Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bulldog123 (talk | contribs) at 21:10, 2 December 2016 (→User:Bulldog123 reported by User:Nomoskedasticity (Result: )). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• 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: 198.30.10.254 reported by User:BlaccCrab (Result: 3 years)

Page: Black Beatles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 198.30.10.254 (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: #

Comments:
Keeps trying to say that Paul Mccartney participating in the manequin challenge is "irrelevant" to the Black Beatles song. Dumbest edit warring that could possibly occur on the page. This is my 4th time undoing it and he's just some random ip address who argues with everyone on every page he edits. BlaccCrab (talk) 20:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 3 years. This school-based IP has an extensive block history, and this behavior seems to coincide with prior disruptive activity. I JethroBT 19:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Mztourist reported by User:Softlavender (Result: Both warned)

Page: Operation Castor (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mztourist (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: ,

Comments:

User insists, despite clear consensus to the contrary (including a current RfC where the current consensus is 7 to 2 against it ), on adding "victory" or "defeat" to the infobox Result parameter. There's already been an ANI filed about this, and the user was instructed to leave consensus until consensus changes , but they are still reverting to their preference. Softlavender (talk) 08:59, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

This issue is the subject of an unclosed RFC, Softlavender has to wait until there is a result, instead he/she insists on making the change that is the subject of the RFC and so it isSoftlavender who started edit-warring this on 24 November with this diff . Referring to a "current consensus" based on his/her own count (which I disagree with) is unacceptable. regards Mztourist (talk) 09:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC) I should also note that Softlavender made the non-admin closure of the ANI, the change to the page was originally made by Dino nam with this edit: and so the previous consensus should prevail pending the outcome of the RFC and Dino nam's IP-socking raised there by me was never addressed.Mztourist (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

You are obliged to accept the overwhelming consensus (currently 7 to 2) , as you were instructed to do in the ANI: . It makes no difference that the RfC hasn't been closed yet, the consensus is clear. If that happens to change, and the consensus veers equally widely in the other direction (which seems very unlikely), you are welcome to change the infobox. This has been explained to you several times: , , , . -- Softlavender (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I'll wait to see what an Admin says on these points, rather than relying or your interpretation or instructions. Mztourist (talk) 10:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

You should probably also note this from WP:RFC "Be patient; make your improvements in accord with consensus after the RFC is resolved." Mztourist (talk) 16:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Dino nam's forgetting to sign in and then reverting his own edits is not "IP socking", and repeated spurious, gratuitous, unfounded accusations of sockpuppeteering are personal attacks and subject to sanctions. Softlavender (talk) 09:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

If it was a one-off I wouldn't have mentioned it, but it wasn't and he didn't self-revert each time. Mztourist (talk) 10:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

"he didn't self-revert each time". He most certainly did self-revert both times, within two minutes of his accidental logged-out posting: + ; + . These continued personal attacks are digging you in deeper. Softlavender (talk) 11:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Dino nam/Archive Mztourist (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Nothing to do with this article. Plus the SPI was declined, and only established that Dino nam might have forgotten to log in one day, as he admitted he might have there. One of the two IPs you tried to prosecute isn't even from the same continent as Dino nam , and is the same user as this IP, which can be clearly seen by the conversation they participated in and the geolocation. As I mentioned before, your attempt at attacking others to deflect from yourself is digging you in deeper and deeper. Softlavender (talk) 12:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I never said it was to do with this article, rather it shows a pattern of behaviour of IP socking. You claimed that he socked twice and self-reverted both times. The only time that Dino nam self-reverted his IP was here: . You also state that Dino nam self-reverted "within two minutes of his accidental logged-out posting", but this diff clearly shows that was not the case, although I'm unsure how the IP edit I reverted shows as being made by Dino nam. You seem very willing to AGF of Dino nam speaking of his "accidental logged-out posting" and "he might have forgotten to log in one day." but you extend no similar AGF to me. The SPI was declined on what is to my mind a foolish policy that protecting the IP identity of a possible socker is more important than stopping socking using an IP. You say one of the IPs wasn't even from the same continent, which may be the case, but you ignore the fact that Dino nam admitted that the other IP was probably him. In relation to your comment that my "attempt at attacking others to deflect from self", you were the one who closed the ANI by reference to the RFC and so the IP socking issue was never addressed, so it is perfectly reasonable for me to raise it. In relation to your digging comments, I suggest you look at your own behaviour and actions. Mztourist (talk) 16:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

• Result: In lieu of issuing at least one block I'm warning both User:Mztourist and User:Softlavender not to revert again until a clear consensus is found on the talk page. So long as the RfC is still running, clear consensus has not been achieved. The argument about 'current majority' would allow widespread edit warring during most RfCs, which is not a thing we want encourage. EdJohnston (talk) 18:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, but with respect, I'm not sure why you're warning me, when you are clearly agreeing that User:Softlavender was not justified in making the change while there was an open RFC. regards Mztourist (talk) 18:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

This is one of the two reverts you made while the RfC was running. If either of you had made no reverts at all during the RfC then no warning to that person would have been justified. I am puzzled by the edits by both you and Softlavender during the RfC. Each of you is a regular long-time editor who has has never been blocked but you were taking a risk of bad consequences, when there was already a proper discussion going on. EdJohnston (talk) 18:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

As noted in my edit summary and as per RFC guidelines and your guidance above, User:Softlavender should not have made this change during an ongoing RFC and yet when I reverted this in accordance with RFC guidelines I was then accused of edit-warring, so to treat me as equally to blame seems unfair. regards Mztourist (talk) 04:33, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Happydaise reported by User:Bradv (Result: Blocked)

Page

Organizational behavior (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Happydaise (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 09:32, 30 November 2016 (UTC) "/* Contributing disciplines */ Ethnology definitely should be there- tell me why if not"
2. 01:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC) "/* Contributing disciplines */ have discussed this now too"
3. 20:55, 29 November 2016 (UTC) "/* Contributing disciplines */"
4. 22:49, 28 November 2016 (UTC) "I took time to work out all the steps how to list this at the dispute resolution noticeboard"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 00:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Organizational behavior. (TW)"
2. 03:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC) "/* November 2016 */ reply re 3RR"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:"

• There is some further discussion at User_talk:Iss246#November_2016. Also, please note the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrm7171 (not directly related to this article but may be relevant). Bradv 13:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

This is the other user and what they did too. Bradv why did you not report them too after you told them this-

"It doesn't matter the reason for your edits, The three-revert rule is a hard limit that may not be crossed. You did the initial edit here, and reverted back to that version again here and here. The point is: don't dispute over content on the article. Instead, discuss on the talk page in a civilized manner, until you come up with a consensus. What the two of you have done so far is yell and insult each other, and then look for someone else to step in to make a decision. You can figure this out yourselves. Bradv 03:00, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Also Softlavender today deleted my entry twice after I explained it and asked them to explain why they did it. how is this not edit warring? How do i put the edits here in the way of diffs to click thru to to show what i mean? They made the two deletions just today with no explanation.Happydaise (talk) 13:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I mean how many more times would softlavender have done this deletion within hours of each deletion. Why did they choose not to discuss it when I started a new topic on ethnology even? I had justified why I added it in this new section I started and then Softlavender chose not top participate but just continue edit warring and I talked about including ethnology, like i should have but they did not participate in discussing it.

How is that not edit warring by user Softlavender and also by user Iss246 based on what Bradv showed they deleted my addition 3 times within a couple of hours? Is this about trying to frame me? Why wont anyone discuss things. I have listed twice now on the dispute noticeboard and took a lot of time working out all of the steps involved in doing that and still - no-one participated in discussing things peacefully with me. Softlavender did not participate there either. they just kept on edit warringHappydaise (talk) 13:37, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I am not involved in the content dispute — I have no opinion on whether "Ethnology" is related to "Organizational Behaviour". I am merely trying to get you two to discuss this rather than edit war. I've reported you since you crossed the WP:3RR limit. Bradv 14:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocked – 24 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 15:23, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Pbfreespace3 reported by User:Beshogur (Result: Blocked)

Page

Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Pbfreespace3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

This user reverted my edits several times without any source. His only sources were:

• 1: An unreliable Twitter account named as Civil War Map.
• 2: His own poor arguments.

Now, I will ask from the moderators to ban this user for a time. He's doing edit war since days with me and other users. The other user is which he's doing edit war is Mehmedsons, this user added several sources and changed villages while User:Pbfreespace3 reverted all edits, with poor sources or without any source, with his own arguments. Beshogur (talk) 13:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Beshogur. Mehmedsons (talk) 13:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Bro, also this user reverted my edit before on Yemeni Civil War detailed map.

@Pbfreespace3:, you seem to be under a 1RR per week ARB enforcement restriction on articles with discretionary sanctions. You agreed to this explicitly as release from an indefinite block. Can you point me to the discussion that removed this restriction? Kuru (talk) 17:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Gah, drat! I forgot to adhere to this rule that was put in place. I'm not aware of a resolution to remove it. How long will I be blocked for? Pbfreespace3 (talk) 22:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

• Blocked. That's just not credible. Outlined on your talk page. Kuru (talk) 01:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

1. Numbered list item

User:Beshogur reported by User:Niele~enwiki (Result: )

Page

Module:Syrian Civil War detailed map (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Beshogur (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts

Pleace note that user Beshogur did 3 reverts of edits of other users in a time-period of 24 hours:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Module:Syrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&oldid=752264460

(Revert of sourced 'SDF' + 'Syrian National Resistance'-controlled village Azraq and Jubah)

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Module:Syrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&oldid=752151926

(revert of sourced 'SDF' + 'Syrian National Resistance'-controlled controlled village Azrak)

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Module:Syrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&oldid=752147406

(revert of 'SDF' + 'Syrian National Resistance'-controlled village Jubah)

Notice

The 'Syrian National Resistance' is neutral force both loyal to SDF and Regime and using Damascus Syrian flag created so that Kurds from SAA territory and 'indirectly' SAA itself can help SDF advance on Al Bab.

A list of 13 sources of SDF control of Jubah you can find on http://wikimapia.org/28004322/Cob%C3%AA-Jubah Including Daesh sources claiming they shelled SDF-positions inside Jubah village.

Talk page

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3ABeshogur&type=revision&diff=752319901&oldid=752286920

Extra reasons to report the account of Beshogur

User Bashogur was blocked for editwarring just a week ago, but never stopped doing it.

He was blocked in July 2016 but did not learn about it.

I count more than 10 warnings for edit warring but he did not stopped ding it.

He has permanently involved in edit warring, malicious editing and NPOV-psuhing following the full duration of his wikipedia-account, proving not being able to learn about warnings and blocks.

Account created for sole purpose of targeting of minorities

I also want to report the account of user Beshogur for being an account created with the sole purpose of targeting wikipedia information about Armenian, Kurdish, Jezidi, Cypriotic, Greek and other minorities,... and glorifying glorifying pan-Turkish organisations that are targeting minorities in Turkey and the region, the Turkish state.

The user that openly states he is pan-Turkisch 'Nationalist' has clearly made a account on wikipedia out of racist sentiment and objective toward all minorities that are usually targeted by pan-Turkish nationalists. A look at Beshogur account and edit history proves this.

Misplaced Pages is an international multi-etnic community. And users should act with respect to other peoples and etnicities. If a user is proudly targeting etnicities the user hate, based on racist motives on wikipedia, it should be sanctioned. Such behaviour focused on hate against peoples is not normal and should not tolerated here.

Please also note he was warned for this several times by multiple users.

Treats of targetting of groups of wikipedia-users

I also want to report user Beshogur for stating he wants to target what he calles 'PKK-supporters' on wikipedia. Please note that with in present day (pan-)Turkish nationalist anyone that defends Kurdish people, human rights,.. is automaticly labeled 'PKK-supporter' and the actions of TAK (Kurdish falcon fighters), Daesh, others are atributed to PKK instead to frame the organisation as a terrorist organisation to justifying the human right abuses against Kurdish people and all AKP opposition in Turkey.

In the same way they frame the Syrian YPG and the Syrian Democratic Forces, the main ally of the international coalition in Syria as 'PKK'. So in Beshogur's mind all wikipedia-users trying to stop them from targeting Kurdish, Jezidi, SDF,.. info and replacing it with false info are 'PKK-supporters' and should be targetted.

(Please note that my personal facebookpage is targeted 3 times in the last 24 hours by Turkish nationalists with attemps to hack it)

Discussion

• Beshogur reverted twice in 24 hours, not three times, which is still a violation of the sanctions.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
  • The third one was actually also a revert of the same villages, just not done with the revert button. --Niele~enwiki (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
    • @Niele~enwiki: In your list of edits where you count three reverts, two of them are consecutive edits and therefore count as only one revert.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:55, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
      • Then by that logic 2 reverts still took place, still a violation of policy. Additionally, he is editing with malicious intent. He is trying to represent the forces advancing on al-Bab from the western side as a pro-Assad force, rather than the diverse mix of Kurds and Arabs without a strong loyalty to Assad that they really are. Since he openly admitted he is a Turkish nationalist opposed to Assad, his editing is biased because he is trying to represent these forces as evil Assadists rather than the democratic forces they themselves proclaim to be. Pbfreespace3 (talk) 17:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
      • Let us also look at the bias of his edits. In the first revert, he cites a video on YouTube that appears to show some fighters in Jubah town. They have a Syrian flag with them. Beshogur takes this and claims the entire town must be held by the Syrian government and there is no SDF/Kurdish loyal forces present. This is an attempt to misrepresent.
      • Also, in the second revert, he cites one Twitter user to justify the town of Azraq not being taken by Anti-Turkish forces. It's literally one random Twitter user saying "no, Turks still control it!". How can he use these sources? Pbfreespace3 (talk) 17:15, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
      • Well, it was. Your edit was just based on Twitter rumor. Beshogur (talk) 09:04, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Syrian National Resistance ('Kafr Saghir Martyrs Brigade') is it a group from mostly local Arabs and Kurds which loyal to the Syrian government and not have any coordination with SDF. per Kurdish and reliable sources:linklinklinklink Syrian National Resistance or ('Kafr Saghir Martyrs Brigade') is a group loyal to the central government(SAA). Mehmedsons (talk) 17:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Syrian National Resistance with their armed-wing 'Kafr Saghir Martyrs Brigade' is neutral brigade loyal to both SDF and SAA fighting embedded with the SDF, it was founded by the SDF in negatiation with the SAA in SDF-held Tel Rifaat and is leaded by Rezan Hedo, who is a member of the 'Syrian Democratic Council' the political wing of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Sources: News article on founding, link,link, link

• In all the acronyms and accusations -- some of which are being copy-pasted in part elsewhere -- it's hard to be clear what is going on, but it may be worth taking into account that of Beshogur's two reverts, one of them, according to the section above, may have been a revert of an edit made by an editor (Pbfreespace3) already restricted from making it. Not that this makes it OK, but it is possibly a mitigating factor. MPS1992 (talk) 22:44, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Niele~enwiki, I don't know why but you are so childish. First there's nothing wrong with Turkish nationalism. If I am Turkish nationalist, so what? This has nothing to do with this kind of discussions. You're using mostly your "own sources" for the edits. Mostly Wikimapia, etc.. Dear users, please check the edit history by Wikimapia locations, you can see his name. The newly formed group, Liwa Shuhada Kafr Saghir is not SDF-affiliated but Government. It's not 'loyal' to SDF as 'your source' on Wikimapia. Beshogur (talk) 08:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

• Also Niele~enwiki called me several times as "racist", this is a big insult, I'm not racist. This guy added fake maps on Ezidkhan article which doesn't exist. And I removed them, this user reported me again and I had 24-hours ban. Reason? Because I removed fake map.

Please check: NPA Beshogur (talk) 09:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

• Also, I never called anyone as "PKK supporter" and never said that SDF is part of PKK. Beshogur (talk) 09:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
• What's the point to add Armenian and Kurdish names into Iğdır page, which the word "Iğdır" has Turkic origin.
• What's the point to add Kurdish name into Great Mosque of Diyarbakır, which is built by a Turkic Seljuk leader. The fact of mosque is based in Diyarbakir doesn't make the mosque Kurdish. Other user said: "Haghia sophia has turned into mosque and it's the part of turkish republic. What about this mosque?". Yes, because it's located in Turkey!
• What's the point to add Armenian name into Erzincan? Why? Because it was inhabited by Armenians 100 years ago? We are not in 1900's. So, we should add Turkish name into Yerevan, because the majority of population was Azerbaijani?

And someone calls me "racist" and "vandal" when I revert those edits. Niele is using dozens of fake DNS to revert my edits. You can see at the IP accounts, they're mostly from Belgium and Niele is also from Belgium. Beshogur (talk) 10:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

"Niele is using dozens of fake DNS" -> don't invent completely fake accusations. I never ever have used a fake DNS on wikipedia. I only seeing a user-account that is fully dedicated on attacking Armenian, Kurdisch, Jezidi, Greek, Israeli,.. info and making racism-motivated edits against those etnicities and so as a neutral human right caring person a few times with my own public account try to stop you. And like you do, with everyone that questions you're behaviour on wikipedia you try to attack them. But not question the problem of you're behaviour toward other etnicities.--Niele~enwiki (talk) 10:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

First of all, I never attacked an ethnicity in Misplaced Pages. Ok there were disputes with Kurdish articles but what about Greeks, Armenians, Israelis? So I should add Turkish name for Yerevan city because Misplaced Pages is a "multiethnic" area? I don't understand why some users are still adding fake informations on Misplaced Pages. You added before a fake map of Ezidkhan which took Mosul and Tal Afar. Yezidis are just a small people in Iraq, "Ezidkhan" does not exist. Stop adding fake informations on the article there. Beshogur (talk) 10:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I never added a map to that article, nor made a edit to the article. You where targetting other users that stopped you're vandalism of removing this valuable map and edit-warring about it. And I reverted you're vandalism once while you where editwarring over it with other users already for a while. A map picturing the area claimed by the Jezidi people as Ezidkhan and their homeland is valuable information over this culture/ethnicity. It's not because you hate the minorities that are standing in the way of you're pan-Turkish/neo-Ottoman ideals, that all attributes of these minorities are fake or you can use wikipedia to target the all articles with info over those minorities--Niele~enwiki (talk) 10:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah man! You never added the map. The map is now deleted. Because "Ezidkhan" is not a real place. You can not find the word "Ezidkhan" in history books, same as Shahba region. Showing those two areas as an "old cultural area" is abnormal and should be deleted. Beshogur (talk) 10:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Eye-opening edit-history of user Beshogur

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions/Beshogur&offset=&limit=5000&target=Beshogur

Everyone can look at User:Beshogur edit history and see this user is dedicating the last year of his live to target info over the minorities that are standing in the way of his pan-Turkish/neo-Ottoman ideals. Offcourse a lot of people try to revert his vandalism and constant edit warring. You can speare a a huge amount of wikipedia users valuable time by blocking him indefenitly. Because after multiple blocks and dozens of warnings he will not learn to stop edit warring and he is damaging wikipedia with his behaviour.--Niele~enwiki (talk) 11:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Other edit-warring actions of user Beshogur of only the previous days

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=I%C4%9Fd%C4%B1r&diff=prev&oldid=752348659
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Erzincan&diff=prev&oldid=752348749
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Diyarbak%C4%B1r&diff=prev&oldid=752348413
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kurdish%E2%80%93Turkish_conflict_(2015%E2%80%93present)&diff=prev&oldid=752265749
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Grey_Wolves_%28organization%29&type=revision&diff=750987231&oldid=750961036
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Azerbaijani_language&diff=prev&oldid=752150216
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arabs_in_Turkey&action=history
8. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Arabs_in_Turkey&diff=prev&oldid=751934965
9. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Diyarbak%C4%B1r&diff=prev&oldid=751935157
10. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kurdish%E2%80%93Turkish_conflict_(2015%E2%80%93present)&diff=prev&oldid=751897668
11. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Template:Syrian_Civil_War_infobox&oldid=752149214, https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Template:Syrian_Civil_War_infobox&oldid=751890045
12. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Great_Mosque_of_Diyarbak%C4%B1r&diff=prev&oldid=751888745
13. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Diyarbak%C4%B1r&diff=prev&oldid=751888605
14. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Module:Syrian_Civil_War_detailed_map&action=history (!not sourced)
15. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Homs&diff=prev&oldid=751726578
16. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Kurdish%E2%80%93Turkish_conflict_(2015%E2%80%93present)&diff=prev&oldid=751712033
17. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Cizre_operation_%282015%29&type=revision&diff=751709056&oldid=751612475
18. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Mosul&diff=prev&oldid=751447717
19. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Qabasin&diff=prev&oldid=751440991
20. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Qabasin&diff=prev&oldid=751440495
21. And so on and on...

You are so childish. Did you checked the articles? They were vandalised by IP users. I have many contributions on Misplaced Pages and in those articles. Someone added unsourced contents and I deleted them then some IP users reverted my edits. Do you think it's an edit war?! How funny that an user call this as "edit wars". Here is an other proof about 2 times reverting in one day by Niele. Beshogur (talk) 13:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

1. Here is the proof how Niele using fake DNS and reverting my edits.
2. Proof 2. Since when became Misplaced Pages a Kurdish nationalist forum? What is "East Kurdistan", "North Kurdistan". So, if you're writing anything in this kind of articles, you must just write Turkey, not non-existing countries.
3. WP:3RR: , , & Beshogur (talk) 13:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

1) I did the edits mentioned above with IP 2003:77:.... To clarify: I'm not Niele, I do not know Niele and I'm not in contact with Niele. I've been doing minor edits here and there as an IP user without having an account. By chance I ran into some anti-Kurdish vandalism by the user Beshogur and found that he is doing it systematically. I have now observed his destructive and malicious behaviour for a while by following his activity. So Beshogur is making false accusations if he exhibits the above examples with IP 2003:77:.... as "proof how Niele using fake DNS". Misplaced Pages should have the technical tools to separate my activities from Niele's activities. (I prefer to remain anonymous in order not to come under attack by Turkish nationalists.)

2) Though Beshogur is sometimes doing some constructive work in articles concerning Turkish history he systematically erases and distorts information about Kurdish, Armenian and Jesidi people. While I agree that comments like "racism-motivated vandalism" should be avoided, I have to say that that often exactly describes what Beshogur is doing.

3) In the above list of some 20 examples, Beshogur cherry-picked some 5 cases in which he is right, but the other cases are examples of a behaviour exactly as Niele described. If one would go deeper into his edit history I'm sure one could find 100s of such examples. (Today, being under discussion, he seems to make more benign edits, but look back in his history.)

4) Apart from his destructive and malicious edit behaviour he also calls other users "Bunch of idi...s. Beshogur (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2016 (UTC)" on User_talk:Niele~enwiki#Stop_calling_me_racist.

I think the behaviour of User:Beshogur should not be tolerated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 17:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I think you're a sockpuppet of Niele. You're using similar language. Wow, an IP user is writing in very-well English. I saw this for first time. Beshogur (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

In Germany we learn English at school and I also spent some time in England. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Another recent example of Beshogurs behaviour: . User Beshogur deleted the Armenian name of the town claiming that a simiar issue had been discussed on Talk:Erzurum as if on this page some solution or consensus had been reached to delete Armenian names in similar cases. In reality on Talk:Erzurum several users said that the Armenian name should be kept because of the towns Armenian history before the Armenian genocide. If this were some isolated incident I wouldn't care but in the case of user Beshogur this is part of a systematic campaign to delete information about Armenian, Kurdish, ... people on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 22:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Neile's reverts with different DNS IP's, they're using same kind of language.

1. Sockpuppet 1
2. Sockpuppet 2
3. Sockpuppet 3
4. Sockpuppet 4

Beshogur (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

As explained above I did the edits with IP 2003:77:.... and I'm not Niele. Beshogur should stop making false accusations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 00:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

User:John reported by User:IgnorantArmies (Result: No action)

Page

Gibraltar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

John (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 18:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC) "nah"
2. 07:36, 30 November 2016 (UTC) "IPA is unintelligible to most Misplaced Pages readers; citation please"
3. 23:03, 29 November 2016 (UTC) "redundant" – note: initial edit, not a revert

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

None – user is an admin and would be well aware of what constitutes edit warring.

Comments:

User is edit warring, but seems to be deliberately skirting around the third-revert rule – per WP:3RR, "any user may report edit warring with or without 3RR being breached". This edit in particular was purely antagonistic. Gibraltar is an archetypal "battleground" article, and has previously been the subject of ARBCOM sanctions. I don't know if the user has any previous involvement in that subject area, but as an admin and 10-year+ veteran editor (per his userpage) he would certainly be aware of that. We should not be encouraging a culture where editors can make multiple reversions against consensus on controversial topics without any consequences. IgnorantArmies (talk) 19:18, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Interesting timeline here. I raised the matter in article talk at 07:37, this report was raised at 19:18 by User:IgnorantArmies, followed at 19:49 by Ignorant Armies' contribution at article talk. Not for nothing has the user declined to fill in the mandatory Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: section, because no such attempt was made. --John (talk) 22:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Now you're just Wikilawyering. My timeliness in making this report has nothing to do with the report's validity. There is no "mandatory" requirement for an editor making an edit-warring report to engage in the actual content dispute, particularly where the edit-warrior doesn't appear to be acting in good faith. By the time you made this revert at 18:17 you had had three editors (Giraffedata at 7:07, myself at 9:11, and Wee Curry Monster at 9:17) express disagreement with your edits and provide a rationale for doing so. So there certainly was an attempt made to resolve the dispute, but you just ignored that and kept edit-warring. IgnorantArmies (talk) 04:12, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

You call it Wikilawyering, I call it basic competence. You made a false and malformed report rather than justify your position in talk. You lied to try to get me into trouble. I can't respect that. --John (talk) 07:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

is a bold edit, not a revert. is a revert after which the talk page discussion started, is disappointing as it took place whilst the discussion was ongoing. Sanctions are clearly not warranted here as the reversion appear to have stopped and there is a discussion, albeit rather bad tempered. WCM_email 08:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

was included automatically through Twinkle. I considered removing it but left it in for context, although I've now made a note to make clear I'm not suggesting it's a revert. I agree with you that there's no need for a preventative block, but I think there should be some form of sanction. A new editor who went around edit-warring and writing weird passive-aggressive insults in edit summaries would receive a reprimand at the very least; Misplaced Pages admins should obviously be held to a higher standard. If bad behaviour never get penalised it usually re-occurs. IgnorantArmies (talk) 09:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Closing this with no action. No one has violated 3RR, and the edit warring is not so bad that a block would improve anything. Glad to see discussion at the talk page. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Twobells reported by User:AlexTheWhovian (Result: )

Page: The Crown (TV series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Twobells (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. (November 19)
2. (November 20)
3. (November 20)
4. (November 24)
5. (November 24)
6. (December 1)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:The Crown (TV series) § British or American-British?

Comments:

Do note that rather than being a report for a 3RR violation, this is a report for constant edit-warring over multiple days.

Please see a further discussion of the editor's behavior at User talk:AlexTheWhovian/Archive 17 § Twobells, which includes notes of previous occurrences of identical behaviour as that which is currently being reported (which, if you look at their contribution history, they are continuing even as this report processes on yet another article). The editor continues to revert even while they take part in the discussion, completely ignoring any form of WP:STATUSQUO or WP:BRD. Also noted is the editor's extensive block log, consisting almost entirely of edit-warring blocks, going as far back as early-2008. Pinging Drmargi, another involved editor who is familiar with the behaviour of the editor in question here. Alex|The|Whovian 10:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, this is a little drama we play out with Twobells from time-to-time as he edits on the basis of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. After a couple blocks for edit warring, he's learned to game WP:3RR by slow edit warring; the pattern above (one edit a day with an occasional day off) is quite commonplace (check the long, drawn-out slow edit war and fruitless discussion over some sort of British weaponry a year or so ago). Meanwhile, he runs through a series of reasons to continue to revert, and to disengage from the corresponding discussion: a) that his edits are "non-controversial and reliably sourced"; b) that national "mash-ups" aren't appropriate (just common as can be on engWP); and c) that his edits represent "best practice" (as though there is such a notion described on WP) and thereby cannot be reverted. And it goes and it goes until he finally gives up and moves on to the next edit war. He started the same thing with Lawrence of Arabia, a film produced by Columbia Pictures and American Sam Spiegel, this morning. He has a rabid resistance to labeling American involvement in increasingly common British-American/American-British co-productions. The production at issue here was commissioned by Netflix, and produced collaboratively by Sony Pictures Television (which is in Culver City CA) and Left Bank Pictures (a production company which is British-based, but a subsidiary of Sony Pictures Television) He's pushing the show as British-only based on a website that promotes films produced in Britain. No one is questioning that the film was made in Britain, but it doesn't alter the fact that there is substantial American involvement in the production, which the article must reflect. But Twobells is determined to edit war it out, and is unwilling to discuss or to work toward any form of consensus. And so we find ourselves here with him once again. --Drmargi (talk) 18:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Ahahahahahahahahaha reported by User:DIY Editor (Result: 24 hours)

Page: Harrier Jump Jet (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ahahahahahahahahaha (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:

Comments:

User has repeatedly ignored and deleted warnings from different editors on user's talk page. Will not speculate or characterize behavior further, to assume good faith. DIY Editor (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

You could add the link to the entire talk discussion...

I really don't see how my revision makes things less clear. Two ideas. Two sentences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahahahahahahahahaha (talk • contribs) 16:24, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I did link the entire discussion. You were reported here for violating the 3RR after ignoring and deleting multiple warnings, not for disputing the phrasing of Harrier Jump Jet, although I do have concerns about the reasons behind that dispute. DIY Editor (talk) 16:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

The same user also violated 3RR at LGBT rights in the United Arab Emirates. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours. Clear reverts at 07:47, 09:37, 10:47, 15:41. Was warned. Kuru (talk) 17:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:107.194.72.223 reported by User:Jytdog (Result: Protected)

Page: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 107.194.72.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: diff

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. diff
2. diff
3. diff
4. diff
5. diff

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link

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

Comments:

User has responded to notice from Doc James about MEDRS sourcing with personal attack (diff); please also note personal attacks in edit notes. Jytdog (talk) 16:16, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

• Result: Fully protected five days. Please discuss changes on the talk page and remember WP:MEDRS. The IP reported here has not used the article talk page at all. EdJohnston (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Dkendel reported by User:WilliamJE (Result:)

List of Mayday episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Dkendel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_Mayday_episodes&diff=752503032&oldid=752447155
2. 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_Mayday_episodes&diff=752435497&oldid=752319185
3. 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_Mayday_episodes&diff=752238584&oldid=752162761
4. 4 https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_Mayday_episodes&diff=752265688&oldid=752263872 Which was a modified version of a post that had been reverted here

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
At least 4 editors have been involved in reverting this editor's additions to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WilliamJE (talk • contribs) 17:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

• Dkendel has reverted once again. See this....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 14:02, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Just adding a note that DKendel tried to delete the above comment but I reverted that. - MrOllie (talk) 15:27, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

User:2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 reported by User:Beshogur (Result:)

Kardzhali (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Battle of Erzincan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Erzincan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2003:77:4f27:1e56:e939:eb0d:3945:c408 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Sockpuppet 1
2. Sockpuppet 2
3. Sockpuppet 3
4. Sockpuppet 4

Those 3 IP's are similar.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
I'm trying to make Misplaced Pages articles better, but this IP user calls my "vandal" also, he reverted all my edits with fake DNS-accounts and called me several times "racist". This user needs a warning. He reverted my 3 edits in 9 minutes. Beshogur (talk) 20:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

More detailed comments oncerning the edits:

1. User Beshogur deleted content without any explanation, I reverted.
2. User Beshogur deleted content without any explanation, I reverted.
3. User Beshogur deleted the Armenian name of the town claiming that a simiar issue had been discussed on Talk:Erzurum as if on this page some solution or consensus had been reached to delete Armenian names in similar cases. In reality on Talk:Erzurum several users said that the Amenian name should be kept because of the towns Armenian history before the Armenian genocide. If this were some isolated incident I wouldn't care but in the case of user Beshogur this is part of a systematic campaign to delete information about Armenian, Kurdish, ... people on wikipedia. This is just one more example of why user Beshogur is under discussion on "User:Beshogur reported by User:Niele~enwiki (Result: )". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

1. The coat of arms of Kardzhali is useless, I added the city's skyline instead the coat.
2. About Turkish loses in Battle of Erzincan was clearly UNSOURCED, never found an info on internet.
3. The Armenian name is already counted in the etymology section. The city has now ZERO % Armenian population. That's how Misplaced Pages works, get your facts.

1) How can Beshogur decide "coat of arms of Kardzhali is useless" as just delete it? Maybe some user though about why to add it. Why doesn't he start a discussion on whether it should be kept? To me this seems to be vandalism, with Beshogur hoping that nobody notices that he deletes bits he doesn't like here and there.

2) Concerning Battle of Erzincan user Beshogur could have mentioned that he deleted unsourced material. (But why deleting immediately and not adding, at least for some time, a comment that a source is needed?)

3) As I wrote, in the discussion in Talk:Erzurum several users said that the Amenian name should be kept because of the towns Armenian history before the Armenian genocide even if there are no Armenians living there nowadays. There was even a user pointing out to Beshogur that "You really need to (re)read WP:NCGN. It concerns not only those living there currently, but those who lived there in the past as well." It is clear that no concensus was reached to delete Armenian names in similar cases, moreover, to me it seems that most users in Talk:Erzurum wanted to keep the Armenian name. I think it is a very questionable behaviour to justify deletion of content by falsely claiming that a discussion came to that conclusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

1) I'm 100% sure, you heard the word Kardzhali for first time today. It doesn't pass on the infobox because it became too long.

2) Since when is "deleting" unsourced material forbidden? Was the casualties sourced? NO!

3) So I should add Turkish name in Bagdhad, Damascus, Cairo, because those areas were ruled by Turks? Beshogur (talk) 23:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I think concerning 1) and 2) everything has been said: it would be helpful to give some explanation if something is deleted. Concerning 3): I don't know. Maybe its similar, maybe there are differences? Why don't you discuss this on the discussion pages of the articles mentioned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:77:4F27:1E56:E939:EB0D:3945:C408 (talk) 23:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion pages on such articles are not even active. Maybe an user will see that months later. Erzincan's Armenian name is already counted in etymology section. That's how Misplaced Pages works. Same with Turkish cities of Western Thrace such as Xanti, Alexandroupoli, ... Beshogur (talk) 23:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Guess Kirkuk#Notable people from Kirkuk who added this section? Yes it's me. Stop calling me "Armenophobic", "Kurdophobic" or another insult such as "racist". Beshogur (talk) 22:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

I never called you "Armenophobic" or "Kurdophobic", in fact I don't like these words, because I think they do not adequately describe what they are meant to describe, and therefore do not use them. I also never called you a racist. But looking at your edit history some of your actions seem to be racism-motivated, anti-Armenian, Anti-Kurdish, ... because you systematically delete content about certain groups of people. But I am just repeating what Niele tried to explain to you in the discussion "User:Beshogur reported by User:Niele~enwiki (Result: )".

User:2.25.27.199 reported by User:Mr. Vernon (Result: )

Page

User talk:Mr. Vernon (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

2.25.27.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 04:18, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "/* Pornography Addiction */ new section"
2. 04:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "/* WHY DON'T YOU CHECK THIS - DO YOU WANT A CERTIFIED STATEMENT ???? */ new section"
3. 04:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "/* PORNOGRAPHY ADDICTION */ new section"
4. 04:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "‎PORNOGRAPHY ADDICTION: new section"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 04:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Vandalism on User talk:Mr. Vernon. (TW)"
2. 04:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on User talk:Mr. Vernon. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 04:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by 2.25.27.199 (talk) to last revision by Mr. Vernon. (TW)"
2. 04:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by 2.25.27.199 (talk) to last revision by Mr. Vernon. (TW)"

Comments:

@Mr. Vernon: I already reported the user at WP:AIV, since the edits to the Talk Pages were vandalistic in nature. DarkKnight2149 04:28, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

User:A123soup reported by User:Winkelvi (Result: )

Page

United States presidential election, 2016 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

A123soup (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 10:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 752628056 by Winkelvi (talk)"
2. 10:03, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 752626757 by Watchfan07 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 10:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on United States presidential election, 2016. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Supposedly new editor, edit warring aggressively over BLP vio and blog-like content - obvious they won't stop without being forced to do so. Also, shouldn't there be discretionary sanctions active for this article as it's politically-related? -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 10:18, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Sure, the page is already under WP:1RR. And the offending user appears to be WP:NOTHERE. — JFG 11:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Aniruddhbhaidhadhal reported by User:Justlettersandnumbers (Result: )

Page

Kathiawari (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Aniruddhbhaidhadhal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 05:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC) ""
2. 05:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC) ""
3. 02:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 10:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Kathiawari. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

• Requests to discuss (in edit summaries): 1, 2
• Request to discuss (from another editor) on talk-page: 3

Comments:

The user has posted a request for my help on my talk-page, which seems to show some willingness to collaborate. It's disappointing that he/she also made a third revert after being warned not to. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:31, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Mr.User200 reported by User:Hakan3400 (Result: )

Page: Turkish involvement in the Syrian Civil War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mr.User200 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hakan3400 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

The user refused to use the talk page on the article and instead kept editing the article many times despite being warned by me. I asked him still to use the talke page and he refused. After a while he used the talk page on the user page (not article) and yet he kept editing it without comming to an conclusion witch is against the rules. By now he still ignores me by not going to the talk page of the article and keeps editing/reverting back the edits I did by using first the talk page. Hakan3400 (talk)

User:Ag97 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: 48 hours)

Page

Pizzagate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Ag97 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 17:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Manually undid the edit by Neutrality. You have refused to negotiate and deleted my claims about why the word falsely should be removed rather than responding to them. Please stop edit warring or you will be reported."
2. 15:40, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 752661586 by Neutrality (talk) Article isn't a biography, so WP:BLP doesn't apply. You can't add your personal opinion to Misplaced Pages articles, see WP:NPV"
3. 15:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC) "removed word "falsely" as per consensus on talk page"
4. 23:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC) "removed word "falsely". That is only the opinion of the writer, the conspiracy theory has neither been proven nor disproven"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Plenty of discussion on the talk page as to why this is a serious BLP issue; user is edit-warring to create FUD about a false, fabricated and debunked conspiracy theory which makes highly-defamatory claims about identifiable, non-public living people. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 17:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours, clear reverts. Kuru (talk) 17:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Bulldog123 reported by User:Nomoskedasticity (Result: )

Page

Richard B. Spencer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Bulldog123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. Consecutive edits made from 18:40, 2 December 2016 (UTC) to 18:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
   1. 18:40, 2 December 2016 (UTC) ""
   2. 18:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC) ""

Comments:

Was blocked for edit-warring three days ago -- after the bock expired, the editor repeated the exact same edit. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

It's not the same exact edit as the one I was blocked for, but I wouldn't expect someone of Nomoskedasticity's vigilance to notice that. I also changed it back FYI. Bulldog123 21:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring
• Misplaced Pages:Edit warring