong citations too!) 3rd. I did agree on my editing on the Nagavanshi page being kneejerk ,not the Indo-scythian page (see the 'respected' users talk page) 4rth. Just have a sample of the deeply prejudiced mindset of the 'esteemed' user when he claims the Havyaks looking down upon Halepaiks and blatanly goes on claiming proto australoid feature for all of them. He also claims 'Aryan', 'Scythian','Naga' features belonging to same race as Caucasian!! well did somebody talk about anthropology? it has taken a toss in this case. and he talks authoritatively on the racial origin of others!!!funny 5th. The User does display highly misconcieved and misappropriate notion of racial purity and superiority. The truth being that there is hardly one particular 'race' in India. Doesnt augur well for Wiki standards. see my talk page for a sample. 6th. maybe the user was lacking on some info/knowledge on the subject. it was duely provided and stage set for clearing all doubts through a meaningful discussion (see the arguments on talk pages of both users). but alas, that was not to be. the User chose to resort to edit-war and also place warning on the editor in blatant misuse of wikipedias actions to further his stereotype agenda. 7th. i have restricted myself to editing the above page only as i am extremely interested in it. I have had authentic answers for all the claims of respected user, but havent posted it to avoid offending others. I should mention here that such far-fetching and false claims takes one nowhere. it is necessary to have a balanced and tolerant view in history. nothing is permanent and fixed. i wish him good luck.

Tej smiles (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Cal Jam II "AGAIN" (Result: Semi)

• California Jam II (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 173.76.45.12 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)
• Peterm4589 (talk · contribs · deleted · count · AfD · logs · block log · lu · rfar · spi)

• Comment:

I/we/you, have been through this all before. Here are all the links I could come up with in a short time. The subject article is California Jam II. The same editor is (no using an IP) User talk:173.76.45.12. At the time of the previous incident the name used was User talk:Peterm4589. And still my question is 1). Who are these people ? 2). What's the relevancy of them being there and how they got there ? This same editor was warned not to repeat these edits a few month's ago by this same method and has since returned and continued. please contact if you need further. I already have notified the editor of this report (if he/she continued) and since he/she has I will make an official notification now. Thank you.

• Today's revert
• The last time we went through this
• Diff 1
• Diff 2
• Diff 3
• Report diff 1
• Report diff 2
• Report diff 3 (typo)
• Report diff 4
• Archive Search, editor warned
• Found discussion (under different name)

And here is my contact with this editor today, After I made my revert User talk:Mlpearc#Cal Jam II "AGAIN" and from their talk User talk:173.76.45.12#Mlpearc Talkback And here is my contact with this editor today, After I made my revert User talk:Mlpearc#Cal Jam II "AGAIN" and from their talk User talk:173.76.45.12#Mlpearc Talkback

Mlpearc pull my chain Trib's 04:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Reply to notification from editor User talk:173.76.45.12#ANI Report notification Mlpearc pull my chain Trib's 05:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Google searches for said bus riders to concert:

• Google Search for Peter Marchesi
• Google Search for Bob Millard
• Google Search for Arbie Girard

Mlpearc pull my chain Trib's 01:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

• Result - Semiprotected. The named edit warrior, Peterm4589, has not been active since March. Report again if he comes back. EdJohnston (talk) 15:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

User:209.244.42.198 reported by User:Jonny2x4 (Result: Protected)

Page: Street Fighter II: The Animated Movie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: 209.244.187.139 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) He has also used the following IP addresses:

• 209.244.187.143 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 209.244.42.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 207.75.185.107 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Here

• 1st revert: Link
• 2nd revert: Link
• 3rd revert: Link
• 4th revert: Link
• 5th revert: Link

I seriously have no idea why he keeps reverting to that particular version of the article, but I guessing it has something to do with the weasel statements on the lead section, as well as "Legacy" section that was arguably filled with original research. Either way, he provides no rationale why he prefers that version and has gone as far as to revert another user's legitimate contribution to the article as well.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link

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

Comments:
As you can see, I have try to discuss things with the user. He makes no attempt to give me a justification and simply goes back to reverting my changes. Please resolve this matter as soon as possible Jonny2x4 (talk) 02:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

• Result - Protected one month. I notice that semiprotection was already tried, but I see no attempt to discuss the current issues on the talk page, by Jonny2x4 or anyone else. Please try to reach agreement on the disputed items. Ask for unprotection at WP:RFPP if this happens. EdJohnston (talk) 02:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks! While I'll admit I did not try to attempt to resolve the issue on the article's talk page and I apologize for that, but I left a message on the anonymous user's talk page to try settling things and he obviously choose to ignore me and revert back to his prefer version of the article. I'll create a topic on the talk page and sent a message to the other user, but I seriously doubt I will get a respond from the user judging by past experiences. It seems the user has a history of uncooperative behavior with other editors as well. Jonny2x4 (talk) 06:13, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Rom rulz424 reported by Bidgee (talk) (Result: Protected)

• Three-revert rule violation on

Olympic Highway (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Rom rulz424 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 03:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

• Revert comparison ("compare"): this revision (diff from previous).

Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

1. 10:01, 21 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "Inclusion of Major Intersections and Towns (including duplex of NHR20 in Wagga Wagga in this new section)")
2. 10:02, 21 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "/* Major Intersections and Towns */")
3. 04:35, 22 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "Undid revision 363363826 by Bidgee (talk) This is done throughout all of the highways currently done in Victoria / NSW.")
4. 04:37, 22 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "Revised total distance of Olympic Highway. Plus, my POV may be from Wiki, however it is conclusive that there are no complaints on other highway pages (that include MI&T) of Australia.")
5. 04:39, 22 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "The length of the Olympic Highway is 318km (not 338km - that is the distance between Cowra and Albury).")
6. 04:56, 22 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "Undid revision 363502471 by Bidgee (talk) The length of the highway as you claim is incorrect.")
7. 03:20, 23 May 2010 (compare) (edit summary: "Undid revision 363505364 by Bidgee (talk) Have corrected the distance of the highway, retained the duplex of NR20 at Wagga, and source of MI&T inc")

• Diff of warning: here

—Bidgee (talk) 03:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Page protected You're both edit-warring. -- tariqabjotu 16:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

User:92.37.172.117 reported by User:Wildhartlivie (Result: Semi)

Page: Cher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: 92.37.172.117 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
While I realize that technically, the IP editor waited to revert the 4th time after I posted the warning to his talk page, he still has violated 3RR in spirit, if not in the time frame. This editor has persisted in blanket reverting the content to this page even after I tried to discuss this with him on the article talk page. The editor claimed that charitable organizations that Cher has been directly involved in aren't valid (despite the fact she helped start one of them) and insists on cutting out a preponderance of labels where she has recorded and keeps cutting the genres of music she has done (including the disco era music which helped revitalize her career and basically jumpstarted it). He used the rationale of "I guided by what is relevant to Cher" while cutting mention of labels, genres, associated acts, etc. I tried to discuss it and he would say he agreed with different points I made but would still revert wholesale and completely disgregarded anything discussed. This has happened 9 or 10 times in the last week and his reverting has escalated the last 24 hours or so. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:42, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

If he hasn't technically violated 3RR you'd be better off getting it semi-protected for a week. That would stop the IP edits for a while and then the editor would have no option but to try and resolve it on the talk page. Betty Logan (talk) 07:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

• Result - Semiprotected, due to long-term warring by a dynamic IP. EdJohnston (talk) 15:07, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Ramdrake and User:88.147.29.155 reported by User:Captain Occam (Result: Various)

Page: Race and intelligence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Ramdrake (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 88.147.29.155 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Version reverted to by Ramdrake: and

Version reverted to by 88.147.29.155:

Reverts from Ramdrake:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:
• 5th revert:

Reverts from 88.147.29.155:

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

Link of edit warring/3RR warning: here for Ramdrake; I don't think the IP has been warned yet.

Link of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Race_and_intelligence#about_pelvic_size

Comments:

Both Ramdrake and this IP are engaged in an intense edit war over the article, which has involved them reverting it five and four times respectively in the past 14 hours. I've made a suggestion about a possible compromise between them on the article talk page (linked above), but am being ignored by both edit warriors. As can also be seen from the talk page, neither of them has put forth any real effort towards resolving this dispute there, despite efforts from other users to mediate it. None of the other users involved in this article are being disruptive, so I don’t think page protection is necessary here; something just needs to be done to stop the edit war between these two. --Captain Occam (talk) 16:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I've stopped reverting. However, I was only trying to get the IP to discuss his changes on the talk page, as there was consensus that his edits were erroneous (factually incorrect), therefore they should be removed in the interest of the project (many such erroneous edits of his still stand -- but I won't touch them now).--Ramdrake (talk) 06:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

(ec) I counted five reverts by the IP as he tried to readd the disputed material The material is from a questionable primary source and is undue. I reverted one of the IPs edits. The fourth diff given for Ramdrake has nothing to do with the material being added by the IP. So I count 5 reverts of the material by the IP and 4 reverts by Ramdrake. The IP's content is still in the article. He edited for one day and has added problematic material to the article. He left 2 comments on the talk page, the second quite odd. . "Lieberman is absolutely note a rationalist, he is a marxist. Hundreds of studies have clearly demonstrated that the cranial capacity of blacks was smaller, their pelvis is smaller and the cranial capacity is less than the third week of pregnancy! It should not include Lieberman is an obscurantist who denies the very foundations of the theory of évolution." The person he's talking about is the late anthropologist and sociologist Leonard Lieberman. As far as I know he's not a Marxist.Mathsci (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

• Result - I warned Ramdrake and another admin has blocked the IP. Be aware that 'trying to get the IP to discuss his changes' is not among the exemptions listed at WP:3RR, and another admin could have blocked both parties. EdJohnston (talk) 12:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Julius Sahara reported by User:ScottPAnderson (Result: Protected )

Page: Kenya Emergency (1952) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Julius Sahara (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Persistent unconstructive reverts of Page Move. Julius is not only reverting the page move and title - but also refusing to discuss or support his reasons. He has ignored constructive arbitration by a neutral editor (pls see talk page) - and unilaterally imposed his will on the matter, implementing his understanding of the wikipedia policy in an extreme and unreasonable manner. Please help. Now the incorrect age name has been frozen by an admin.
ScottPAnderson (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

• Page protected by Black Kite (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Tiptoety 17:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Ottre reported by User:Lester (Result: 24 hours by User:Orderinchaos )

Page: Tony Abbott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Ottre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User:Ottre has been blanking the following text:
"In his first Budget reply speech as Opposition Leader, Abbott sought to portray the Rudd Government's third budget as a "tax and spend" budget and promised to fight the election on the new mining "super-profits" tax proposed by Rudd."

• 1st Revert Revision as of 08:45, 23 May 2010 (the disputed text is a fair way down the page, you may have to word search to find it.
• 2nd Revert Revision as of 02:52, 24 May 2010
• 3rd Revert Revision as of 03:37, 24 May 2010
• 4th Revert Revision as of 06:48, 24 May 2010

Through this period, User:Ottre has been sending other editors warnings to stop editing or they face 3RR. Example, on User:Lester's talk page (down the very bottom), and also to User:Merbabu in the edit summary of the 4th revert.

Link to article talk page... Talk:Tony_Abbott#Budget_Reply_2010 ...where all other editors have tried to resolve the issue with User:Ottre. If you view the article edit history, you can see Ottre's edit war over this particular text has been going on for days, and the 4 diffs presented above are only the most recent of many. He's warring against numerous other editors.

Comments:

User:Orderinchaos has blocked for 24 hours. SGGH 11:29, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

User:138.38.32.168 reported by Shrewsagain (Result: Semi)

• Three-revert rule violation on

Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 138.38.32.168 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 15:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

1. 15:51, 23 May 2010 (edit summary: "")
2. 15:51, 23 May 2010 (edit summary: "")
3. 16:03, 23 May 2010 (edit summary: "")
4. 16:38, 23 May 2010 (edit summary: "")
5. 07:23, 24 May 2010 (edit summary: "/* Biology A-Level controversy */")

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I have attempted to edit this section of the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance but someone keeps reverting these without justification. A page devoted to this topic on its own was deleted from Misplaced Pages but this deletion is being circumvented by putting the content within another page. The vandalism of my edits is being carried out by several very similar IP addresses: 138.38.32.168, 138.38.32.167, 138.38.32.169, 138.38.32.170, 138.38.32.172. I've posted coments on the talk pages of several of thes users and on the discussion page of the article itself. I've written detailed justifications for the edits I've made and feel that the section should either be removed or left as a brief account of what happened. Shrewsagain (talk) 15:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

• Result - Semiprotected. Edit-warring by a dynamic IP who does not participate in, or respect, the discussion on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 20:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Cimicifugia reported by User:Bali ultimate (Result: 30 hours)

Page: The New York Times and the Holocaust (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Cimicifugia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
This is basically a guy pushing the Truth. Note the edit summaries and his behavior elsewhere. It's not just this article. He's also starting to canvass, .Bali ultimate (talk) 19:33, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of thirty hours -- tariqabjotu 23:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Ink Falls reported by User:Blaxthos (Result: 24 hours)

Page: Keith Olbermann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Ink Falls (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 08:16

• 1st revert: 19:59 23 May
• 2nd revert: 20:19 23 May
• 3rd revert: 21:54 23 May
• 4th revert: 22:12 23 May
• 5th revert: 22:25 23 May
• 6th revert: 22:41 23 May

• Additional POV-ness (offtopic, but a great example of why he's edit warring)
• Clear defamation & personal attack: It doesn't tell us anything about Keith other then he's a douche who makes his career out of attacking others who don't even attack back.

Comments:
While each "version" only appears 3 times, with 6 reverts in a little over 2 hours it's very clear that:

1. This editor has no regard for WP:3RR.
2. This editor is here pushing his POV. See the content, as well as the edit summaries.
3. This editor has no intent of seeking consensus, and would prefer to edit war.

/Blaxthos ( t / c ) 20:42, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Blaxthos - While revisions don't all relate to the exact same material, this appears to be very aggressive editting against the objections of multiple editors. Suggest temporary topic ban. NickCT (talk) 21:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Some of those edits I did before I got any objection. I only actually reverted my edits three times(I got the Three Revert edit warning and stopped) since then I had made different edits to the article which have nothing to do what was being reverted and which havn't been undone because others have acknowledged that they were the correct edit to make. In short I have made any edits since yesterday, only three reverts have I made thus not breaking the 3revert rule, and I have resigned myself to discussing things on the talk page. This is just a cheap ploy to get me banned from discussing things on the talk page, I havn't made any edits since yesterday, and am clearly not edit warring(as you can tell if you look at my edits). Ink Falls 22:36, 24 May 2010 (UTC) Here's a break down of my edits:

• 1st revert: 19:59 23 May Noticed the wording of the article didn't make logical since, they call it a "feud" when O'reilly(as the article states) has never mentioned Olbermann on his program and the whole "rivalry" doesn't appear to be acknowledged by O'reilly at all.
• 2nd revert: 20:19 23 May revert of first edit
• 3rd revert: 21:54 23 May since talk page seemed to want to call it a feud I said, "Well then let's at least include the reply Fox News has given to the "feud" and copy and pasted the reply the same article gave.
• 4th revert: 22:12 23 May revert
• 5th revert: 22:25 23 May editors complain that segment I added was too large of a monologue, so I compromised and shortened it to a few sentence fragments.
• 6th revert: 22:41 23 May a newer editor incorrectly changed a sentence from saying "O'Reilly has rarely, if ever, mentioned Olbermann's name on the air" to "O'Reilly avoids mentioning Olbermann's name on the air", because the source says "he has apparently never mentioned Mr. Olbermann’s name", and no one has reverted this edit of mine because it was the correct edit to make.

In short I have made only 2 direct reverts, I have changed the types of edits based off what I have heard on the talk page and have not continued to make anymore edits until I get a responses(note I made those reverts because people were reverting my edits without stating why on the talk page(I started a section) but rather instead making comments like "Careful your POV is showing" or "This is a useless, meaningless edit"). I only use reverts when people are reverting my edits without posting a reason why. Since there has been an ongoing discussion I have not made any reverts since yesterday. Ink Falls 22:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

So, instead of taking responsibility for (1) egregious POV-based edit warring, and (2) a clear attack on the subject of the article, you now come here and assert that the report is a "cheap ploy"? //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 22:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it is a cheap ploy, why not just discuss things with me in the discussion instead of trying to get me banned? Nothing I have edited could ever be consider "egregious POV", I gave my reasons for making the edits, if you disagree with them then that's fine but come up with a good reason don't just say "Its POV but I disagree with it". Ink Falls 22:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Note: Dayewalker posted this on my talk page "Just letting you know, you're at WP:3RR on Keith Olbermann. Please don't edit war, and continue the discussion on the talk page. Thanks! " Since then I have only made one edit (#6) and it was completely justified. Ink Falls 22:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of twenty-four hours. I didn't block him for the edit-warring -- he's clearly taken a break and taken matters to the talk page -- but his POV/agenda-pushing is impossible to ignore and is not at all useful to the article. -- tariqabjotu 23:39, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

User:94.2.134.76 reported by User:Mo ainm (Result: Already semi-protected)

Page: Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: 94.2.134.76 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
Seems likely to be related to 86.181.219.78 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), they started edit warring immediately after that IP received a 3RR warning.

• Page protected Semi-protected by Phantomsteve (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). CIreland (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Deshabhakta reported by User:Viplovecomm (Result: Already fully-protected)

Page: Communist Party of India (Marxist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Deshabhakta (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: ] same thing is done again' ] and again the same thing happens' ] Reverting the same thing again' ]]

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Sir this user is not giving us a democratic space to write, he has a history of 3R's, if you want to ensure then visit his talk page, you will get enough reasons to detain him:

• Page protected by Tariqabjotu (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). CIreland (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

User:83.59.244.54 reported by User:Labattblueboy (Result: Already semi-protected)

Page: Deepwater Horizon oil spill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: 83.59.244.54 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• 1st :
• 2nd :
• 3rd :
• 4th :
• 5th :

• 1st warning issued on user talk page:
• 2nd warning issued on user talk page:
• 3rd warning issued on user talk page:
• 4th warning issued on user talk page:
• 5th warning issued on user talk page:

Comments:

User continues to reinsert same text into the article.--Labattblueboy (talk) 00:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

• Page protected Semi-protected by HJ Mitchell (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). CIreland (talk) 16:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Mathsci reported by User:Captain Occam (Result: )

Page: Race and intelligence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Mathsci (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: and

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Race_and_intelligence#Figures and Talk:Race_and_intelligence#Hereditarians_vs_Enviromentalists

Comments:

This editor has had a confrontational editing style, and a harassing attitude towards me in particular, for quite a while. One example of this is his constant posting of warnings in my user talk (two today, three in the past week; seven of the eight most recent edits to my user talk are from him), including his most recent comment there accusing me of edit warring for reverting the article twice after he'd already violated 3RR on it. He also has a history of making personal attacks against me and anyone else who disagrees with him; there are too many of these to list, but the most significant of them is accusing me of being a holocaust denier. (Which is false and completely unsupported.)

His confrontational attitude has ramped up recently, as can be seen from his recent contributions (things like two separate warnings on my userpage that are only a few minutes apart, and asking why I hadn't yet replied to a comment he'd left only eight minutes earlier.) I think some sort of time-out for him would be really beneficial to everyone involved in this article. --Captain Occam (talk) 05:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Iceman rides your tail reported by User:Athenean (Result: Blocked per the SPI report)

Page: Turkey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Iceman rides your tail (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

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

Four reverts in 25 hours or so, not quite 3RR but close enough. This is made even worse by the fact that this is a sock of the banned User:Shuppiluliuma. SPI is here: .Athenean (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: No need, this is the nth sock of a banned user.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Athenean (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

• Result - Indef blocked by User:Shirik as a sock of Shuppiluliuma. EdJohnston (talk) 14:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Stubes99 reported by User:JanVarga (Result: )

Page: Ányos Jedlik (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Stubes99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:
• 5th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
It seems to be a very complicated case. My misgiving is that user: JanVarga is a sockpuppet of banned Samofi as all he did on wikipedia were 2 reverts in order to restore the same as Samofi edited on this very article beforehand.

Nay, MartinMagera and user:78.128.181.9 are also probably sockpuppets of Samofi as they ditto resume Samofi's "work" on wikipedia after he has been banned from editing. --Nmate (talk) 15:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, the blocked user confirmed that 78.128.181.9 is his IP address. "User:78.128.181.9. I think its me, sometimes Iam not logged and write. Last user is not me. --78.128.181.9 (talk) 07:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC) Ok, so iam sure its me now :) but Tobar888 is not me. --Samofi (talk) 07:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)"The account has been blocked, but the IP address not, (should be, not?) hence he can still edit in a disruptive way.--B@xter 16:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

CommentThese reverts did not even happen on the same day, hence it is not 3RR, although I agree that tis recent revert war is very disturbing.--B@xter 16:29, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Between 09:50, 24 May 2010 and 07:29, 25 May 2010 there are less than 24h. PS I am not Samofi, an admin could check that —Preceding unsigned comment added by JanVarga (talk • contribs)

User:Epsteins reported by User:I42 (Result: 24 hour block - article rdr )

Page: Heartfulness (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
User being reported: Epsteins (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:
• 5th revert:
• 6th revert:
• 7th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on user talk page:

Comments:

I42 (talk) 12:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Follow-up notification of this report and advice not to continue: . I42 (talk) 12:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

24 hour holiday, article has been re-directed. SGGH 14:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring