Future Perfect at Sunrise (talk | contribs) |
User:LPRABCMP reported by User:Jakew |
||
Line 774: | Line 774: | ||
:<s>User warned. I didn't see any previous attempt at engaging this new user in talk or warn him, so I think an immediate block would not be warranted at this point. However, I'd be for blocking immediately if he resumes. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 10:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)</s> |
:<s>User warned. I didn't see any previous attempt at engaging this new user in talk or warn him, so I think an immediate block would not be warranted at this point. However, I'd be for blocking immediately if he resumes. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 10:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)</s> |
||
::Strike that. Blocking 24h. My bad for not checking his talk page history. He was indeed warned, removed the warning, and went on edit-warring. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 11:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC) |
::Strike that. Blocking 24h. My bad for not checking his talk page history. He was indeed warned, removed the warning, and went on edit-warring. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 11:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
== [[User:LPRABCMP]] reported by [[User:Jakew]] (Result: ) == |
|||
*[[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|Three-revert rule]] violation on |
|||
{{Article|Circumcision}}. {{3RRV|LPRABCMP}}: Time reported: 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*Previous version reverted to: [http://http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&oldid=192009116 06:03, February 17, 2008] <!-- This is MANDATORY. --> |
|||
<!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert |
|||
and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to.--> |
|||
<!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. See Help:Diff if you do not know what a diff is. --> |
|||
*1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=192137890&oldid=192045709 20:58, February 17, 2008] (as [[User:70.114.38.167]]) |
|||
*2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=192139373&oldid=192138497 21:04, February 17, 2008] |
|||
*3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=192253305&oldid=192235418 07:08, February 18, 2008] |
|||
*4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcision&diff=192256654&oldid=192255057 07:36, February 18, 2008] |
|||
*Diff of 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LPRABCMP&oldid=192140408 21:09, February 17, 2008] |
|||
Persistent edit warrior, as can be seen by viewing the page histories. User first appeared as {{3RRV|70.114.38.167}}, then [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Circumcision&curid=3489028&diff=192139573&oldid=192138459 signed] one of the IP's contributions using the LPRABCMP account. [[User:Jakew|Jakew]] ([[User talk:Jakew|talk]]) 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Example == |
== Example == |
Revision as of 12:16, 18 February 2008
Administrators: Please do not hesitate to move disputes to user talk pages.
Your report will not be dealt with if you do not follow the instructions for new reports correctly.
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. |
|
Violations
- Please place new reports at the BOTTOM. If you do not see your report, you can search the archives for it.
User:Strider12 reported by User:MastCell (Result: Warning)
- Three-revert rule violation on
David Reardon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Strider12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 23:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 17:59, 13 February 2008
- 1st revert: 20:22, 13 February 2008 (undoes prior edit)
- 2nd revert: 22:37, 13 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 21:19, 14 February 2008
- 4th revert: 22:58, 14 February 2008 (reverts this edit from the previous day)
- 5th revert: 23:29, 14 February 2008: undoes the immediately preceding edit
- Diff of 3RR warning: User is well aware of WP:3RR and has previously been blocked for violating it.
These are 5 reverts in just over 24 hours. Given this editor's prior block for edit-warring on this and the related abortion and mental health article, and her long-term focus on edit-warring on these ttwo articles going right up to 3 reverts per day on many occasions, I'm bringing it here as a clear violation of the spirit of WP:3RR. Note that IronAngelAlice (talk · contribs) has also been edit-warring on this article, largely over tags; though I don't see >3 reverts on her part, I'll leave the disposition of that up to the reviewing admin. MastCell Talk 23:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- No violation here due to timing - issued another warning. Stifle (talk) 16:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Mathewignash reported by User:Apostrophe (Result: No violation)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Silverbolt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Mathewignash (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 02:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 10:19, 6 February 2008
- 1st revert: 01:58, 14 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 10:27, 14 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 21:11, 14 February 2008
- 4th revert: 23:56, 14 February 2008
- 5th revert: 01:37, 15 February 2008
Revert warring over adding a POV (or weasel wordy) sentence to the article. ' 02:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Diff #2 isn't a revert and #4 is a different user. Only three actual reverts == no violation. Stifle (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- How is Diff #2 not a revert? He's changing it. To say the same thing. ' 17:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:JAF1970 reported by User:MrStalker (Result: 12 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Template:Sim series (edit | [[Talk:Template:Sim series|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). JAF1970 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 12:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 01:36, 15 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 01:12, 14 February 2008
Revert war between JAF1970 and Sillygostly. MrStalker (talk) 12:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Sillygostly reported by User:MrStalker (Result: 12 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Template:Sim series (edit | [[Talk:Template:Sim series|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Sillygostly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 12:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 14:48, 21 January 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 01:12, 14 February 2008
Revert war between JAF1970 and Sillygostly. MrStalker (talk) 12:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Tasc0 reported by User:Same As It Ever Was (Result:No violation, rollback removed)
- Three-revert rule violation on Bangin' on Wax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). User was previously reported by User:Chubbles for the same thing on Bloods & Crips. I tried to explain that the info on the article is not about the album but the group yet he continues to revert.Same As It Ever Was (talk) 16:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Only two reverts of late. I have removed this user's rollback privileges, though, as it is being used inappropriately. --B (talk) 19:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Secret2 reported by User:Mhking (Result: 48 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Star Trek (film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Secret2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 18:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 03:02, 15 February 2008
- 1st revert: 11:40, 15 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 12:08, 15 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 12:22, 15 February 2008
- 4th revert: 12:27, 15 February 2008
- 5th revert: 12:37, 15 February 2008
- 6th revert: 12:50, 15 February 2008
- 7th revert: 12:53, 15 February 2008
- 8th revert: 12:55, 15 February 2008
- 9th revert: 13:00, 15 February 2008
- 10th revert: 13:18, 15 February 2008
- 11th revert: 13:21, 15 February 2008
- 12th revert: 13:44, 15 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 12:41, 15 February 2008
POV, OR edits by Secret2, reverted by multiple persons. Secret2 insists his view should be included, and calls others reversions vandalism. Mhking (talk) 18:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Blocked. Some other editors who were removing this nonsense came close to 3RR, but it's so obviously inappropriate that I don't think it's appropriate to block anyone else. --B (talk) 19:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Gregs the baker reported by User:zogonthetyne (Result: Reported user already blocked)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Geordie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Gregs the baker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 19:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Content is being removed with a rationale on Talk:Geordie yet the user in question refuses to read the rationale and is repeatedly reverting without considering anything. An Ip is also involved, already been warned by an admin.
- Diff of 3RR warning: User talk:Gregs the baker, user now blocked for 31 hours. Zogonthetyne (talk) 19:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:88.64.91.102 reported by User:Georgette2 (Result: 12h block)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Futurama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 88.64.91.102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 13:33, 14 February 2008
- 1st revert: 20:16, 15 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 20:25, 15 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 20:30, 15 February 2008
- 4th revert: 21:12, 15 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: [12]
This IP address continually changed the name of the theme music composer. He/She did not provide any sources for these changes. Also, called users who reverted his/her edits idiots. Georgette2 (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- IP blocked for 12 hours, although it appears to be dynamic so other measures may be needed if edit warring continues. CIreland (talk) 21:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Please block 84.56.61.154 too. It is obviously the same user that was just blocked. See [13]. Also, this IP consistently attacks users who have reverted its changes [14]. Georgette2 (talk) 22:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
User:70.188.184.84 reported by User:Barek (Result: 3 day block)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Asia (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 70.188.184.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 04:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 23:34, 15 February 2008
- 1st revert: 00:02, 16 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 00:13, 16 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 00:18, 16 February 2008
- 4th revert: 02:53, 16 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 00:20, 16 February 2008
Ongoing revert war by anon regarding inclusion of a fan-site of which he is president. Aside from the WP:COI issue, it's inclusion is debated (confusingly) on the article's talk page - with no aparent concensus. Anon later made, then retracted legal threats. Note, it appears that one other user, while battling the anon, has also violated 3RR on that page. - Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Blocked him for 3 days due to his repeat offender nature. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 04:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Vera from upstairs reported by User:Southern Texas (Result: No action taken; see below )
- Three-revert rule violation on
Chris Dodd presidential campaign, 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Vera from upstairs (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 04:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: [15]
- Diff of 3RR warning: [20] (removed 1 minute later)
User keeps removing images violating 3RR on the article. STX 04:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
So a user can violate 3RR for no good reason other than to disrupt and they aren't blocked? --STX 05:39, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Vera from upstairs just violated the 1RR sanction --STX 19:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Southern Texas reported by User:Vera from upstairs (Result:1RR enforced )
- Three-revert rule violation on
Chris Dodd presidential campaign, 2008 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Southern Texas (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 04:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: [21]
- Diff of 3RR warning: [26]
User keeps adding random pictures to article. Vera from upstairs (talk) 04:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- This is not a 3RR violation. The images are not "random" but have a purpose in the article.--STX 04:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Since blocking you both would be counterproductive, as you wouldn't be able to discuss changes, I've decided instead to give you guys one more chance. You're now on the 1 revert rule; if you revert one another again, without having the other's consent to change the page, you'll be handed a twenty-four hour block. I'm hoping this way you guys can discuss the issue at hand without edit warring yourselves to oblivion.
- Again; discuss it amongst yourselves. Try to find a compromise. Do not, under any circumstances, start reverting the article or you will be blocked. If you can't settle the dispute yourselves, ask for a third opinion or seek dispute resolution. Thank you. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 05:40, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- If she keeps reverting then she will be blocked. Please do your best to compromise. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 05:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note: Both users have been blocked for violating 1RR. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 20:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Zipgun reported by User:Tony Sidaway (Result: 15 day block (aggravated 3rr))
- Three-revert rule violation on
Ashes to Ashes (TV series) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Zipgun (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 18:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 17:29, 16 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 17:47
User repeatedly inserting content. There have been many more reverts in the past day or so but this is the most recent set of four. Tony Sidaway 18:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Cumulus Clouds reported by User:BQZip01 (Result:warning for both)
- Three-revert rule violation on
BQ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Cumulus Clouds (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 19:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Request reversion to this version: [27]
Cumulus Clouds apparently doesn't want anything in this article that anyone could deem offensive. Numerous references for such an inclusion have been provided, but rejected by this editor. I am willing to come to some sort of compromise, but Wikipedia is not censored.
- "...the rule does not convey an entitlement to revert three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique...Editors may still be blocked even if they have made three or fewer reverts in a 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive."
- "It is disruptive to remove statements that are sourced reliably, written in a neutral narrative, and pertain to the subject at hand."
As such, this is a violation of WP:3RR, et al. — BQZip01 — talk 19:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- WP:3RR applies to more than 3 reverts made in a 24 hour period. I only count two. Sorry. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- (e/c)Please read WP:3RR and the quote above from it. — BQZip01 — talk 20:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Well, I'll leave it up for these the community to decide then. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- BQZip is correct that Cumulus Clouds is edit warring; however, he/she is equally guilty of edit warring. I'm unwilling to block only one of you, so I'm watchlisting the article and will block either of you if you revert again. Stop reverting and talk this out. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- PLEASE watchlist the page! I have tried various versions with requested materials only to have my changes reverted repeatedly. I have responded to every request on the talk page with no response. What am I supposed to do? He reverts repeatedly, I request assistance, and you say to leave the page alone until we come to an agreement? No agreement is possible when another party won't change anything. This doesn't solve anything. — BQZip01 — talk 21:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- BQZip is correct that Cumulus Clouds is edit warring; however, he/she is equally guilty of edit warring. I'm unwilling to block only one of you, so I'm watchlisting the article and will block either of you if you revert again. Stop reverting and talk this out. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Edit-warring IP Special:Contributions/62.47.23.131, Special:Contributions/62.47.2.150, Special:Contributions/62.47.25.79, Special:Contributions/62.47.23.131, Special:Contributions/62.47.13.60 (current), etc. (Telekom Austria) reported by User:Jayen466 (Result:protected)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Osho (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). May be IPs of Semitransgenic (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 20:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 17:48
Multiple reverts to POV-driven new wordings. Some are badly sourced, or do not accurately reflect the sources quoted. RfCs placed on Talk:Osho page. Jayen466 20:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- As this is a full-out edit war, with multiple IPs (though likely the same person) on one side and multiple editors on the other, I'm fully protecting the article. Please discuss this matter on the talk page and come to a consensus. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Saythetruth reported by User:Ben Tillman (Result:12 block)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Creation myth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Saythetruth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 20:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 05:56, 17 February 2008
- 1st revert: 11:31, 16 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 05:07, 17 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 05:37, 17 February 2008
- 4th revert: 06:02, 17 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 05:55, 17 February 2008
Despite numerous requests, both in the edit summary and users talk page, to try and reach consensus on the talk page and reversions by at least 3 editors, this user continues to insert new (and dubious) information into the article. I'm not sure if I got the diffs in the right order, but it's clear what is happening in the article history. Thanks, Ben (talk) 20:29, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- These diffs show your own edits, not SaytheTruth's. Please fix this report (note that your report must show at least four reverts, unless there is a reason you think action is needed despite no technical 3RR vio) or submit a new one. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Saythetruth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) blocked for 12 hours for edit warring. CIreland (talk) 20:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ben Tillman, please be careful not to edit war yourself, even if you don't techincally violate 3RR. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 21:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks ... but do I revert back to the original now? Also, I'm not sure how I was edit warring. I'm not arguing that I was or was not, but I thought the idea was the stop at 3 and head over here, so am I confused? Ben (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- I would suggest you start up a discussion on the talk page; if your preferred version has consensus, someone else will make the edit. CIreland (talk) 21:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- So just to clarify, despite other editors making the same reverts, I can't just revert back to the original now? I have to wait until someone else sees the talk page? That seems a bit unnecessary .. especially for a page that doesn't get a lot of traffic. Ben (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- To clarify: Saythetruth (talk · contribs) being blocked does not imply that the content of his edits was incorrect, only that his methods were inappropriate. It should be established by discussion whether or not the content was incorrect. CIreland (talk) 21:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- So just to clarify, despite other editors making the same reverts, I can't just revert back to the original now? I have to wait until someone else sees the talk page? That seems a bit unnecessary .. especially for a page that doesn't get a lot of traffic. Ben (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- I would suggest you start up a discussion on the talk page; if your preferred version has consensus, someone else will make the edit. CIreland (talk) 21:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks ... but do I revert back to the original now? Also, I'm not sure how I was edit warring. I'm not arguing that I was or was not, but I thought the idea was the stop at 3 and head over here, so am I confused? Ben (talk) 21:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ben Tillman, please be careful not to edit war yourself, even if you don't techincally violate 3RR. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 21:01, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Hempbilly reported by User:Jasont82 (Result: 24 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Scott_Ritter. Hempbilly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: [60]
- 1st revert: [61]
- 2nd revert: [62]
- 3rd revert: [63]
- 4th revert: [64]
- 5th revert: [65]
- 6th revert: [66]
- 3RR Notice: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AHempbilly&diff=191931176&oldid=191929875
Basically a good ol' edit war. -- JTHolla! 21:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note Although the warning above was given after the latest reverts, the user had being warned previously so was aware of policy [67] TigerShark (talk) 23:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- That only applies to new users anyway - this account has been around since May 2007 (not new) and from a quick glance at his contributions, it's probably not his first/only account anyway. --B (talk) 23:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- It would be highly inappropriate to block a user for 3RR if it where not clear that they were aware of the policy on edit-warring. You would be on shakey ground in jumping to the conclucion that a user knew this policy simply because they had been around for a period of time. TigerShark (talk) 23:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- That only applies to new users anyway - this account has been around since May 2007 (not new) and from a quick glance at his contributions, it's probably not his first/only account anyway. --B (talk) 23:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Brfc97 reported by User:Bill (Result: 48 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Blackburn Rovers F.C. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Brfc97 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 23:39, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 17:10, 16 February 2008
- 1st revert: 17:33, 16 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 17:50, 16 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 19:33, 16 February 2008
- 4th revert: 23:27, 16 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 21:21, 16 February 2008
This is the 2nd reporting of this user in a few days. I've attempted to open discussions on the article talk page and on the Brfc97's talk page with no success. Brfc97 repeatedly removes a citation that is sourcing a claim made in the article. Bill (talk|contribs) 23:39, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Has been given a 48 hour block by Gwernol for edit warring. TigerShark (talk) 23:48, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Hataf and User:Hoya4life reported by User:SMC (Result: Page Protected)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Consolidated Contractors Company (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Hataf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 00:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC) Consolidated Contractors Company (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Hoya4life (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 00:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 0015
I then warned both users about this time.
- 3rd revert: 00:15
An anon then interrupted and appears to have now entered the edit war.
- Diff of 3RR warning: 00:11
This appears to be an edit war which has been going on for quite some time. Granted, I have not given the user all four warnings, but if you check the history and the reasons behind the edits you will see why I have reported this "early". Several editors are now entering the fray. It appears that an anon has reason to believe the information Hataf keeps re-adding is prohibited due to a court order. Apologies if I have made mistakes - this is my first 3RR report - but it's apparent things are getting out of hand. SMC (talk) 00:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- 3RR doesn’t apply until after the 3rd revert. From the article history, it appears that more reverts were done, so you should add more to this report. —Travistalk 00:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Same As It Ever Was reported by User:Tasc0 (Result:both 24h, page protected)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Bangin' on Wax (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Same As It Ever Was (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- 1st revert: 15:07, 16 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 20:56, 16 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 22:19, 16 February 2008
- 4th revert: 22:32, 16 February 2008
I tried to approach this user on his talk page, but I just can't end this issue. The user removes content claiming it shouldn't be there because the article it's about an album, and I certainly don't agree with that. The user is awared of the 3RR rule, he reported me a few days ago but the result was that I did not break the rule. My rollback rights were revoked because I was reverting edits that were not clear vandalism, and I wasn't awared that I only could rollback vandalism. Now I have the rollback edits back and I have used the edit summary when reverting non-vandalism. Tasc0 It's a zero! 01:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Page protected due to edit warring, User:Tasc0 & User:Same As It Ever Was blocked 24 hours for persistent edit warring. Ronnotel (talk) 05:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Pgsylv reported by User:Soulscanner (Result:48 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Quebec (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Pgsylv (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 03:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 01:27, 17 February 2008
- 1st revert: 21:36, 16 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 22:26, 16 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 00:32, 17 February 2008
- 4th revert: 01:11, 17 February 2008
- 5th revert: 02:24, 17 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning 1: 22:34, 16 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning 2: 22:47, 16 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR notification: 04:03, 17 February 2008
A short explanation of the incident. Straightforward 3RR violation. User has been warned on his user page, in history of page, and on discussion page.
This continues an edit war that has been carried out by anonymous IP 70.83.226.185 over last several days. :
- 1 revert02:44, 13 February 2008
- 2 revert23:42, 14 February 2008
- 3 revert20:01, 15 February 2008
- 4 revert02:05, 16 February 2008
- 5 revert15:28, 16 February 2008
- 6 revert17:45, 16 February 2008
- page semi protected 18:33, 16 February 2008
User:Pgsylv started edit warring after semi-protection was put on to prevent anonymous vandals. It's possible that User:Pgsylv was using anonymous IP to edit war. Should I report this as potential sock puppet or IP infraction? soulscanner (talk) 03:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- User:Pgsylv blocked for 48 hours, seems to be a single purpose account. Please see policy at WP:SSP for information on when to file a sock puppetry report. Ronnotel (talk) 05:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:GuffasBorgz7 reported by User:Truco9311 (Result:Warning and page protected)
- Three-revert rule violation on
No Way Out (2008) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). User:GuffasBorgz7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 04:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 23:02, February 16, 2008.
- 1st revert: 17:46, February 16, 2008
- 2nd revert: 18:12, February 16, 2008
- 3rd revert: 21:28, February 16, 2008
- 4th revert: 23:00, February 16, 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 22:35, February 16, 2008
User believes that wikilinking the same article in the same sections is not redundant. Me, and User:Gavyn Sykes have told him that it is and I have warned him about breaking the 3RR rule. I also told him to read WP:MOS#Links, but ignored it. TrUCo9311 04:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Edit warring over MoS issues is silly. Both sides should please take a deep breath and focus on the good things in their lives instead of this nonsense. I'm protecting the page briefly to encourage this result. Ronnotel (talk) 05:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Cebactokpatop reported by User:Seminarist (Result: Article protected)
- Three-revert rule violation on
John_Zizioulas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Cebactokpatop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 06:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 18:18, 15 February 2008
- 1st revert: [68]
- 2nd revert: [69]
- 3rd revert: [70]
- 4th revert: [71]
- 5th revert: [72]
- 6th revert: [73]
- 7th revert: [74]
- 8th revert: [75]
- Diff of 3RR warning: 20:56, 15 February 2008
User:Cebactokpatop repeatedly insisting on inclusion of contentious material in biographical article of John Zizioulas, Greek Orthodox Metropolitan of Permagon. Text and references claim 'traditional Orthodox' view is that Zizioulas is 'heterodox'. This violates WP:NPOV, WP:BLP and WP:PROVEIT. For more information, see Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Cebactokpatop_and_John_Zizioulas_article. Seminarist (talk) 06:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not sure there have been more than 3 reverts by either individual in a 24 hour period and frankly, I don't consider it relevant: Both Cebactokpatop (talk · contribs) and Seminarist (talk · contribs) are edit warring. However, It is encouraging that a discussion is simultaneously taking place on the talk page. Thus, because a 3RR violation is not clear and in order to discourage further edits from either editor until a resolution can be found on the talk page, I am protecting the article for 10 days. CIreland (talk) 15:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Kborer at socialized medicine: 3RR violated several times: (Result: User warned)
- User:Kborer has essentially reverted to a specific version (see also talk page), removing a key distinction (that socialized medicine is a term as opposed to a single system) four times in less than 24 hours, and and six or seven times in approximately 48 hours (more in the previous days):
one two three four five six seven
- Note that while there have been minor changes, the primary fixation seems to be to remove a (documented and referenced) issue with respect to the use of the term. Note that this is also a repeated pattern on this particular page, reverting three times or more within a short period of time. There is a clear pattern of violation of the spirit of wp:3rr. I am not listing the numerous changes in exactly the same spirit in the previous few days, so there are actually more than these seven.
- The use of POV sources is also more than tendentious: witness the lead sentence being changed to "Socialized medicine is any health care system that embodies the fundamental principle of socialism."--Gregalton (talk) 09:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Olahus reported by User:Bogdangiusca (Result: No vio 31 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Moldovans (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Olahus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 12:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 11:00, 16 February 2008
- 1st revert: 19:17, 16 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 09:52, 17 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 10:50, 17 February 2008
- 4th revert: 12:12, 17 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: user is not a newbie, he's aware of the policy, has been warned before.
Revert-war on whether Moldovans should include the people of the Romanian part of Romania or not. POV-pushing to prove a point. bogdan (talk) 12:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- The 3RR has not been violated as the first diff does not show a revert. There was a brief edit war but it was short-lived. I would encourage both editors to continue the discussion ongoing on the talk page. If reversion rather than discussion continues at a later stage, come back to this noticeboard or request page protection at WP:RFPP. CIreland (talk) 17:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Pexise reported by User:Ultramarine (Result: 31 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Human rights and the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Pexise (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 16:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 18:13, 12 February 2008
- 1st revert: 10:59, 17 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 12:27, 17 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 15:56, 17 February 2008
- 4th revert: 16:05, 17 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 15:58, 17 February 2008
First revert is a partial one, the rest are full reverts.Ultramarine (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Derek.cashman reported by User:bkonrad (Result:warning both)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline (edit | [[Talk:Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Derek.cashman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 17:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 03:47, February 16, 2008
- 1st revert: 05:06, February 16, 2008
- 2nd revert: 23:28, February 16, 2008
- 3rd revert: 06:54, February 17, 2008 (note: there was an intervening edit in which another user proposed another version--Derek.cashman reverted to his preferred version)
- 4th revert: 16:42, February 17, 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: DIFFTIME (Derek.cashman is not a new user)
A short explanation of the incident. Derek.cashman finds general references to be unacceptable and has attempted to force this dictate into the WP:City Guidelines, despite there being no such explicit deprecation on WP:CITE. He has demonstrated no support for this change and others have expressed disagreement. In addition, he has accused me of being a sock puppet [76] (on what basis I have no idea). While I object to Derek.cashman edits, I have no problem with the suggestion proposed by Maclean25 here and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Guideline. older ≠ wiser 17:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Both sides are edit warring. Bkonrad has not technically violated 3RR, but has reverted four times in the past two days. Not willing to block only one, but have watchlisted the article and will block either one if he continues the edit war. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'm not exactly proud of having the course this has taken. WP:BRD suggests that further discussion is needed before a controversial new dictate is added to the project guidelines that, at present, far overreaches the general guidance at WP:CITE. older ≠ wiser 20:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Desione reported by User:Relata refero (Result: 31 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
British Raj (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Desione (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 19:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 13:24 Feb 17
- 1st revert: 23:00 Feb 17
- 2nd revert: 23:12 Feb 17
- 3rd revert: 00:19 Feb 18
- 4th revert: 00:30 Feb 18
- 5th revert: 06:46 Feb 18
- 6th revert: 07:06 Feb 18
- Diff of 3RR warning: 00:23 Feb 18
- Additional warning after he broke 3RR, requesting he revert himself [77].
User has been around for some time. Mainly tendentious editing; has been arguing on talkpage of previously stable article, but without providing any sources, or indeed any form of reasoned argument as far as I can see. I don't like coming here, because its such an effort and because I feel like a snitch, but I think perhaps this one needs to cool off and get some encouragement to read policy, and understand that edit-warring is bad. Judging by his response to my two requests to revert himself, he doesn't care right now.
Previously reverted several other editors, and I think its about 5-6 reverts in the past 24 hours, but counting this gives me a headache.
Relata refero (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Agree with Relata refero. Here, for example, is a "memorable" post made by user:Desione on the Talk:British Raj page:
The references should cite Indian sources. British were oppressors, racist, slave traders, and mass murders, hence the views of british publications which were part of british empire are considered biased to begin with. Stick to neutral publications of Indian (the sufferers) publications. Besides that no one gives a damn about Gladstone or racist bitch known as the British empress. Desione (talk) 15:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- The "racist bitch" is a reference to Queen Victoria. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- And another contentious revert accusing other users of vandalism [78]. Dance With The Devil (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Stone put to sky reported by User:Ultramarine (Result: 72 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Allegations of state terrorism committed by the United States (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Stone put to sky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 18:53, 15 February 2008
- 1st revert: 01:01, 17 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 06:10, 17 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 07:00, 17 February 2008
- 4th revert: 19:25, 17 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: Blocked previously for 3RR violation on the same article
As seen in this Request for checkuser, [79], Stone put to sky has used numerous different accounts to deliberately try hide his violation of WP:3RR. I have only reported the most recent violation but the article history shows that he has has used his sockpuppets to circumvent the 3RR rule before this also. Thus also violating Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. The reported recent reverts are complex but in all cases Stone put to sky reinserts his view that the Philippines is a United States protectorate or a colony. He has also violated WP:Username by making attack accounts on my name, see the Request for checkuser. Finally, he violated WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL many times, for example here by calling me a liar,[80] and here being warned by another editor for incivility against me.[81]. As such a I urge for a long ban due to the serious and repeated attempts to circumvent Wikipedia policy and attack me personally.Ultramarine (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have also made a report of this on WP:ANI.Ultramarine (talk) 23:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 72 hours and semi-protected the page since the checkuser and the contrib evidence is pretty clear that it's the same person. --slakr\ talk / 00:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Dimension31 reported by User:Metros (Result:24 hours)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Bow High School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Dimension31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 23:39 14 February 2008
- 1st revert: 08:54 17 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 22:26 17 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 22:32 17 February 2008
- 4th revert: 01:14 18 February 2008
- 5th revert: 01:25 18 February 2008
- 6th revert: 01:36 18 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 01:21 18 February 2008
Dimension31 has been reverting the notability tag on this article. He has also been taking out any valid references to establish the notability of the school. Metros (talk) 01:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- A pretty clear-cut case, so 24 hours. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Al-Andalus reported by User:Beneaththelandslide (Result: 2 weeks)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Stolen Generations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Al-Andalus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 06:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: [82]
- Diff of 3RR warning: [87]
Al-A repeatedly introduced a commentary paragraph critical of one person, and negative of another. Multiple reversions beyond these four with minor variations. Article history will show these. Michael talk 06:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 1 fortnight Since this is the user's 6th block, the user should know better by now. --slakr\ talk / 06:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
User:AerospaceM reported by Fut.Perf. (Result: no violation, but 8 hour block for edit warring)
- Three-revert rule violation on Minorities in Greece (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). AerospaceM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 77.83.22.224 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Time reported: 08:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 13 Feb 22:25
- 1: 17 Feb, 00:51 (AerospaceM)
- 2: 17 Feb, 01:39 (AerospaceM)
- 3: 17 Feb, 03:13 (77.83.22.224)
- 4: 17 Feb, 20:26 (AerospaceM)
- 5: 18 Feb, 08:03 (77.83.22.224)
n parallel on second article:
- 1: 16 Feb 19:42 (AerospaceM)
- 2: 17 Feb 01:38 (AerospaceM)
- 3: 17 Feb 03:11 (77.83.22.224)
- 4: 17 Feb 20:25 (AerospaceM)
- 5: 18 Feb 03:03 (77.83.22.224)
Warning given: [88]
Repeated removal of contested map previously added by User:Polibiush [89]. Sterile reverting, no participation in discussion on talk (unlike his main opponent, User:Polibiush, who discusses constructively and stopped reverting after warning.) Identity of IP and named account seems obvious from behaviour and style. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Not all of the edits are within a 24-hour period nor are they by the same user, but it's enough to justify an 8-hour block for general edit warring. Stifle (talk) 11:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Akhamenehpour reported by User:Zedla (Result: 24h)
- Three-revert rule violation on
Piedmont, California (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Akhamenehpour (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 10:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 09:22, 17 February 2008
- 1st revert: 08:13, 18 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 06:49, 17 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 21:33, 16 February 2008
- 4th revert: 15:41, 15 February 2008
- 5th revert: 08:08, 15 February 2008
- 6th revert: 08:46, 14 February 2008
Piedmont High School (California) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Akhamenehpour (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 10:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 06:13, 19 January 2008
- 1st revert: 08:14, 18 February 2008
- 2nd revert: 08:13, 13 February 2008
- 3rd revert: 08:12, 13 February 2008
- 4th revert: 08:21, 12 February 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 08:45, 12 February 2008
Not a strict 24h/3rr but long term constant reinsertion of unsourced pov statement and reverting all removals or fact tags with inappropriate 'removing vandalism' edit summary. Zedla (talk) 10:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
User warned. I didn't see any previous attempt at engaging this new user in talk or warn him, so I think an immediate block would not be warranted at this point. However, I'd be for blocking immediately if he resumes. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
User:LPRABCMP reported by User:Jakew (Result: )
- Three-revert rule violation on
Circumcision (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). LPRABCMP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Previous version reverted to: 06:03, February 17, 2008
- 1st revert: 20:58, February 17, 2008 (as User:70.114.38.167)
- 2nd revert: 21:04, February 17, 2008
- 3rd revert: 07:08, February 18, 2008
- 4th revert: 07:36, February 18, 2008
- Diff of 3RR warning: 21:09, February 17, 2008
Persistent edit warrior, as can be seen by viewing the page histories. User first appeared as 70.114.38.167 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), then signed one of the IP's contributions using the LPRABCMP account. Jakew (talk) 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Example
<!-- COPY FROM BELOW THIS LINE --> == [[User:NAME_OF_USER]] reported by [[User:YOUR_NAME]] (Result: ) == *[[Wikipedia:Three-revert rule|Three-revert rule]] violation on {{Article|ARTICLE NAME}}. {{3RRV|NAME_OF_USER}}: Time reported: ~~~~~ *Previous version reverted to: [http://VersionLink VersionTime] <!-- This is MANDATORY. --> <!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to.--> <!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. See Help:Diff if you do not know what a diff is. --> *1st revert: [http://DIFFS DIFFTIME] *2nd revert: [http://DIFFS DIFFTIME] *3rd revert: [http://DIFFS DIFFTIME] *4th revert: [http://DIFFS DIFFTIME] *Diff of 3RR warning: [http://DIFFS DIFFTIME] A short explanation of the incident. ~~~~ <!-- COPY FROM ABOVE THIS LINE -->
See also
- Help:Diff
- 3RR report helper tool – helps simplify diff gathering and reporting. Be sure to remove non-reverts from the report or it may be rejected.