Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard |
---|
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 You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different than 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.
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. |
|
Noticeboard archives
User:2602:43:65E:9700:5C6B:2AA7:7D4D:3928 reported by User:Tenryuu (Result: Semi)
Page: Persona 5 Scramble ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2602:43:65E:9700:5C6B:2AA7:7D4D:3928 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 06:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 06:01, 8 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 05:51, 8 August 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 971760920 by Tenryuu (talk)"
- 00:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Development and release */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 05:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC) "Caution: Removal of content, blanking (RedWarn 15)"
- 06:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC) "Warning: Removal of content, blanking (RedWarn 15)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
- 06:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Unexplained removal of content */ new section"
Comments:
Apologies if I've broken 3RR, but this IP editor is constantly removing content without discussing their reasons over at the talk page. I've left warnings on their talk page and started a discussion over on the article's talk page, but they seem to be unresponsive to those. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- Update: They've cleared their talk page since then. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- Result: Page semiprotected two weeks due to IP-hopping revert warrior from Special:Contributions/2602:43:65E:9700:0:0:0:0/64. EdJohnston (talk) 18:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
User:2a01:119f:31b:5d00:9421:ef37:6d83:a9a9 reported by User:Tarl N. (Result: Semi)
Page: Chronology of the universe ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2a01:119f:31b:5d00:9421:ef37:6d83:a9a9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [1]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- [2] it's 2020 now not 2019 so the figure of stages of existance must be updated
- [3] Unexplained revert. The universe Big Bang happened 13800000001 years ago, not 13800000000
- [4] However the thing is each time a year passes the uncertainty of relative time must be shifted by 1 year
- [5] Vandalism
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6] (deleted by user)
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7]
Comments:
- Looking at the /64, Special:Contributions/2A01:119F:31B:5D00::/64, I find previous instances of WP:NOTHERE behaviour evidently by the same author. Tarl N. (discuss) 19:27, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- Result: Page semiprotected two months. EdJohnston (talk) 18:25, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
User:94.250.171.181 reported by User:Ezhao02 (Result: Blocked)
Page: Croatian Democratic Union ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:
- 94.250.171.181 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- 94.250.174.45 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- 94.250.163.134 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- 94.250.181.83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- 94.250.165.194 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [8]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [17]
Attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Croatian Democratic Union#Centrism
Comments:
I've linked to reverts by other IP addresses that I presume are by the same person. 삭은사과 and I have repeatedly asked this user to engage on the talk page, but the editor keeps reverting before discussion is complete and has not addressed the points we've made. I've refrained from reverting this time. Ezhao02 (talk) 17:45, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- The closing admin might consider a block of Special:Contributions/94.250.160.0/19, which would cover all the IPs listed above. EdJohnston (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – Two weeks to Special:Contributions/94.250.160.0/19 for long term edit warring. They have constantly reverted about the same thing since 26 July at Croatian Democratic Union. (View the page history and check out their repeated addition of 2,147 bytes to the article). They are insisting that certain references be cited in the infobox, while others say that those items are already cited in the article body.
This editor has never used the talk page to discuss their desired change.Updated per below. EdJohnston (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- As person who reported this IP address, I'd like to correct one small part of your statement. The editor did use the talk page to discuss the desired change ([18]), but he/she did not address the issues we brought up with that change and did not respect the current consensus. Ezhao02 (talk) 00:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – Two weeks to Special:Contributions/94.250.160.0/19 for long term edit warring. They have constantly reverted about the same thing since 26 July at Croatian Democratic Union. (View the page history and check out their repeated addition of 2,147 bytes to the article). They are insisting that certain references be cited in the infobox, while others say that those items are already cited in the article body.
User:5.43.102.127 reported by User:Davey2010 (Result: Blocked)
Page: BMW ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 5.43.102.127 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 20:59, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 972022489 by Special:Contributions/82.79.62.216 (talk)"
- 18:25, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 972007534 by Davey2010 (talk)"
- 17:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 972000233 by Davey2010 (talk)"
- Consecutive edits made from 16:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC) to 16:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- 16:08, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "I was not part of the consensus mentioned.
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 16:12, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* BMW */ new section"
- 17:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* BMW */ final warning"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
IP keeps removing the BMW logo claiming "they weren't part of the consensus", Having told them "not being a part of the consensus" is not a reason to continue reverting[19] they've still continued to revert, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:42, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- FYI to save people looking - the consensus for not including the new BMW logo is at Talk:BMW#2020_logo_change, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:45, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Added 4th diff as they're still at it. –Davey2010Talk 21:24, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – 48 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 00:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your help EdJohnston, Greatly appreciated, Cheers, –Davey2010Talk 01:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – 48 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 00:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Added 4th diff as they're still at it. –Davey2010Talk 21:24, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Looks like block evasion from Obsuser (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log), same edit with the same summary and a similar editing area. Toasted Meter (talk) 08:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks Toasted Meter, Clearly the same guy - Reported at SPI. Deceitful behaviour such as that does on belong anywhere on this project. –Davey2010Talk 11:41, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Looks like block evasion from Obsuser (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log), same edit with the same summary and a similar editing area. Toasted Meter (talk) 08:11, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
User:Cordyceps-Zombie reported by User:NedFausa (Result: Blocked)
Page: Belarus ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Cordyceps-Zombie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [20]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [27]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [28]
Comments:
Cordyceps-Zombie's edit summary says it all: "I can do this all day if I have to." NedFausa (talk) 20:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
He said also on his talk page "Don’t tell me what to do", "That red rag is not the flag of Belarus - that is a FACT !!!", "If you block me, there will be a hundred more ready to take my place" Braganza (talk) 20:44, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Now he's removing the flag from House of Representatives of Belarus, National Assembly of Belarus, and Council of the Republic of Belarus. Schazjmd (talk) 21:01, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- This is clearly not a case for "Edit warring" but for Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism Braganza (talk) 21:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Ohnoitsjamie: Very disappointing result. If I did anything half as disruptive, I'd be blocked indefinitely—and rightly so! NedFausa (talk) 21:32, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – 72 hours by User:Ohnoitsjamie. See also the warning left by Ohnoitsjamie on the blocked user's talk page. That ought to be sufficient. EdJohnston (talk) 14:35, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
User:Lugnuts reported by User:ThePersecuted (Result: User promised to stop)
Pages: (some examples, there are plenty more)
- Breda Babošek ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Madman at War ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Maung Rajan ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- So Kam Tong ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- Liu Liming ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Lugnuts (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: Breda Babošek, Madman at War, Maung Rajan, So Kam Tong, Liu Liming
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- Breda Babošek: [29], [30]
- Madman at War: [31], [32]
- Maung Rajan: [33], [34]
- So Kam Tong: [35], [36]
- Liu Liming: [37], [38]
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]
Comments:
User:Lugnuts is arbitrarily updating the {{Use dmy dates}} with a newer date. There is no reason for this and it simply bloats their edit counts and creates confusion. User has been asked several times to stop doing this & they continue, in addition to reverting to the point of edit warring when people revert their edits & ask them to stop [39], [40], [41]. I have linked above several times of them disregarding reverts & comments on their talk page, but I've personally experienced at least 25 different articles this occurring on. ThePersecuted (talk) 05:17, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Maybe ThePersecuted could explain why they needed to follow my edits and make reverts on each and every one of them? As I've already explained, I check everything on my watchlist for vandalism, including running an update to unify any date formats in a given article. Infact Template:Use dmy dates states that it's fine to do this - "Use the parameter |date= for the month and year that an editor or bot last checked the article..." Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 06:07, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Materialscientist (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Result: User:Lugnuts was blocked by Materialscientist. Then they were unblocked after they promised to stop making cosmetic edits. EdJohnston (talk) 17:12, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
User:Utfrk reported by User:JavaHurricane (Result: Blocked 31 hours)
Page: Superorganism ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Utfrk (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- Consecutive edits made from 05:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC) to 06:01, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Consecutive edits made from 22:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC) to 23:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- 22:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 22:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 22:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 22:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 23:03, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 23:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 23:07, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 23:17, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 23:33, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 23:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- Consecutive edits made from 17:44, 9 August 2020 (UTC) to 21:56, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- 17:44, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 18:14, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 20:02, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 20:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 21:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 21:56, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- Consecutive edits made from 09:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC) to 15:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- 09:36, 9 August 2020 (UTC) ""
- 12:28, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Concept */"
- 12:29, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 12:53, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
- 15:40, 9 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Underlying concept of spirit */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
User was warned by Acroterion at 00:29 UTC today about the 3RR. User is persistently adding questionable content. JavaHurricane 06:25, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
User:U1Quattro reported by User:Davey2010 (Result: Withdrawn)
Page: Isuzu Giga ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: U1Quattro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 12:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Second generation (2015–present) */Your next revert would see you there, idiot"
- 12:40, 10 August 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 972141814 by Davey2010 (talk) Then replace it with a better one instead of mulling about it."
- 03:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Second generation (2015–present) */Replace poor image."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 12:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC) "/* Edit warring */ new section"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
User is repeatedly edit warring over the image and has also resorted to childish personal attacks, I've told U1 in edit summaries and on their talkpage to go to the talkpage but instead they keep reverting, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 12:54, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- This is much more concerning than a 3RR. This extremely combative user is currently engaged in several edit wars and has introduced numerous errors at Hino Ranger. The user also absolutely refuses to own their mistakes and, in so many words, says that if they offend anyone then stay out of their way "or they will bite." Mr.choppers | ✎ 02:20, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Withdrawn - User has since started an RFC on the talkpage, They really should've been blocked the moment this was reported because either way it was blatant edit warring,
- Honestly makes me feel like why do I bother ?, Why don't I just continue in the back and fourth edit warring until we both get bored as either way it won't make a blind bit of difference. (Ie they still won't be blocked for it) - The exact same happened with another user whom I reported - They were warned and then a year later warned again ..... just makes me feel like why the hell do I bother coming here anymore if nothing's ever done about it. –Davey2010Talk 11:16, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
User:Grufo reported by User:Vice regent (Result: )
Page: Rape in Islamic law ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Grufo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: 4 reverts are whether an [original research?] tag is justified on a piece of text that has been accused of being original research. 1 revert is a more substantial content revert.
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 12:49, August 9, 2020. A revert of this
- 20:31, August 9, 2020. A revert of this
- 02:14, August 10, 2020. A revert of this.
- 02:30, August 10, 2020. A revert of this.
- 03:26, August 10, 2020. A revert of this.
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Grufo was warned against edit warring on July 27. During the edit war above, Grufo warns others against edit-warring and tells them about 3RR. Clearly Grufo knows about our policy. Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Discussion at Talk:Rape_in_Islamic_law#More_original_research and Talk:Rape_in_Islamic_law#Fresh_start.
Comments: When Grufo inserted original research into the article, I started a discussion to point it out (Talk:Rape_in_Islamic_law#More_original_research). I let the material stay, but added an [original research?] tag until discussion was resolved. Grufo found that tag unacceptable and has edit-warred to have it removed while discussion is ongoing. Grufo is also subject to a complaint at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Hounding where three users (including me) have found their behavior to be problematic. Grufo has been warned by an admin not to make personal attacks against me.VR talk 13:38, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
User:PrincessConsuelaBH reported by User:JCBird1012 (Result: Blocked 31 hours)
Page: The Growlers ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: PrincessConsuelaBH (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 23:04, 6 August 2020
- 22:29, 8 August 2020
- 22:01, 9 August 2020
- 04:26, 10 August 2020
- 15:42, 10 August 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JCBird1012 (talk • contribs)
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: User:Whisperjanes notified the user of their problematic edits on their talk page show in this diff. I notified the user of potential edit warring on 9 August 2020 shown in this diff.
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: A section exists for this very topic on the article's talk page but the offending user has made no effort to attempt to justify their edits under that section nor have they provided descriptive edit summaries for their changes - reasoning for reverting this user's original edits were given via a edit summary (see this diff) and multiple users have reverted these edits from User:PrincessConsuelaBH on this article so far (showing that there's at least a small consensus amongst other editors active on this article)
Comments:
User has been notified on their talk page that they have been reported for edit warring. JCBird1012 (talk) 14:03, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 31 hours Salvio 21:22, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
User:212.15.177.12 reported by User:Ezhao02 (Result: No action)
Page: Croatian Democratic Union ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 212.15.177.12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 12:44, 10 August 2020 (UTC) "Unsourced changes"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
I believe this is the same user who was involved here. Ezhao02 (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Result: No action. Wait and see if this continues. So far it is only a single edit. EdJohnston (talk) 15:09, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
User:Tilakny reported by User:Joshua Jonathan (Result: Blocked)
Page: Hinduism ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Page: Vedanta ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Tilakny (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- Hinduism
- Vedanta
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [52]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Hinduism#Swaminarayan Hinduism
Comments:
@EdJohnston: Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:01, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- I issued the user's previous block on 7 August regarding the same article, Hinduism. After attempting to explain our policies I do not perceive that the message is getting through. It appears that it's time for a longer block. He is quite friendly and agreeable, he just keeps on reverting as though nothing had happened. EdJohnston (talk) 17:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- They removed the Vedanta-diffs diff; I've seen quite a number of disruptive editors over the years, but this is exceptional. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 17:48, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Just now the reported editor, Tilakny, edited this report to remove others' comments. I'm considering an indefinite block. He means well, he just doesn't seem to understand anything anyone says to him about his behavior. EdJohnston (talk) 17:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi I was just trying to remove the vedanta page edits as we clarified that in a talk page and it was not edit warring, so I don't understand why I'm getting banned for that I even explained why I did it when I removed it, Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tilakny (talk • contribs) 18:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Fourth revert for Vexanta. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:51, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- Blocked – Five days. Continued warring on the topic of Hinduism after a previous block. EdJohnston (talk) 22:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)