Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 11 discussion(s) to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive291) (bot |
Adding new report for NorthBySouthBaranof. (TW) |
||
Line 384: | Line 384: | ||
<!-- OPTIONAL: Several users left the same comment on the reason for edit pointing out that this article was totally WP:OR and lacked any reliable sources and moreover contradicted heavily everything on [[Salafi movement]] and [[Athari]] articles.~~~ --> |
<!-- OPTIONAL: Several users left the same comment on the reason for edit pointing out that this article was totally WP:OR and lacked any reliable sources and moreover contradicted heavily everything on [[Salafi movement]] and [[Athari]] articles.~~~ --> |
||
== [[User:NorthBySouthBaranof]] reported by [[User:Winkelvi]] (Result: ) == |
|||
;Page: {{pagelinks|Shaun King (activist)}} |
|||
;User being reported: {{userlinks|NorthBySouthBaranof}} |
|||
;Previous version reverted to: |
|||
;Diffs of the user's reverts: |
|||
# {{diff|oldid=677087592|diff=677088022|label=Consecutive edits made from 01:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC) to 01:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} |
|||
## {{diff2|677087700|01:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "As per [[WP:BLP]], you are removing King's own statement about his ethnicity from the lede, which is simply not on. You are the one edit-warring out well-sourced information." |
|||
## {{diff2|677088022|01:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Questions regarding race */ Note that he has understood this since childhood." |
|||
# {{diff|oldid=677087347|diff=677087523|label=Consecutive edits made from 01:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC) to 01:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} |
|||
## {{diff2|677087399|01:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} ""Faced questions" is not a neutral way of stating the issue." |
|||
## {{diff2|677087460|01:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Personal life */ He is biracial, as per his statement." |
|||
## {{diff2|677087523|01:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Personal life */ This is entirely [[WP:UNDUE]] and inflammatory in its false inference." |
|||
# {{diff|oldid=677071295|diff=677079987|label=Consecutive edits made from 23:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC) to 00:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} |
|||
## {{diff2|677071793|23:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Family history */ And this is why we don't write biographies based on 24 hours' worth of partisan-fueled news-cycle stories that don't turn out to be accurate or fair. Stripping down." |
|||
## {{diff2|677071956|23:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}} "This disputed claim by a partisan outlet should not dominate the lede of the article about King." |
|||
## {{diff2|677072035|23:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}} "Nor should we include this inflammatory (and apparently false) comparison." |
|||
## {{diff2|677072777|23:35, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Family history */ Improve" |
|||
## {{diff2|677073207|23:40, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Family history */ He ''is'' biracial, as per his own statements, and there is no proof or significant evidence to the contrary." |
|||
## {{diff2|677079987|00:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "Add Washington Post reference" |
|||
# {{diff2|677043692|19:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)}} "rm inappropriate non-reliable source and material sourced to it." |
|||
;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: |
|||
# {{diff2|677087811|01:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "Caution: Unconstructive editing on [[Shaun King (activist)]]. ([[WP:TW|TW]])" |
|||
# {{diff2|677087918|01:46, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Shaun_King_(activist)&oldid=677087700&diff=prev]]. ([[WP:TW|TW]])" |
|||
;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: |
|||
# {{diff2|677081962|00:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Utterly terrible biography */ comment" |
|||
# {{diff2|677088349|01:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Utterly terrible biography */ comment" |
|||
# {{diff2|677088386|01:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Utterly terrible biography */ indent" |
|||
;<u>Comments:</u> |
|||
Editor is not discussing effectively, rather, is choosing to gut the article of anything mentioning the current controversy over the article subject, editing disruptively, and edit warring over same. -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">[[User:Winkelvi|WV]]</span> ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">[[User_talk:Winkelvi|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Winkelvi|✓]]</span> 01:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:52, 21 August 2015
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
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.
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. |
|
User:Ferret reported by User:151.252.246.63 (Result: Stale)
Page: The Elder Scrolls Online (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ferret (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [1]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7]
Comments:
The numbers presented in cited article are unverifibiable and come from unreliable source. Unfortunately, editor(s) in question disregard this. 151.252.246.63 (talk) 10:54, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Addendum:
Considering Gameindustry.biz as "reliable source" this is email i received directly from them:
Dan Pearson <contact>
10:10 AM (3 hours ago)
to me, contact
Hi - as you can see in the image in the article, the data comes from Superdata. You'll need to speak to them to establish any further details on how they sourced it, although a basic explanation is included beneath the chart.
Best, Dan
Dan Pearson European Editor, GamesIndustry.biz Part of the Gamer Network www.gamer-network.net
Mobile: +44 (0)7967 569 692 Office: 3rd Floor, 1 Grand Parade, Brighton, BN2 9QB, UK.
On 17 August 2015 at 23:40, -------------------- wrote:
Hi.
Since numbers from this article http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-07-18-the-old-republic-earned-usd165-million-last-year-report are being cited as verifiable facts, could you please explain to me which measures have you taken to verify numbers in that article.
Note that your answer will be used as arguement in a dispute.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.252.246.63 (talk) 11:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
He reverted back it again [8] --User:151.252.246.63 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.39.147.40 (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Exxcalibur808 reported by User:MaxBrowne (Result: Stale)
Page: Viswanathan Anand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Exxcalibur808 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [14]
Attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [15]
Comments:
User has repeatedly attempted to introduce the subjective assessment "one of the greatest chess players of all time" into the lead section of the article, despite general agreement on the article's talk page that this constitutes puffery. The sources provided are only other people's subjective opinions of the player; they should not be treated as objective facts. User has edit warred aggressively and refused to compromise or acknowledge the concerns of the other editors in the talk page discussion. User has also taken to admin shopping, messaging four separate admins to try to push his own POV ([16], [17], [18], [19]) instead of following proper process. Also, "I feel strongly about it" is not a valid argument to justify edit warring. MaxBrowne (talk) 01:13, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Stale, user is obviously in the wrong with their behavior but they haven't reverted in over 24 hours. Re-report if necessary. Swarm ♠ 02:47, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- I have temporarily FP'd this article until the issue is resolved. Without prejudice to another admin lifting or shortening the protection as they see fit. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
User:1.186.199.135 reported by User:Kailash29792 (Result: Page protected)
- Page
- Baahubali: The Conclusion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- 1.186.199.135 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
Even though the film is yet to begin production, he tries to create an article for it, against my orders. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Boy Named Stu reported by User:Randykitty (Result: 31h)
Page: List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom by date of birth (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Boy Named Stu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [20]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [26], [27], and [28].
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [29]
Comments:
I added text to this level 1 warning explaining that reverting a community decision reached after an AfD is considered disruptive editing and asked the editor to stop reverting. --Randykitty (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- Blocked for 31h. Article reverted to AfD result. Black Kite (talk) 17:33, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
User:77.130.193.59 reported by User:Shreerajtheauthor (Result: Blocked 24 hours)
- Page
- Sadio Mané (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- 77.130.193.59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 18:38, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "There is no fucking transaction, reported of otherwise"
- 18:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC) ""
- 18:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC) ""
- 18:25, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676875063 by Shreerajtheauthor How dare you accuse me of vandalism, you stupid prat?"
- 18:16, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676874342 by Shreerajtheauthor When does a rumour become a transaction, FFS."
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 18:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Sadio Mané. (TW)"
- 18:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676876387 by 77.130.193.59 (talk). Do not revert talkpage warnings on Wiki or get into edit wars. There are now 3 users who have warned you."
- 18:36, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Sadio Mané. (TW)"
- 19:17, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676877613 by 77.130.193.59 (talk). Please do not blank your talkpage. This is a forum for discussing edits."
- 19:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Please see warning given your unconstructive edits"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
User has received 2 warnings by me, and a third by bot. Have also placed 3rr template on page. 3 OTHER users have also warned not to insult other editors. User has also blanked talkpage with Warnings given to subject. Shreerajtheauthor (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Spshu reported by User:Mdrnpndr (Result: )
- Page
- Template:Corus Entertainment (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Spshu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- Consecutive edits made from 15:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC) to 15:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
- 15:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676839369 by 41.142.99.147 (talk)"
- 15:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676804716 by Mdrnpndr (talk) yes it does there are two sources in the article"
- 15:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC) "return to source"
- 21:03, 18 August 2015 (UTC) "restore structure sourced in Corus article"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 18:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Re: cartt.ca */ Comment"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 09:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* New structure */"
- Comments:
This user has been edit warring against not only my own edits (only two here) but also those of multiple IPs. This user was also recently reported for edit warring against another user across multiple related articles. Mdrnpndr (talk) 09:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Mdrnpndr was the one [Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:ViperSnake151_.26_User:Mdrnpndr_reported_by_User:Spshu_.28Result:_.29 reported for edit warring and disruptive editing] across multiple related article. I attempt first a RfPP to stop edit warring so discussion can occur. As spelled out in the above counter charges, Mdrnpndr missed used templates slapping several on my talk page instead of engaging in discussion to harassment me. While I tried talking him down what was a template were questioning inferring that I should not make any judgements. His edit match (as detailed in the previous ANI/ER) as textbook example of WP:DISRUPTSIGNS: "An example is repeated deletion of reliable sources posted by other editors." Which is one of the thing I was doing taking a media source and replacing a primary (PR) source. He removed his notification of that report here as Wikipedia:Harassment.
- Two pages were eventually page protected and when I attempt a merge discussion thus needing an administrator to edit to post the notices to the lock page, he followed me there to oppose posting the merger discussion notice. It was I who started talk page discussion to resolve the argument not Mdrnpndr. And your post is basically an order. As you previous said in reversing summaries corporate structure at that point not yet known then the next reversal edit summary: "The source you mentioned does not even remotely support such an organizational structure. Furthermore, your proposed template structuring is highly misleading." It isn't misleading it is what the source states up to a point and is not far from what you are reverting back to.
- His so called "Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning", I assume his is supposed warning. It is his person assurance about a disputed source, cartt.ca, not any warning.
- Also, his "Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page" is 3 minutes before his 09:42, 20 August 2015 Notifying me about this edit warring noticeboard discussion. I have made no edits to the template (or any other article for that matter) in those three minutes.
- Notices to Mdrnpndr
- Diffs of notice of disruptive editing
- Diffs of notice of harassment/intimation/over use of templates
- 20:18, 16 August 2015
- 04:06, 17 August 2015 ViperSnake151 even warns him about using templates with a regular Spshu (talk) 13:53, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
User:FreeatlastChitchat reported by User:Human3015 (Result: Page protected)
- Page
- Pakistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- FreeatlastChitchat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 06:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Shahbazmalik97 (talk) to last revision by SheriffIsInTown. (TW)"
- 09:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676970969 by Human3015 (talk)well thank GOD wikipedia does not run on Pakistani laws lol. Anyway your revert is POV and against WP policies."
- 10:07, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676975378 by Human3015 (talk)"
- 10:15, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 676980191 by Human3015 (talk)"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 10:10, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* 3RR */ new section"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 09:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Ahmadis and Islam */ new section"
- 09:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Ahmadis and Islam */ further"
- 10:15, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Ahmadis and Islam */ cm"
- 10:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Ahmadis and Islam */ refs"
- Comments:
Clear violation of 3rr. His first revert of another editor was abuse of rollback, last 2 reverts were without edit summary. Not given any valid rationale for his reverts on talk page as of now. Human3015Send WikiLove 10:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- BOOMERANG:
The reverts in question don't fall under the 3 Revert Rule as they are clear vandalism. The content issue under question is whether "Ahmadies" can be called muslims or not. This issue was resolved (After lengthy debate) more than 4 years ago. There are MORE THAN A DOZEN discussions on wikipedia which resulted in 'CLEAR CONSENSUS' that ahmadies are muslims. Three such discussions are present in the Pakistan TP archives. However there is daily vandalism against Ahmadi articles where someone either inserts derogatory slurs into the article or removes the words "muslim" to replace them with "non muslim". Therefore reverting such vandalism is routine to me and many other editors who keep watch on these pages(A quick look at the pages, Ahmadiyyah, Qadiani, Islam, Pakistan, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and their related Talk Pages will confirm that they are routinely vandalised). Usually I don't bother to report such vandals as they either get bored or just get tired. However when an editor starts a TP discussion about the edits I take time to explain to him the consensus and guide him towards the relevant discussion which are in archives. If you look at the Pakistan TP you will see that I guided Human but he just keeps on restoring the vandalised version of the article. Therefore the 3Revert rule does not apply here.
P.S Human has been stalking/hounding me for some time. The last time he tried to report me(I dont think that discussion has even been archived yet lol) an admin admonished him saying
Human, looking at the discussion, you seem to be misrepresenting the situation. The previous RfC did yield a consensus "that in some way the infobox should recognise the region is disputed". You're reverting based on claims that "there is "no consesnus" to add it to infobox" and that he should "let the ongoing RfC on same issue be closed". On its face this seems to be nothing less than a flagrant misrepresentation of the situation, as the current RfC is a follow up to determine how exactly the infobox should say it, not on whether it can be added to begin with. Furthermore, your argument that AlbinoFerret's RfC close is somehow invalid because he's not an administrator and/or because he interpreted a "rough consensus". This is simply wrong. As an uninvolved editor in good standing, he was completely and entirely within his rights to close the RfC, and misrepresenting consensus in an edit war is nothing short of disruptive. Yes, WP:BRD is the appropriate means of going about having one's edit reverted, but I honestly can't see any legitimate reasoning being given for the revert aside from a false procedural concern. I'm not sure what you're doing Human, but stop. Let me further clarify, since you apparently aren't particularly deterred by the threat of a block (based on your above comment): yes, your opponents may absolutely be blocked alongside you in some of these situations, but given your prior and current incidents of edit warring it's difficult not to see a problematic behavioral pattern on your part, and the next block you receive will be substantially lengthier, especially given the leniency I've opted for regarding these last two reports. Stop edit warring. Last warning from me before the consequences start getting serious. Swarm ♠ 06:56, 18 August 2015 (UTC)FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 10:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Result
Page protected 24 hours. Please don't bring external conflicts into Wikipedia. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 11:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
- Comment
Georgewilliamherbert can you lengthen the time of protection to 72 hours? You can see that not many edits have been made recently except vandalism. If any major edit is required quickly we can always request it. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 11:04, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
User:95.114.47.113/User:95.113.222.93 reported by User:Toddy1 (Result: 31h)
Page: Aleksandr Dugin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 95.114.47.113 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)/95.113.222.93 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: Revision as of 17:52, 17 August 2015, by Special:Contributions/95.114.29.174
The editor uses different IPs different days, and is edit-warring to change "fascist" to [[far right|right-wing extremist]] as well as other changes.
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 15:39, 19 August 2015 by Special:Contributions/95.113.222.93
- 08:19, 20 August 2015 by Special:Contributions/95.114.47.113
- 08:53, 20 August 2015 by Special:Contributions/95.114.47.113
- 09:22, 20 August 2015 by Special:Contributions/95.114.47.113
- 09:31, 20 August 2015 by Special:Contributions/95.114.47.113
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 09:28, 20 August 2015
There have been discussions of whether it is right to call Dugin "fascist" on the article talk page. The IP editor knows about talk pages (he/she has made posts on the article talk page on other aspects of Dugin].
One of his her changes is to insert Dugin also has a good relationsship to the Turkish national-communist [[Workers Party (Turkey)|Workers Party]] in front of existing citations, and then place a citation for the new information at the end of the list of citation. I have tried explaining nicely on his talk page that when he/she adds new information to articles, he should do so after the existing citations, not before.[30] -- Toddy1 (talk) 11:28, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Comments:
User:87.92.157.171 reported by User:Wesley Mouse (Result: )
- Page
- Eurovision Song Contest 2016 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- 87.92.157.171 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 15:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Bidding phase */"
- 15:12, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Bidding phase */"
- 11:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Bidding phase */"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 15:09, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "General note: Formatting, date, language, etc (Manual of style) on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. (TW)"
- 15:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. (TW)"
- 15:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Vandalism on Eurovision Song Contest 2016. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
The IP keeps on removing the {{dagger}} template, that was placed there by The Rambling Man due to WP:ACCESS. Wes Mouse ✒ 15:44, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
User:Shokatz reported by User:Tuvixer (Result: 31h)
Page: Serbs of Croatia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Shokatz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [35]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [36]
Comments:
After repeated pleading to stop edit warring he did not stop. Also he ignores the arguments on the talk page and just repeats the same thing all over again. He has broken the 3RR. He is introducing subjective text to the article without any sources and is removing valid sources just because they say something what he is not saying.
Two users reported by User:CorporateM (Result: )
- Page: Reynolds and Reynolds (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported: Flaco1262 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- User being reported: 206.180.44.25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
It came to my attention that there are some slow-rolling edit-wars on this page, over this edit being the most recent and previously it was over using Glassdoor as a source.[37]
The edit-warring appears to be primarily between an SPA @Flaco1262: that keeps adding poorly-sourced negative material, and an IP 206.180.44.25 that keeps removing it. The IP is registered to the company network and is most likely a current employee, while knowing some context here, the SPA is likely a disgruntled former employee. I have a confirmed, disclosed COI, and each of the other accounts have a very probable COI.
Not sure if anyone has passed 3RR, but it could use more eyeballs. I see @TaqPol: threw in a revert as well. Although I wouldn't have restored primary sources, blogs, etc. he/she is probably the only actual disinterested editor. Their edit summary seems to be encouraging discussion, but one never took place. CorporateM (Talk) 20:39, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Comments:
Well I definitely initiated a discussion at User_talk:206.180.44.25#Your edit on Reynolds and Reynolds and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_191#Reynolds_and_Reynolds but it didn't exactly go down well. I would assume good faith for now though I suppose the page and/or the user might be worth monitoring. — TaqPol talk contrib 23:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
User talk:216.177.129.238 reported by User:Sakimonk (Result: )
Page: Salafi Theology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: User talk:216.177.129.238
Previous version reverted to: original version
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [45]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Several users left the same comment on the reason for edit pointing out that this article was totally WP:OR and lacked any reliable sources and moreover contradicted heavily everything on Salafi movement and Athari articles. Also the talk page seems to have been lost in this haze of edits.
Comments:
User:NorthBySouthBaranof reported by User:Winkelvi (Result: )
- Page
- Shaun King (activist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- NorthBySouthBaranof (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- Consecutive edits made from 01:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC) to 01:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
- 01:44, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "As per WP:BLP, you are removing King's own statement about his ethnicity from the lede, which is simply not on. You are the one edit-warring out well-sourced information."
- 01:47, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Questions regarding race */ Note that he has understood this since childhood."
- Consecutive edits made from 01:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC) to 01:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
- 01:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC) ""Faced questions" is not a neutral way of stating the issue."
- 01:42, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Personal life */ He is biracial, as per his statement."
- 01:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Personal life */ This is entirely WP:UNDUE and inflammatory in its false inference."
- Consecutive edits made from 23:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC) to 00:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
- 23:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Family history */ And this is why we don't write biographies based on 24 hours' worth of partisan-fueled news-cycle stories that don't turn out to be accurate or fair. Stripping down."
- 23:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "This disputed claim by a partisan outlet should not dominate the lede of the article about King."
- 23:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "Nor should we include this inflammatory (and apparently false) comparison."
- 23:35, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Family history */ Improve"
- 23:40, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Family history */ He is biracial, as per his own statements, and there is no proof or significant evidence to the contrary."
- 00:39, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "Add Washington Post reference"
- 19:26, 20 August 2015 (UTC) "rm inappropriate non-reliable source and material sourced to it."
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 01:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Shaun King (activist). (TW)"
- 01:46, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on [[46]]. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 00:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Utterly terrible biography */ comment"
- 01:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Utterly terrible biography */ comment"
- 01:49, 21 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Utterly terrible biography */ indent"
- Comments:
Editor is not discussing effectively, rather, is choosing to gut the article of anything mentioning the current controversy over the article subject, editing disruptively, and edit warring over same. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)