Misplaced Pages

:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ToBeFree (talk | contribs) at 20:18, 11 January 2024 (User:Cambial Yellowing reported by User:Grorp (Result: Stale): Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 20:18, 11 January 2024 by ToBeFree (talk | contribs) (User:Cambial Yellowing reported by User:Grorp (Result: Stale): Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Noticeboard for edit warring

Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles and content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard Shortcuts Update this page

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

    You must notify any user you have reported.

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


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

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

    Definition of edit warring
    Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring.
    Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)
    An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions.

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

    Twinkle's ARV can be used on the user's page to more easily report their behavior, including automatic handling of diffs.
    Click here to create a new report
    Noticeboard archives
    Administrators' (archives, search)
    348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357
    358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367
    Incidents (archives, search)
    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

    User:Megat Lanang reported by User:Gunkarta

    Page: Onde-onde (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Klepon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Megat Lanang (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: , then continued on edit wars on his latest edit

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: unresponsive to my invitation to address the problem in Klepon talk page also ignoring other user warning. Gunkarta  talk  12:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

    User:Ash.david reported by User:Tol (Result: Now blocked for a week)

    Page: Fraser Island (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Ash.david (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 19:20, 6 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    2. 14:35, 6 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    3. 08:15, 6 January 2024 (UTC) "Reverting of this edit is politically inflammatory. Please do not change it again."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 19:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC) "/* Adding uncited statements */ Reply"
    2. See existing discussion on User talk:Ash.david for awareness of edit warring policy, and other discussions linked at Talk:Fraser Island#Recent addition to § Toponymy for further discussion and explanation of the edit warring policy

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 19:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC) "/* Recent addition to § Toponymy */ new section"
    2. 19:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC) "/* Recent addition to § Toponymy */ Reply"
    3. See also other discussions linked at article talk for previous attempts at resolution

    Comments:

    Ash.david is edit-warring to include the unsourced statement that "many locals and tourists still refer to it as Fraser Island" (rather than its traditional, and now official, name of K'gari). Three different editors, including myself, have removed this unsourced claim. Ash.david has behaved rudely on talk pages, including at User talk:Ash.david § Adding uncited statements and elsewhere as linked in the article talk page discussion. Most recently, Ash.david added four inline citations to the statement, ostensibly supporting it, but none of the citations have any text supporting the claim. When I started a discussion on the talk page to centralise the multiple discussions on user talk pages that had been started, Ash.david reverted my new discussion without comment. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

    Ash.david has since added another inline citation that does not appear to support the statement anywhere. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
    Blocked – for a period of 24 hours. I might have considered just a longer partial block from the article, but editor's defiant, tendentious and combative attitude (including a past promise to edit war) clearly calls for a sitewide block. Daniel Case (talk) 20:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
    @Daniel Case @Tol apologies if this is the wrong place to mention it, but I've just noticed that a brand new account (TyromannA) has made the exact same edit, then proceeded to edit Ash.david's talk page claiming that it is their own. This seems to be a fairly clear and deliberate circumvention of the block and continuation of the edit warring. Turnagra (talk) 05:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    @Turnagra, I opened your ping and saw your message right after I also noticed this behaviour and filed an SPI. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 06:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    I have blocked the new account indef. Daniel Case (talk) 06:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
    Following the block expiring, Ash.david has again added the content to the article and deleted the talk page discussion three times (once after a self-revert) - see edits 1, 2, and 3. After I reverted one of the removals, they also sent me an email accusing me of, among other things, giving "an uneducation to children". Turnagra (talk) 09:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
    Blocked for a week this time. Daniel Case (talk) 18:21, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

    User:Claudiogostoso reported by User:Guilherme (Result: Blocked for a month)

    Page: 2023 Sociedade Esportiva Palmeiras season (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Claudiogostoso (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    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:
    User inserting wrong redirects. He was blocked in the past week due to this exact same behaviour, and he refuses to answer when asked to and he deletes all the messages that I sent to him. Guilherme (talk) 16:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

    Blocked – for a period of one month Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

    User:Edwinonus reported by User:Bsoyka (Result: Partially blocked indefinitely)

    Page: Draft:Wild Furry Pawtality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 02:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    2. 02:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    3. 02:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC) ""

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 02:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "/*Quick note on Draft:Wild Furry Pawtality*/ Quick note"
    2. 02:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Draft:Wild Furry Pawtality."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    Edwinonus has repeatedly removed an AfC decline template from their draft, in direct opposition to the comment alongside it asking users, Do not remove this line!. They have ignored multiple warnings on their user talk page not to do so and appear likely to continue removing this tag. Bsoyka (tcg) 02:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

    User:69.117.93.145 reported by User:Callitropsis (Result: Blocked 60 hours)

    Page: Michele Evans (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 69.117.93.145 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 07:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "This is vandalism. Proper edits were made according to Talk page. Quit deleting accurate, relevant, unbiased, numerously sourced information on Michele."
    2. Consecutive edits made from 06:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC) to 06:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
      1. 06:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Making edits to comply with talk page discussions."
      2. 06:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "minor edit"
    3. 05:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Removing un cited claims as no examples were given on talk page and this biased editor continues to vandalize."
    4. 04:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Continued vandalism revert. Added additional sources. Non-biased Sources now total 25."
    5. Consecutive edits made from 04:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC) to 04:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
      1. 04:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1194653381 by Nikkimaria (talk). Vandalism is not OK in the name of cleanup!"
      2. 04:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "fixed typo"
      3. 04:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "adding clarification"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 05:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "General note: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Michele Evans."
    2. 05:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ reply"
    3. 06:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Michele Evans."
    4. 07:02, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ reply to 69.117.93.145"
    5. 07:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ add"

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 05:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC) on Talk:Michele Evans "re"

    Comments:

    See also WP:BLPN#Michele Evans. Has been consistently accusing Nikkimaria of vandalism on talk pages and in edit summaries. — Callitropsis🌲 07:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

    Almost the entirely of the article was being deleted. From what I have been told that is vandalism. If it is not, I apologize but it's the information I had at the time. I addressed Nikkimarias concerns once I was able to finally get them articulated. My concerns of mass deletion keep being ignored however. 69.117.93.145 (talk) 07:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
    Also can someone help me understand why Nikkimarias was not reported as the person who started the mass deletion? I'm confused why the initiating party was not reported and I was. 69.117.93.145 (talk) 07:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
    Blocked – for a period of 60 hours Ordinarily, I take a cautious approach when the article reported is the subject of an AfD, as you would expect a lot more back and forth in that situation which some editors might regard as edit warring. But not here. More than the usual 24 hours for a first block for 3RR because the editor went to about five reverts, plus they have clearly demonstrated a tendentious mindset and battleground mentality as evidenced by their bludgeoning the AfD, and also have failed to assume good faith. They have thus earned themselves a break from the AfD and article for a while, but not so long that they will be unable to return to the former before it closes (although I'm not optimistic that the tide will suddenly and dramatically shift to keep). Hopefully—emphasis hopefully—they will be able to participate in a more civilized, collegial fashion and gracefully accept the very-likely deletion of the article. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

    User:Dingo175 reported by User:Czello (Result: Blocked one week)

    Page: Maxwell Jacob Friedman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Dingo175 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 10:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    2. Consecutive edits made from 02:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC) to 03:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
      1. 02:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC) ""
      2. 03:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    3. 21:42, 9 January 2024 (UTC) ""
    4. 11:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC) "He has not resigned with AEW as of edit"
    5. 02:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC) "He is no longer signed to aew contract ended Jan 1 2024"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 08:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."
    2. 10:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ Reply"
    3. 10:18, 10 January 2024 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ Reply"

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    Edit warring in a contentious topic area, persistent addition of unsourced material to a BLP, refusal to discuss on talk page, also making personal attacksCzello 10:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

    Just wanted to add onto this my final revert was removing unambiguous vandalism from an unrelated user; wanted to point this out just in case it was misinterpreted as continuing to revert Dingo175. Their BLP violation still stands. — Czello 11:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

    User:Cambial Yellowing reported by User:Grorp (Result: Stale)

    Page: Scientology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to: (see table)

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    These six reverts fit in under 48 hours; the final 4 reverts (3b, 4b, 5b & 6b in pink) span under 25 hours—if you're short on time, just look at the last 4. I felt I should include the earlier reverts to put the series in perspective, especially showing the edit warring started right after Cambial Yellowing's edit-warring block expired. I apologize for the length, and hope this chronological table helps simplify/illustrate an edit warring series that would have been too complicated to follow if abbreviated to just diffs. I tried to simplify it as much as possible.

    Markers Grorp
    (OP)
    Cambial
    Yellowing
    Notes
    green Key: Green color represents edit to "new territory" (meaning an area of the article that had not recently been edited)
    pink Key: Pink color represents a revert (includes partial reverts)
    23:34 30 Dec Cambial Yellowing receives 72-hour block for edit warring on different, but related, article
    1a 06:20 1 Jan My one edit to this article during Cambial's block represents the starting point.
    23:34 2 Jan Cambial's block expires
    1b 15:37 3 Jan 1b: Cambial reverts my edit-1a as their second edit after their block expired, and starts discussion under older talk page thread.Cambial goes on to make 9 more edits, including reverting/restoring content @15:40 3 Jan (1c) which I had removed 07:44, 30 August 2023.
    2a 02:41, 4 Jan I revert Cambial's edits-1b & 1c to restore my version (plus I edit a few other new territory bits in this same edit).
    3a 03:49 4 Jan I go on to make a series of edits (03:49-04:57 4 Jan) modifying new territory.
    2b
    3b
    07:52 4 Jan

    08:49 +
    11:38 +
    11:53 4 Jan

    In this period, Cambial makes a series of 27 edits (07:52-13:20 4 Jan), starting with 2b which reverts my edit-2a (by re-adding deleted content).
    In the remaining 26 edits, several of my new-territory edits were modified, reorganized, and basically undone.3b is a trio of edits to revert 3a. I selected to focus on just one section, "Auditing", so you can see the reverts without trying to compare two entire sets/series of edits.
    4a & 4b 07:37 5 Jan 07:50 5 Jan‎ 4a: I revert a large section ("Beliefs and practices") which Cambial had mangled.4b: Cambial reverts 4a.
    5a & 5b 08:02 - 09:22 5 Jan 11:33 - 11:34 5 Jan 5a: I remove content which does not verify. This section was new-territory and unrelated to above content disputes.5b: Cambial reverts 5a.
    6a & 6b 11:58 5 Jan‎ 12:40 +
    12:47 +
    12:50 5 Jan
    6a: Rather than revert, I tag content as 'failed verification'.6b: Cambial reverts 6a, starts talk page thread. (Pinging other editor involved in that thread, North8000.)


    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    No specific warning given. Cambial had received a 72-hour block the prior week for edit warring with me on the talk page of a related article (see AN3 archive 477 § Cambial Yellowing). Cambial is quite familiar with 3RR and AN3, having participated here several times.

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    Two threads on talk page; neither resolved:

    1. Talk:Scientology § Reduction project B&P (re content forks—edits 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b in table above)
    2. Talk:Scientology § Misuse of maintenance templates (re failed verification—edits 5a, 5b, 6a, 6b in table above)

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 01:57, 11 January 2024

    Comments:

    During 28–30 December 2023, Cambial edit warred with me on a related article, culminating in Cambial's 3RR violation on the talk page for which they were given a 72-hour block. Since that edit warring incident, I have made no further edits to that article. (I gave up.)

    During Cambial's block period, I made only one edit to the Scientology article (the article of this 3RR report). In less than 24 hours after Cambial would have gotten off their 72-hour block, Cambial reverted my edit, and continued for the next three days almost exclusively edit warring or arguing on this article, and not stopping until after I ceased engaging.

    I have been slowly working on this article over the last few months to remove duplicate material resulting from content forks (Talk:Scientology § Reduction project B&P), but during this period, everything I tried to do in this article has been reverted and reorganized by Cambial Yellowing (who keeps re-adding the duplicate material) until it is too complicated of a jumble to figure out how to fix it.

    It wasn't until after I quit trying to work on the article, and abandoned the two talk page threads (which were not resolving), that I counted up the edits/reverts and subsequently drafted this report.

      ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 01:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

    Cambial has been one very nasty individual at the Scientology articles. Mostly with Grorp plus I've had some exchanges with them. I'm not concerned about me but they are harassing away it's best editor (Grorp). There should be some type of warning given. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:56, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

    The discussion at the article's talk page (permanent section link) is full of unproductive discussion about user behavior, which doesn't belong there (focus on content; no meta). This isn't entirely Cambial Yellowing's fault; Grorp and North8000 also raised conduct concerns there instead of leading by example. Describing an editor as "very nasty individual" and another as "best editor" is a highly subjective approach that turns pages into battlegrounds and is unsuitable for a noticeboard discussion.
    So if a warning is needed, this here is one for all of you three. Now we can archive. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    Categories: