→User:Calmsurble reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: ): put in result |
Tag: Reply |
||
Line 309: | Line 309: | ||
:It looks like this user has been blocked two times in the past before for edit warring, according to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AAmoakgusd block log] – neither of which have successfully rectified the behaviour here. |
:It looks like this user has been blocked two times in the past before for edit warring, according to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AAmoakgusd block log] – neither of which have successfully rectified the behaviour here. |
||
:To the OP (User:Mutt Lunker): please provide diffs like I did above the next time you create an ANEW report. For a simple how-to on retrieving edit diffs, check out the [[Wikipedia:Simple diff and link guide]]. — [[User:AP 499D25|<span style="background:#1F6295;color:white;padding:1q 5q;border-radius:10q;font-family:Franklin Gothic, Verdana">AP 499D25</span>]] [[User talk:AP 499D25|<span style="color:#1A527D">(talk)</span>]] 10:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC) |
:To the OP (User:Mutt Lunker): please provide diffs like I did above the next time you create an ANEW report. For a simple how-to on retrieving edit diffs, check out the [[Wikipedia:Simple diff and link guide]]. — [[User:AP 499D25|<span style="background:#1F6295;color:white;padding:1q 5q;border-radius:10q;font-family:Franklin Gothic, Verdana">AP 499D25</span>]] [[User talk:AP 499D25|<span style="color:#1A527D">(talk)</span>]] 10:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC) |
||
::To add to the above, [[Special:Diff/1155614613|this]] is the only talk page edit I've ever seen from the user's contributions. — [[User:AP 499D25|<span style="background:#1F6295;color:white;padding:1q 5q;border-radius:10q;font-family:Franklin Gothic, Verdana">AP 499D25</span>]] [[User talk:AP 499D25|<span style="color:#1A527D">(talk)</span>]] 13:24, 23 June 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:24, 23 June 2023
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 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:177.9.116.128 reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: Blocked 24 hours)
Page: Uniformed services of the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 177.9.116.128 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 03:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1161017855 by BilCat (talk) No other page use the yellow flag, the blue one is the correct one"
- 02:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC) ""
- 02:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1161015732 by Untamed1910 (talk) Sop putting the wrong secretary of HHS flag!"
- 02:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160343306 by Cuprum17 (talk)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 03:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Uniformed services of the United States."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
- [1]
- 03:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Edit Warring */ new section"
Comments:
The ip has made 4 reverts on Uniformed services of the United States Untamed1910 (talk) 03:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Just check which pages use the yellow flag (File:US Secretary of Health and Human Services flag.svg) and the blue flag (File:Flag of the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services.svg). 177.9.116.128 (talk) 03:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Appears to be an easily verifiable correction of uncontentious fact with the unexplained reversions being disruptive. IP is correct, other relevant articles across multiple projects all use the blue flag. Becerra was sworn in in front of the blue flag. The yellow flag is unsourced, apart from stating that the source is the blue flag. I cannot find any evidence that that the yellow flag is ever used in any capacity. Literally just clicking the relevant link to the parent article would have seemingly clarified this. ~Swarm~ {sting} 16:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 24 hours "Correct" does not give you permission to edit war. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: true, which is why I didn’t unilaterally decline, 3RR is obviously a brightline with the caveat that DE is not an exception, and it’s procedurally routine to enforce it here. However I firmly believe that we should factor in reasonableness and fairness, and in this case you’re not just blocking someone who was “in the right”, you’re blocking a victim of disruptive editing who was being stonewalled for no reason whatsoever, who did not continue edit warring after the first warning was issued, and who did not continue getting disputed on any grounds whatsoever after he had clarified his edit in an edit summary. ~Swarm~ {sting} 03:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Then I wish you would have been clearer about that in your comment. Daniel Case (talk) 12:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Addendum: I have unblocked. Daniel Case (talk) 12:15, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Then I wish you would have been clearer about that in your comment. Daniel Case (talk) 12:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: true, which is why I didn’t unilaterally decline, 3RR is obviously a brightline with the caveat that DE is not an exception, and it’s procedurally routine to enforce it here. However I firmly believe that we should factor in reasonableness and fairness, and in this case you’re not just blocking someone who was “in the right”, you’re blocking a victim of disruptive editing who was being stonewalled for no reason whatsoever, who did not continue edit warring after the first warning was issued, and who did not continue getting disputed on any grounds whatsoever after he had clarified his edit in an edit summary. ~Swarm~ {sting} 03:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 24 hours "Correct" does not give you permission to edit war. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Ermenrich reported by User:Fries Montana (Result: OP blocked as a sock)
Page: Huns (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ermenrich (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:
- 14:31, 19 June 2023 (UTC) "/*Physical appearance*/ none of these images illustrate the actual European Huns discussed in the text - they are therefore misleading as they show Asian peoples associated by modern scholars with the Huns (and one contentious mention of Odoacer (not necessarily a Hun!) and the "Arpads are Attila's descendents" theory"
- 11:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "There was no consensus for including these images (and the racist caricature is a modern 19th century image)"
- 11:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "Information on other groups who may or may not be connected to the Huns does not belong in this section - use the talk page and gain consensus"
- 11:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "There is no consensus for these changes - “waiting a whole day” does not change that - get consensus on the talk page"
- 12:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC) "Not correct - if you keep this up, insisting on your addition rather than taking consensus into account, you will be reported for edit warring"
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff]
Comments:
- Comment: I reformatted this report - the last state it was can be found <here> or in the comments below. 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:9C5E:86B:78D9:3A49 (talk) 13:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
User Ermenrich, apparently a confirmed and otherwise legit user but with some strong belief regarding, at least, the Huns, is removing stuff from article against consensus. They have performed 4 reverts within 24 hours. Here are the diffs: 1 2, 3, 4, 5 Fries Montana (talk) 12:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This is not a properly filed report. Note that this user only reported me because I had said I was going to report them.
- I was removing images they had added, restoring this article state [2].
- FM has now reached 4rr this morning: [3], [4], [5], [6].
- Talk page discussion occurred here: talk:Huns#Let us add Odoacer' picture?
- I placed the warning on their talk page here: [7]
- I'll also note, two of the "4rr" that FM has posted are actually from the same revert of their additions.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Note that, after I reported here the update that they removed my warning against edit warring from their talk page, they also removed such update from this page 1. With total liberty, as if I command so I can. To the admins: Please, be careful to the wiki lawyering and other honey words and just zero in on the fact they have performed 4 reverts within 24 hours. And sorry for the quality of my report. But the gist and the evidence is there. Thanks. Fries Montana (talk) 12:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to note FM's stunning inability to assume good faith and incivility as well:
I didn't completely restore what Ermenrich removed because they later split their removals (whether cunningly or for whatever reason
[8],You are literally arguing against reality
[9]Who are you trying to fool?
[10],you have clearly attempted to push your POV in the article [...] Stop repeating meaningless things
[11]. On top of that, they insist that they have consensus when they clearly do not.--Ermenrich (talk) 12:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)- There is no incivility but a mental breakdown when a guy (you in this case) reverts four time in a day, denying that 2 against 1 is consensus and trying thereby to get me a headache. Sidenote Ermenrich just removed my notice he is discussed at ANI with the note "this is not going the way you think" 1 is this bossing around? Prophecy? Some hint that they will receive favor from admins? But you just need to look at the diffs I provided and nothing else. Fries Montana (talk) 12:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'm allowed to remove a talk page notice, see WP:OWNTALK. And I've seen no evidence of anyone agreeing with you since I raised my objections to those images.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Evidence is on talk page. Long established, very fair and esteemed user with dozens of precius, fundamental works at art and history related topics has agreed with my addition, has helped to edit the capion of the long established pictures you removed, and even agreed that Odoacer's picture would fit better than Attila's. Even so, I did not add Odoacer's picture, waiting for fuller discussion. Just as I waited 24 hours before reverting your action. You on the other hand take just a few minutes to revert to your own way, careless of consensus. You appeal to Andrew Lancaster, who marely opposed Odoacer's picture, which never did I add, much less restore! You manipulate edit comments, claiming stuff like that you removed Odocaer claims, which were never there, or that a picture of Attila from the Chronicon is "racist caricature". You, a few weeks ago, manipulated the article by excluding all East Asian haplogroups, by restricting all arguments in favor of East Asian Hun origin and giving huge weight to minority views (and I will soon prove this). Your conduct on that page is not admissible and is in contrast with your conduct elsewhere. But the matter here is just that you reverted too many times to have it your way, and now you deserve what wiki rules dictate in such case. Fries Montana (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- And, lucky is the one who has time to spare! Who can pick sentences from wider arguments like Ermernich is doing to make an argument against me! I don't have time right now, if I had I would provide diffs to prove Ermernirch's long established pov pushing at Huns. But let me plead to the admins here to just focus on evidence, not at Ermenrichs attempts at manipulation or anything else. Fries Montana (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'm allowed to remove a talk page notice, see WP:OWNTALK. And I've seen no evidence of anyone agreeing with you since I raised my objections to those images.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- There is no incivility but a mental breakdown when a guy (you in this case) reverts four time in a day, denying that 2 against 1 is consensus and trying thereby to get me a headache. Sidenote Ermenrich just removed my notice he is discussed at ANI with the note "this is not going the way you think" 1 is this bossing around? Prophecy? Some hint that they will receive favor from admins? But you just need to look at the diffs I provided and nothing else. Fries Montana (talk) 12:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'd like to note FM's stunning inability to assume good faith and incivility as well:
- Note that, after I reported here the update that they removed my warning against edit warring from their talk page, they also removed such update from this page 1. With total liberty, as if I command so I can. To the admins: Please, be careful to the wiki lawyering and other honey words and just zero in on the fact they have performed 4 reverts within 24 hours. And sorry for the quality of my report. But the gist and the evidence is there. Thanks. Fries Montana (talk) 12:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Fries Montana blocked per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dirk0001.-- Ponyobons mots 16:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Visokor reported by User:Gamowebbed (Result: No violation)
Page: Secret Invasion (TV series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Visokor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 09:19, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1161211473 by Gamowebbed (talk) WATCH THE FIRST EPISODE!"
- 09:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "It's true! A Skrull assumed Ross' form in the cold open of the first episode and Hill DIED at the end of the episode!"
- Consecutive edits made from 08:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC) to 08:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- 08:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "I had a feeling this was Smulders' final MCU contribution. and the Agent Ross we saw wasn't him at all."
- 08:31, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Premise */"
- 08:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Guest */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 09:19, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Secret Invasion (TV series)."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
User adding unsourced information, reverted twice. Already warned on talk. Gamowebbed (talk) 09:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. The first three edits, as tacitly acknowledged above, are not reverts. Daniel Case (talk) 12:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
User:86.157.182.97 / User:86.157.182.45 reported by User:Czello (Result: Range blocked for a week and article protected for two)
Page: Money in the Bank (2023) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 86.157.182.97 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
As 86.157.182.45
As 86.157.182.97
- 12:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC) ""
- 12:15, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Matches */"
- 12:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Matches */"
- 12:06, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Matches */"
- [18]
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 12:15, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Money in the Bank (2023)."
Comments:
Clearly the same user given near-identical IP addresses and identical edits. — Czello (music) 12:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of one week (86.157.182.0/25 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial))) and since other IPs seem to be adding unsourced content, I have also semi'ed the article for two weeks, i.e. through the event and a couple of days after. Daniel Case (talk) 12:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
User:TruthHurts22 reported by User:Czello (Result: Blocked indefinitely)
Page: List of regional Burning Man events (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: TruthHurts22 (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 18:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC) to 18:06, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- 18:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Austin */Added content"
- 18:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* North Texas */Content"
- 18:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Central Texas */Content"
- 18:06, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* San Antonio */"
- 18:03, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Austin */Added content"
- Consecutive edits made from 18:01, 21 June 2023 (UTC) to 18:02, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- 18:01, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* North Texas */Added important and missing information"
- 18:02, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Central Texas */Added content"
- 17:59, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Austin */Added important and missing content"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 18:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on List of regional Burning Man events."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
- Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:10, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Vipersage reported by User:BlueboyLINY (Result: Both blocked )
Page: CBS Broadcast Center (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Vipersage (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 16:06, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1161029839 by 69.122.243.48 (talk) Possible vandalism."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 23:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC) "Final Warning: Disruptive editing (RW 16.1)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
This user has been persistently reverting good edits, claiming they are vandalism when they are not. They have made no attempt to discuss their reasoning on the article talk page. BlueboyLINY (talk) 00:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
User BlueboyLINY has reverted several of my good edits which include reputable citations. It appears he has gone through my contributions and targetted my edits without cause or explanation. Worst cases of this have been CBS Broadcast Center, WRNJ, and WLNY-TV. It's clear this user has an ax to grind, but fails to explain what the reason for the disruptive edits are. --Vipersage (talk) 01:20, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Both editors blocked – for a period of 2 weeks As this is a partial block just from the article, both editors are free to resolve the dispute on the talk page, or find other articles to edit and improve. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:36, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Oz346 reported by User:Cossde (Result: Both blocked one week)
Page: List of attacks on civilians attributed to Sri Lankan government forces (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Oz346 (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: [22]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [23]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [24]
Comments:
I added the WP:NPOV tag as there is an ongoing disscussion in the talk page on the NPOV status of the sources used in the article. Oz346 has been activly reverting and removing this tag without discussing in the talk page. Cossde (talk) 14:21, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Cossde is challenging the status of a particular source, of whether it is a reliable source or not (a source that every other respondent on the talk page and other discussion board have endorsed as reliable - he is the sole editor disputing its status at present). This is NOT the same as a NPOV issue, the article is a simple list, and is written in a neutral POV. I have repeatedly told him that the correct template to use when questioning whether a source is RS or not is the following Template:Unreliable source?. But he has not heeded my comments nor the other editor who has also questioned the erroneous tag. He has also reverted the same page 3 separate times now since putting the incorrect tag over the last few days. Oz346 (talk) 17:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Both editors blocked – for a period of one week. Apparently, neither user learned anything from the last time they were blocked for edit-warring on a related article. Bbb23 (talk) 21:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Ash20055 reported by User:Ecrusized (Result: Indefinitely blocked)
Page: Simko Shikak revolt (1918–1922) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ash20055 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [25]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [29]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [30]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [31]
Comments:
Removing references, 3RR triggered, personal attacks in edit summary. Vandalism only account. Ecrusized (talk) 18:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Calmsurble reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: Blocked as a sock)
Page: Marcus Owen Bell (Calmsurble) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Calmsurble (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 04:53, 23 June 2023 (UTC) ""
- 04:50, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "I have peacefully given warnings to stop to the user Onorem. Do not alter House of Delegate information."
- 04:42, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "The user Onorem is Vandalizing this article Undid revision 1161505910 by Onorem (talk)"
- 04:28, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "The username BoyTheKingCanDance Vandalism. This user wants to refute the House of Delegates."
- 04:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "Deletion not needed vandalism prevention."
- 04:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "Vandalism protection. Proper sources on factual historical notable events."
- Consecutive edits made from 03:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC) to 03:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- 03:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "Another user is trying to vandalize this article. This article is factual notable under the House of Representatives."
- 03:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 04:56, 23 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Marcus Owen Bell (Calmsurble)."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [32]
Comments:
- Blocked as a sock by Samwalton9.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:18, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
User:Amoakgusd reported by User:Mutt Lunker (Result: )
Page: Scotland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Amoakgusd (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:
Return to warring an edit they have been implementing for months, receiving multiple previous warnings and blocks. Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment from uninvolved editor:
- This ANEW report is missing some diffs, but I'll provide some – this user has been making the exact same edit to the short description on the Scotland article over and over again for months now:
- 19:21, 24 February 2023
- 12:35, 1 March 2023
- 16:58, 13 March 2023
- 23:17, 19 March 2023
- 01:52, 20 March 2023
- 10:59, 20 March 2023
- 08:52, 22 March 2023
- 14:22, 18 May 2023
- 02:37, 23 June 2023
- It looks like this user has been blocked two times in the past before for edit warring, according to the block log – neither of which have successfully rectified the behaviour here.
- To the OP (User:Mutt Lunker): please provide diffs like I did above the next time you create an ANEW report. For a simple how-to on retrieving edit diffs, check out the Wikipedia:Simple diff and link guide. — AP 499D25 (talk) 10:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)