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:94.134.8.212 reported by User:Ebonyskye (Result: Warned)
Page: Nox Arcana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 94.134.8.212 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: diff
Diffs of the user's reverts:
contribs
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]
The user is unsigned so I didn't leave anything on the talk page.
Comments:
I am requesting a rollback to this version of the page for Nox Arcana. While I have been editing another section, an unsigned editor 94.134.8.212 keeps reverting to remove music genres (Gothic, ethereal, dark wave) that have already been long established for this band, referenced by music reviews, other wiki editors including the wiki albums team, and can be ref'd at All Music Guide. The user has reverted multiple times, wiping out new content (including new refs to support the gothic and ethereal genres). Ebonyskye (talk) 00:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- This person adds fake reviews. None of these reviews uses "Ethereal wave" as a genre term. Of course i'll remove non-sourced nonsense. --94.134.8.212 (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Previous unsigned editor is now editing as [Special:Contributions/94.134.9.192|94.134.9.192]] removing term 'gothic' which is referenced multiple times. diff. This appears to be nothing more than vandalism. Ebonyskye (talk) 06:03, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
User:86.3.184.24 reported by User:331dot (Result: blocked)
- Page
- Foffa Bikes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- 86.3.184.24 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 11:58, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "corrections since someone that keeps trying to slag our brand off keeps editing the entry to defame our company. 1) we are not an assembler, we are a designer. 2) our bikes are not made in China 3) our bikes go up to 700 pounds so are not inexpensive."
- 17:24, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "how to stop getting the same people making the same irrelevant changes?"
- 20:00, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "usual corrections from the usual reedit from our competitors trying to slag our brand off"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 12:00, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on Foffa Bikes. (TW)"
- 12:05, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "/* June 2014 */"
- 17:34, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Final warning notice on Foffa Bikes. (TW)"
- 20:04, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Foffa Bikes. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
This user is already blocked under their username Danifoffa for making legal threats and edit warring; their IP address was temporarily blocked but that has now expired, and the user is now editing the article about their company after repeated warnings to take any concerns to the talk page due to their conflict of interest. Aside from the fact they are evading their block, they have ignored these warnings. 331dot (talk) 20:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Blocked for the block evasion; there is still an outstanding indefinite block at Danifoffa. Kuru (talk) 20:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Funnycoolman reported by User:Ryulong (Result: Blocked)
- Page
- List of Pokémon: XY episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Funnycoolman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 01:11, 19 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613458371 by Cyberpower678 (talk If you won't believe the episode already aired then go to WatchCartoononline.com"
- 20:55, 20 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613504026 by Cyberpower678 (talkIt's going to air in the UK this Saturday"
- 12:33, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613608643 by Cyberpower678 (talkThe episode is going to air in the UK today.)"
- 13:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613806327 by Ryulong (talkJust this once, please? I know Japan info is for unaired episode but for upcoming episode is English info.)"
- 16:38, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613812441 by Cyberpower678 (talkokay and by the way what's it?)"
- 18:44, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613834456 by Cyberpower678 (talkThe episode will be translated and that's that! Even though it's not aired yet stick with what you know )"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 20:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC) "/* XY summary */ new section"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
User has been told multiple times (through edit summaries and in a discussion on User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 20#Next Episode about the practices in regards to translation, but edit warred while logged in and while logged out as 24.191.109.165 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 31 hours. The user apologized for editing while logged out. Nonetheless, the user breached WP:3RR. Ryulong, please don't use capital letters in edit summaries.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:39, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
User:95.29.174.90 reported by User:MelbourneStar (Result: Blocked)
- Page
- Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- 95.29.174.90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 08:56, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613918699 by MelbourneStar (talk)"
- 08:48, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613917976 by BilCat (talk)"
- 08:28, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613915471 by Thomas.W (Stop edit warring, if you don't like it try Britannia)"
- 08:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613912867 by Thomas.W (talk)"
- 07:50, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613902252 by Thomas.W (talk)"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 08:50, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Level 4 warning re. Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15 (HG)"
- 08:54, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
Continues to add unsourced content to said article, despite warnings not to or to discuss content on article's talk page. —MelbourneStar☆talk 08:58, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
- Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Materialscientist (talk) 09:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
User:174.239.197.33 reported by User:QuartzReload (Result: Blocked)
- Page
- Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- 174.239.197.33 (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
- 16:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "General note: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Indictment. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
I reverted once AGF and then once assuming vandalism, warned on talk page and finally requested temporary page protection. He/She continued to constantly edit/revert. This can also be seen in the article "Due process". (I couldn't select the reverts in Twinkle, however, by looking at the edit history it is pretty clear) QuartzReload (talk) 17:17, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
- IP is already blocked for 72 hours for disruption. --NeilN talk to me 17:19, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
User:89.110.19.176 and 91.122.6.3 reported by User:Nightscream (Result: )
Page: Alan Moore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 91.122.6.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 89.110.19.176 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [1]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- First edit by 89.110.19.176, which is traced to the Russian Federation
- Revert by Nightscream
- Revert by 91.122.6.3, which is also traced to the Russian Federation
- Vanamonde93 reverts 91.122.6.3's revert and leaves a message on that IP's talk page
- 91.122.6.3 again reverts Vanamonde93
- Nightscream reverts the article again, and try to caution 91.122.6.3 in his edit summary and on 91.122.6.3's talk page about edit warring.
- 91.122.6.3 reverts my revert, and makes no acknowledgement of my message or the policies and guidelines I linked him to.
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link
Record of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page (actually the reported user's talk page): diff
Comments:
User:Rizlas p reported by User:Tchaliburton (Result: No action)
- Page
- Michail Lountzis (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Rizlas p (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 01:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- 01:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- Consecutive edits made from 01:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC) to 01:45, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 01:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "General note: Removing speedy deletion tags on Michail Lountzis. (TW)"
- 01:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Caution: Removing speedy deletion tags on Michail Lountzis. (TW)"
- 01:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Removing speedy deletion tags on Michail Lountzis. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
- Stale, editor has stopped. Though they've been warned enough that if this continues, they'll be blocked. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Joshuaj102003 reported by User:NeilN (Result: Blocked )
- Page
- Cinderella (Disney character) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Joshuaj102003 (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
- 12:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Cinderella (Disney character). (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 03:56, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Ethnicity */"
- Comments:
More: [2], [3], [4] NeilN talk to me 11:16, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Blocked for 48 hours. Acroterion (talk) 11:25, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:LardoBalsamico reported by User:Alans1977 (Result: Blocked)
- Page
- 1955 Turkish basketball withdrawal incident (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- LardoBalsamico (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 11:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "reverted vandalism"
- 11:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "this was the match between Galatasaray and Fenerbahce. Players, officials and trainers should be known. If you remove something, please use talk page first."
- 06:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "do not revert this. If you want to revert, first go to talk page. Remmeber! You did it first!"
- 00:34, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "if it was not match-fixing, then what is match-fixing?"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 11:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on 1955 Turkish basketball withdrawal incident. (TW)"
- 11:59, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "/* June 2014 */"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 11:48, 23 June 2014 (UTC) on Talk:1955 Turkish basketball withdrawal incident "←Created page with '==Roster for each side== How is who was on the roster for each side relevant to occurrence of the event? Alans1977 (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)'"
- Comments:
- I'll withdraw this. Looks like an admin user Callanecc blocked them while I was in the middle of filling this. Alans1977 (talk) 12:16, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:AbelM7 reported by User:Aquintero82 (Result: )
Page: Template:Foreign relations of Mexico (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: User:AbelM7 (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]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612026050&oldid=607590814
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612048240&oldid=612026050
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612054488&oldid=612048240
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612061267&oldid=612054488
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612163296&oldid=612061267
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612674791&oldid=612346994
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612736558&oldid=612674791
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=612791949&oldid=612778064
- [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AForeign_relations_of_Mexico&diff=614084307&oldid=613994281
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AbelM7
Comments:
User:AbelM7 is new to editing Template:Foreign relations of Mexico and other similar articles. Before his arrival, most of the articles were the same in structure, however, he has decided upon himself to change the articles and arrange the continents to his understanding of how the world is without first consulting users who have worked on the articles nor seeking consensus, even though it had been suggested to him. I left a message on his talk page asking him to justify his point of view. He responds with "No mean for disrespect. I'm not the one who formed the continents but each one are separated by something. Each continent gets its own group. The Americas (North America + South America) is a supercontinent just like how Eurasia (Europe + Asia) and Afro-Eurasia (Africa + Europe + Asia) are also supercontinents." Even Wikipedia's article on continents recognizes that there are differences of point of view and that it is not set that there are indeed seven continents. I've even tried to compromise by separating the American continent by keeping the same 'America' section but separating them by North and South. However, this too was reverted back to his point of view. User:AbelM7 would do well to seek consensus on the matter rather than impose his point of view. User:Aquintero82, (talk), 23 June 2014, 15:03 (UTC)
- User:Aquintero82 You never did responded to my talk page so we couldn't have seek a consensus. Each group on the foreign relations templates are divided into continents such as Asia, Africa, North America and not the combined continents such as the Americas, Eurasia, Afro-Eurasia. In my edits, I separated the combined landmass of the Americas into the continents of North America and South America in the group sections since none of the other sections uses combined landmasses such as Eurasia or Afro-Eurasia. You're saying it is "my" point of view like if it is mine exclusively but it is not. A continent is a large landmass and there are seven of them (technically it's six but Europe and Asia are divided at the Ural Mountains). I know people sometimes combined continents to form the Americas, Eurasia, and Afro-Eurasia but the foreign relations templates used continents in their groups, not the combined ones. Not all of the articles are the same in structure such as Template:Foreign relations of Kiribati which doesn't have the different continent groups. Who's to say you're not imposing your point of view of using combined continents instead of the singular ones? AbelM7 (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- And I used the examples set by Template:Foreign relations of the United States, Template:Foreign relations of Russia, and Template:Foreign relations of China since I know those would have more edits done and more foreign relations articles as oppose to Template:Foreign relations of Samoa. AbelM7 (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Funnycoolman reported by User:Ryulong (Result: Warned)
- Page
- User talk:Ryulong (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Funnycoolman (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 15:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC) to 16:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- 15:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- 15:34, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Send back */"
- 16:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Send back */"
- 16:30, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 614111189 by Ryulong (talkDeal with it)"
- 16:31, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- 16:33, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "not until you agree"
- Consecutive edits made from 16:34, 23 June 2014 (UTC) to 16:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- 16:42, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- 16:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Accepted */"
- 16:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 16:34, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "/* June 2014 */"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
User will not leave me alone after I removed his thread he started from my user talk page. This comes off after a block he had just served and also he resumed edit warring on the page he was originally blocked for edit warring on. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:35, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Warned and this also looks to be possible harassment since Ryulong has asked them to stop posting on their own talk page. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 17:42, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Lugnuthemvar reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: Warned)
- Page
- Canadian soccer league system (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Lugnuthemvar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 12:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- 16:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "i mentioned canadian usage. this is proper usage."
- 16:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC) ""
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 16:53, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing. (TW)"
- 16:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "/* June 2014 */ EC + wrong"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
The editor is removing common name from multiple articles and edit warring to do so Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:58, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- There are multiple other articles where the editor has made this change and I won't edit war with the subject over them. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:59, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- My edits were to correct errors introduced such as [[Association football|association football]] and WP:REPEATLINKs. The other editor has been involved in three 3RR cases in the past few days. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Tenebrae reported by User:Winkelvi (Result: )
- Page
- Josh Dallas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Also on Kelly Clarkson and Ginnifer Goodwin
- User being reported
- Tenebrae (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 16:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 613958489 by Winkelvi (talk) See talk-page discussion, rather than continuing edit-war with TWO other editors."
- 20:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "No, we leave the extant, status quo version until there is consensus to change. BLP does not REQUIRE removal, and there is no consensus to hide a name already available to millions via magazines, newspaper and entertainment-news TV shows."
- 20:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "According to Wikipedia policy, the status quo is supposed to remain. The status quo before you started this included the name."
- 20:23, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "You are the one edit-warring, even though the status quo is supposed to remain, and you are now at 3 reverts here. Revert again,and you're over WP:3RR"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 20:15, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Ginnifer Goodwin. (TW)"
- 20:17, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Josh Dallas. (TW)"
- 20:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Kelly Clarkson. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 16:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC) on Talk:Ginnifer Goodwin "/* Response to edit summary here */ yes"
- Comments:
Tenebrae has chosen to edit war rather than continue discussion and go with consensus. He has not violated 3RR but is engaging in edit warring and win at all costs behavior. The articles in question where he is edit warring (Ginnifer Goodwin, Josh Dallas, and Kelly Clarkson) are all BLPs; they are obviously treated differently than non-BLP articles when it comes to content on living persons. Another, uninvolved editor, has also weighed in on the dispute at all three articles. Consensus is in favor of removing the contested content until a resolution is reached. I removed that content earlier today, Tenebrae chose to revert it all back in spite of the discussion on each article's talk page. Policy is clear on including names and identifying information on non-notable minor children of article subjects:
- "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, ex, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject. However, names of family members who are not also notable public figures must be removed from an article if they are not properly sourced." Adding the name and exact birth date of a a non-notable low-profile minor child of a celebrity is not relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the article subject. Saying the child exists and giving a birth month and year is sufficient mention.
Further, I asked Tenebrae to stay off my talk page twice yesterday. He returned to post there twice more and today has posted there again [5]. He was already been warned by an administrator at AN/I about instigating incivility with me along with lack of respect here: [6] He was told to stop. The edit warring behavior and coming back to my talk page today is, in my estimation, a continuation of the behavior he was told to stop. My patience has been tested to the limit by his uncivil, battleground and WP:POKE behavior. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 20:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Wikilevi is dissembling. I returned to his talk page only to post a 3RR warning and that I had begin this 3RR action, both of which were required of me to do. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- That is a complete misrepresentation; there is no requirement to threaten editors. After being told twice already to stay off my talk page, he should not have returned with anything other than a template or a notification. After I placed warning templates on his talk page, he chose to come to my talk page and threaten to report me. There was no notification at this point that he was planning to or had already done so: "You are the one promulgating an edit-war. If you revert again, you will be at three reverts. If you go over that, I guess we'll need to take this to WP:3RR. Or I could go there now, based on your posts on my talk page saying 3RR can be broken in spirit without going over 3 reverts." His own words give the true story. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 21:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- And you can, as well, see his threats to me on my talk page
- And since he's bringing the discussion of BLP policy here, I suppose I need to defend myself here. We're not talking about private minor children of notable but no-famous people. We are talking about the names of celebrities' minor children whose parents have announced their names to the media ... in some cases on magazine covers ... and which in our footnotes themselves are readily available to millions of readers/viewers through WP:RS newspapers, magazines and entertainment-news TV shows. The suggestion that Wikipedia is able to or should keep "secret" Kim Kardashian's child North or Gwyneth Paltrow's child Apple is absurd. This a valid part of such subjects' biographies. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Note for this and below: This dispute started at ANI [10], but I'm happy to walk away and let AN3 deal with it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 21:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
User:Winkelvi reported by User:Tenebrae (Result: )
Josh Dallas: John Dallas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Also on Kelly Clarkson and Ginnifer Goodwin
User being reported: Winkelvi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Since User:Winkelvi has come to my talk page repeatedly to threaten me over editing-warring when he has been doing so since June 15 — and also because he has threatened on my talk page — with two exclamation-point signs and one stop sign — that "you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly." Based on his own reasoning and behavior (which has included him telling me repeatedly to "go fuck myself" and similar phrasing), I bring this case here.
Previous version reverted to: Here is the status quo as of June 5: [11], which he changed on June 15 [12].
Despite an editor other than myself immediately restoring the status quo [13], he began edit-warring immediately after that [14] and this edit-warring has continued across Josh Dallas and the other two articles above. All I have tried to do is retain the status quo until consensus says otherwise. There is no consensus yet.
Diffs of the user's reverts: Since Winkelvi is listing things previous to this 24-hour period in his report above, it's only equitable I do the same
- 16:59, 15 June 2014 [15]
- 04:11, 22 June 2014 [16]
- 15:03, 22 June 2014 [17]
- 17:42, 23 June 2014 [18]
- 20:16, 23 June 2014 [19]
- 20:19, 23 June 2014 [20]
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: I provided warning, and he erased it with a highly uncivil edit summary [21]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Consolidated [here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ginnifer_Goodwin#BLP]
Comments:
During discussions, the article's status quo is supposed to remain and consensus arrived at for any change, especially a contentious one. He insists his interpretation of BLP is the only valid interpretation, and believes that means he's entitled to keep reverting to his preferred version. The issue is contentious since he's removing names of celebrities minor children even though those names have been released to the media by the parents themselves, in some cases on magazines covers, and are readily available to millions of readers/viewers through RS newspapers, magazines and entertainment-news TV shows.
I bring this here based on his threat to bring me here through "you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule". --Tenebrae (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC)