Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
<!--Adds protection template automatically if semi-protected--><noinclude>{{#if:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|{{pp|small=yes}}}}__NEWSECTIONLINK__{{no admin backlog}}{{/Header}}] ]
<!-- BEGIN WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE --><!-- This page is automatically archived by Werdnabot-->{{User:Werdnabot/Archiver/Linkhere}} <!--This is an empty template, but transcluding it counts as a link, meaning Werdnabot is directed to this page - DO NOT SUBST IT --><!--Werdnabot-Archive Age-3 DoUnreplied-Yes Target-Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive31--><!--END WERDNABOT ARCHIVAL CODE-->
<!-- NOTE: THE *BOTTOM* IS THE PLACE FOR NEW REPORTS. -->
== ] reported by ] (Result: No violation) ==
<!--{{adminbacklog}}-->
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Ahmed al-Sharaa}} <br />
==Violations==
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|BubbleBabis}}
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
{{adminbacklog}}
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
Please place new reports '''at the bottom'''.
# (31 December 2024)
# (6 January 2024)
# (7 January 2025)
# (8 January 2025)
'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' (7 January 2025)
===] reported by ] (Result:)===
'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
] violation on
{{Article|List of very tall men}}. {{3RRV|RCS}}:
<u>'''Comments:'''</u> The user was warned multiple times to not insert ] ] in a page which is a ]. Despite this, the user has continued to insert ], while making no attempt to refrain from disruptive editing behaviour or initiate a discussion on the talk page.<br />
* Previous version reverted to:
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
*
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
* 5th revert:
] (]) 11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
There may have been a lot more than this that I missed
:I've made my position clear. There is NO source that supports your version that between October 2006 and January 2012 he was not a member of any group. The current version is both manipulative (goes from 2006 Mujahideen Shura Council straight to 2012 al-Nusra) and contradicts RS that mention him as member of ISI in that period. There are RS that support my version, none that supports yours. A revision that'd include "2008-2012 ISI" (which would bypass his prison years 2006-08) would be a better solution. But a career infobox that straight-up omits the entire 2006-12 period is unacceptable.--] (]) 19:41, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::{{AN3|noex}} And really, this deserves more talking out on the talk page, which hasn't seen any discussion of this for a week (But, that having been said, if it continues like this I or another admin may be less tolerant). ] (]) 23:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I would like to note the previous discussion about this particular editor, who has a penchant for creating ]es, adding ] information about al Qaeda to unrelated articles, and a tendency to steal entire sentences from other articles for their additions may be found at ]. ] (]) 20:24, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: Page move-protected) ==
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Toxic: A Fairy Tale for Grown-Ups}}
<!--
- * Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here.
Your report may be ignored if it is not placed properly.
-->
* Diff of 3RR warning:
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Shecose}}
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
Sorry if my report was formatted incorrectly. I don't normally report people on this board. Subject was about 3RR policy. <s>Although I'm not sure if he's considered "new,"</s> he clearly read my warning (and repsonded to it on my talk page), and continued reverting.--] 19:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
:Looking at his contriubtions, it's clear RCS is not a new user and should have been well aware of 3RR prior to my warning.--] 19:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
# {{diff2|1268346980|08:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Undiscussed move. The editor is acting out of personal hate instead of collaborating."
# {{diff2|1268346280|08:43, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Undiscussed move. There are multiple people edited this article."
# {{diff2|1268345229|08:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
::Reply : ] popped up in the middle of a conflict and took party for the wrong side. If you look at the history of the page, you'll see that some IP's (later appearing under and username) just don't want the 6ft 4 section to be kept deleted as it was for good reason for several days already. I don't know what's on ]'s mind, but he certainly ain't an honest broker. ] 07:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
<!-- Violations reports go here -->
'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
===] reported by ] (Result: warning)===
] violation on
{{Article|Haut-Rhin}}. {{3RRV|Aquarelle}}:
<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
* Previous version reverted to:
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
*
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
Also note the ] (]) 08:55, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
<!--
- * Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here.
Your report may be ignored if it is not placed properly.
-->
* No warning was given though this is an established user that is more than aware of Misplaced Pages policies. (I also believe that it is a sockpuppet of ]
This article is about a highly anticipated film with a large base of interest. There are hundreds of references available following its teaser and poster release, and it has been confirmed that principal photography has begun. Despite all this, the user ] has draftified the article multiple times. When asked about the policy, he simply forwarded the entire article, which was edited by multiple editors, to satisfy his personal ego. His actions are not collaborative and should be noted. ] (]) 09:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
*I am going to advise that we delay any action here until ] is resolved. — ] <sub>]</sub> 17:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
*:That is because {{u|CNMall41}}'s only possible actual justification for the move warring against a draftification objection is block evasion, and their actions would normally lead to a block. And even if this <em>is</em> block evasion, waiting for the investigation's result would have been advisable. ] (]) 19:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
*{{AN3|p}}: Move protection for now, and if redirection is still desired, please start a deletion discussion for it (]). Even if this is sockpuppetry, the page qualifies neither for ] (due to substantial edits by others) nor redirection as a form of reverting block evasion (due to collateral damage). In such cases, it can help to focus on the content and decide independently of whether someone might be a sockpuppeteer. ] (]) 19:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{u|Shecose}}, {{tqq|to satisfy his personal ego}} (above and in ] too) is a personal attack; you too should focus on the content. ] (]) 20:09, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
::Apologies, I withdraw that. I wasn't aware of it, and it happened in the heat of the argument. ] (]) 07:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Reverting to a version using French whilst discussion is taking place regarding this very issue at ]. Other editors have ceased editing these articles for this issue to be resolved yet this user is continuing to edit. Clear bad faith editing. --] 20:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
*I realize the policy states, ''An editor must not perform more than three reverts'', right? '''This is three, not more than three.''' It shows the desperation. ] (]) 07:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
*:{{u|Shecose}}, an editor must not perform twenty reverts either, yet that doesn't mean nineteen reverts are fine. Edit warring isn't limited to violations of the three revert rule. You both have edit warred. The edit war has ended since, and no action is needed here; if any action is taken, that's via the sockpuppetry investigation, but we don't need to keep the edit warring report open in the meantime. ] (]) 19:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: Filer informed) ==
:My reversions were to the previously established version which came before ]'s controversial edits. No evidence that other editors have refrained from editing this articles : they are not often modified. I violated the 3RR by 30 minutes after confusing UTC with UTC+1 (where I live), my apologies. I am not a sockpuppet, and I resent the libelous, unmitigated accusation. --] 20:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Novak Djokovic}} <br />
::The fact you were waiting for 24 hours to pass does not negate the accusation of edit warring. 24-hours is a guideline, not a hard rule, trying to argue that edits fall just outside or inside a 24-hr window is wikilawyering. --] 23:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Theonewithreason}}
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
*'''Warning'''. I'll issued Aquarelle a warning. Let's leave it there. ] 04:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
===] reported by ] (Result: warning)===
#'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
] violation on
#
{{Article|Moselle}}. {{3RRV|Aquarelle}}:
#
#
* Previous version reverted to:
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
*
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
<!--
- * Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here.
Your report may be ignored if it is not placed properly.
-->
* No warning was given though this is an established user that is more than aware of Misplaced Pages policies. (I also believe that it is a sockpuppet of ] as the user reverts to French when he is upset, edits almost exclusively on France related articles and Hardouin has a history of suspected sockpuppetry, although nothing has been proved to my knowledge. Weak evidence, but that is neither here nor there for this abuse of the 3RR). User is now trolling my talk page. --] 20:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
Reverting to a version using French whilst discussion is taking place regarding this very issue at ]. Other editors have ceased editing these articles for this issue to be resolved yet this user is continuing to edit. Clear bad faith editing. --] 20:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
:My reversions were to the previously established version which came before ]'s controversial edits. No evidence that other editors have refrained from editing this articles : they are not often modified. I violated the 3RR by 30 minutes after confusing UTC with UTC+1 (where I live), my apologies. I am not a sockpuppet, and I resent the libelous, unmitigated accusation. --] 20:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
*I've '''warned''' Aquarelle. ] 04:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
===] reported by ] (Result:)===
<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
] violation on
{{Article|United Kingdom}}. {{3RRV|TharkunColl}}:
I also find the baseless message the user had left me personally intimidating . Threats to report my 3RR message . Is this how unwelcoming Misplaced Pages is supposed to be? ] (]) 09:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
* Previous version reverted to:
:{{u|Theonewithreason}}, you could have used the edit summary to explain why your editing was exempt from the edit-warring policy. ] (]) 21:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
:; closing. ] (]) 21:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
* 5th revert:
* 6th revert:
== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked indefinitely ) ==
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional --> User is involved in an edit war on ] to do with not replacing the infobox map. He has been blocked before for 3RR and has had many similar warnings on other pages, see ] for details.
'''This is not true. I uploaded many different maps, and at no time reverted to the same one more than twice. However, ] has indeed reverted to the same map more than 3 times in a 24 hour period, and even removed the official warning I gave him on his talk page.''' ] 23:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Sillypickle123}}
It is true that in several of the cases above TharkunColl made subtle changes to the map he uploaded in a deliberate effort to avoid 3RR, but each time he was reverting the ''same'' Euro-map which is the bone of contention. If I've transgressed it was in an effort to stop this flagrant breach of Misplaced Pages rules, and would be happy to accept a block for it. ] 23:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
'''No, this is a travesty of what I actually did. I made a map and uploaded it, then the following day made a very different map because people had expressed an opinion to show the EU. The only person who broke the 3RR rule is ]. I did not report him, because in my opinion crying to the teacher is petty.''' ] 00:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
It's really pointless you going on like this Tharkun - the admins can see the log of diffs for themselves and will be able to decide on the evidence. ] 00:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
# {{diff2|1268583865|14:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268451301|21:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268450870|21:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268449472|21:14, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268448980|21:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
'''Absolutely! I have made a number of different maps based on what was discussed. All you did was revert to the same map.''' ] 00:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
# {{diff2|1268447335|21:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Welcome to Misplaced Pages!"
# {{diff2|1268463321|22:39, 9 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."
'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
Except it wasn't just me, you were busy changing reverts by other editors too, as you are doing tonight on ]. ] 00:14, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
# {{diff|oldid=1268447335|diff=1268451519|label=Consecutive edits made from 21:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC) to 21:26, 9 January 2025 (UTC) on User talk:Sillypickle123}}
<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
'''You reverted to the same map four times. I listed the times you did this on your talk page, but you deleted it (twice). I have proposed a succession of different maps based on the discussion for that day. I have ''not'' uploaded any map more that 3 times in 24 hours. You, on the other hand, uploaded the same map 4 times.''' ] 00:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
* {{AN3|b| indef}} <b>]</b><sup>]</sup>/<sub>]</sub> 14:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
===] reported by ] (Result: noblock)===
== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked 48 hours) ==
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Saving Grace (Philippine TV series)}}
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Winaldcruz088}}
* Previous version reverted to:
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
''' Comments:''' The above mentioned user has been blocked prior to . Others have in the past complained about his behavior number of times . In the above mentioned article he is in edit war with others and has personally attacked other . He has called other editors “apologists of terror groups” and I have tried to reason with the editor to allow the wiki process to take it but he refuses to let a to this issue harmoniously instead keeps reverting the article. In the last 48 hours he had reverted it 4 times.] 22:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
'''In addition''' on {{Article|Saare Jahan Se Achcha}}, a clear desire to edit war and troll can be found in the . Reverts on that page span 4 reverts in 25 hours
# {{diff2|1268697942|02:47, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Guest cast */"
<b>]]</b> 23:24, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
# {{diff2|1268688649|01:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Guest cast */"
# {{diff2|1268687321|01:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
# {{diff|oldid=1268684554|diff=1268686155|label=Consecutive edits made from 01:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC) to 01:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}}
## {{diff2|1268685840|01:17, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Guest cast */"
## {{diff2|1268686155|01:19, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Guest cast */"
'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
*'''admin note'''. No block, reversions over more than 24 hours. ] 04:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
# {{diff2|1268688594|01:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "]Created page with '== January 2025 == ] Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an ]; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the ] to work toward making a version that represents ] among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about ]. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant ] or seek ]. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary ].
'''Being involved in an edit war can result in you being ]'''—especially if you violate the ], which states that an editor must not perform more than three ] 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. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—'''even if you do not violate the three-revert rule'''—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> You didn't read the ] carefully before rethinking about your edits carefully. IMDB is not a credible source to use for TV series. So, stop putting uncredited cast members if there's no reliable sources. ] (]) 03:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)'"
===] reported by ] (Result: no block)===
# {{diff2|1268690605|01:53, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Credit for additional casts */ Reply"
# {{diff2|1268694009|02:16, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Credit for additional casts */ Reply"
# {{diff2|1268695553|02:28, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Credit for additional casts */ Reply"
'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
] violation on
{{Article|Chris Daly}}. {{3RRV|71.139.4.32}}:
* Previous version reverted to:
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
* 1st revert: 14:56, 19 January 2007 71.139.4.32 (Talk)
* 2nd revert: 10:01, 19 January 2007 71.139.4.32 (Talk)
* 3rd revert: 01:36, 19 January 2007 71.139.4.32 (Talk)
* 4th revert: 01:34, 19 January 2007 71.139.4.32 (Talk)
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
<!--
- * Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here.
Your report may be ignored if it is not placed properly.
* Diff of 3RR warning:
-->
The user was not following the ] correctly as the user continue to put uncredited cast members without reliable sources, which are not credited from the TV series. I tried to convince the user to stop and answered questions from what the user asked, but the problem is still ongoing. ] (]) 03:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->User has repeatedly reverted over a period of several weeks. I have placed 3 Rule warnings on his/her page, but they were ignored. ] 22:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
:YOU ARE JUST BEING BIASED!!!! THERE ARE LOT OF CASTS BEING ADDED IN TV SERIES WIKIPEDIA ARITCLE WITHOUT BEING CREDITED IN THE TV ITSELF BUT THEIR NAMES ARE THERE. YOU ARE JUST BEING SELECTIVE!!! ] (]) 03:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
*'''Admin comment'''. There's not much point in a 3RR block, since this user obviously is resetting his/her IP regularly. A semi-protect will stop the shenanigens for a while. ] 04:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
:THERE ARE SECTIONS IN WIKIPEDIA WITHOUT NECESSARY CITATIONS OR LINKS AS LONG AS THEY APPEARED IN THE SERIES THAT IS FINE TO PUT THEIR NAMES THERE TO BE CREDITED. ] (]) 03:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
*{{AN3|b|48 hours}} ] (]) 09:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|180.195.212.14}}
{{Article|Transnistria}}. {{3RRV|William Mauco}}:
The user is edit-warring to insert a list of "supported by" countries into the military conflict infobox.
* Previous version reverted to:
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
* Necessary only for new users: Not a new user
#
#
#
#
''' Comments:''' Check also user's block log. All reverts are about removing a "border issue" section, which was agreed in Talk by 4 editors (me, ], ] and ]) , but with which ] don't agree. Some of reverts are also about removing other information. I have to mention that "border issues" section was a stable part of this unstable article from 2 September until end of December and its removal was one of the reasons of the edit war which was the cause of article protection for 3 weeks.--] 00:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
:: I made four edits, and not all four were clearcut reverts. The page was protected until less than 24 hours ago. Instead of seeking consensus in Talk, ] waited until it was unprotected. Then he immediately launched onto the page and made 9 major edits within 7 hours. It is not just a "border issues" section, as he claims, and he did not wait for consensus. In fact, some of the editors whom he cites are involved with me in an ongoing and very constructive discussion on how to improve this section in ] right now. May I also request that you look closely at the DIFFs which he provides, as one of them shows an alternate border issues section added by me (and proposed by another user) which had broader support and consensus on the talk page. - ] 00:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' ], ]
:::All 4 are reverts, at least regarding "border issues" section. There is no alternative border issue section added by Mauco. Some are also reverts regarding US Department of State position or of usage of word "officially" regarding Pridnestrovie name for Transnistria. All issues were long discussed in Talk. Anybody who check my edit count can see that I have a lot more edits in Talk pages than in mainspaces, the claim that I don't seek consensus in talk is fake.--] 01:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
''' Comments:''' User has history of reverting and deleting content with citations and adding content without citations including blogs.Please also see his reverts on Jan 3rd.this is despite another anon requseting in the talk page not to revert and adding expert India to accomodate is his point of view.] 02:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
<span style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:10pt;color:#000000">--] ]</span> 14:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
*'''admin commment'''. No violation of ] here.
<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
===] reported by ] (Result:)===
*{{AN3|b|one week}}. ] (]) 15:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked 1 month) ==
] violation on
{{Article|Transnistria}}. {{3RRV|MariusM}}:
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Discovery Zone}} <br />
* Previous version reverted to:
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|73.194.17.8}}
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
* 5th revert:
* 6th revert:
* 7th revert:
* 8th revert:
* 9th revert:
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
* Necessary only for new users: Not a new user, but I warned him anyway out of courtesy:
#
#
#
#
''' Comments:''' Cronic edit warrior, see his block log. Frequent use of uncivil and/or misleading edit comments. Background: ] was under full protection due to previous revert warring. Many of us are in the process of working out the issues in Talk at this point in time, and making progress. Protection was prematurely lifted in 19 Jan at 12:56. Immediately thereafter, ] took advantage of this by falsely claiming "consensus" when there was none, adding disputed pet POV items, and removing of stable features of the article. Despite nine edits in seven or eight hours, he was notably unwilling to seriously discuss most of this in the same period in the article's Talk page where I and other editors meanwhile kept working on developing acceptable phrasing, with a lot of progress. - ] 01:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
:Only 5th, 8th and 9th are reverts, rest are edits long discussed in talk. Some of them are consecutive edits for different part of the article (you can see my name in previous edit). In fact, Mauco want to have veto rights for all Transnistria-related articles. Talk page is showing that the majority of editors accepted the changes that I added, only Mauco was against, he broke the 3RR (see above report) and I had to revert him. I stopped at 3 reverts.--] 01:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
:As an example of bad faith by the person who reported me, he agreed to remove the paragraph "Transnistria in popular culture" , however now he listed the agreed edit as my 4th revert. Also, he agreed to split the "violent incidents" section in "antisemitic incidents" and "explosions" but now he is reporting this agreed edit as my 3rd revert.--] 02:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
* Diff of 3RRwarning:
'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />Slow edit war, not 3RR, but editor has shown no effort to engage. -- ] (]) 15:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
*{{AN3|b|1 month}} ] (]) 17:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
This user has also added content of a similar nature farther back but they aren't direct reverts so I guess they don't count. He has been warned several times for several policy violations on his ] but they have been summarily ignored or denied. ] 05:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked indefinitely) ==
== Sample violation report to copy ==
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Dave Upthegrove}}
<pre>
===] reported by ] (Result:)===
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|ChasePlowman2014}}
<!-- If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to.
For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous-version for each revert. -->
* 1st revert:
* 2nd revert:
* 3rd revert:
* 4th revert:
<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
<!--
# {{diff2|1268792658|15:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
- * Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here.
# {{diff2|1268747259|09:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
Your report may be ignored if it is not placed properly.
# {{diff2|1268721660|05:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
* Diff of 3RR warning:
# {{diff2|1268541485|08:09, 10 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
-->
'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
</pre>
'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
Note on completing a 3RR report:
* Copy the template above, the text within but not including <nowiki><pre>...</pre></nowiki>
* Replace <nowiki>http://DIFFS</nowiki> with a link to the ] and the DIFFTIME with the timestamp
<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
* We need to know that there are at least four reverts. List them, and replace <nowiki>http://VersionLink</nowiki> with a link to the version that the first revert reverted to. If the reverts are subtle or different, please provide an explanation of why they are all reverts. Even if the reverts are straightforward, it's helpful to point out the words or sentences being reverted.
* Warnings are a good idea but not obligatory
Was just blocked for 2 weeks for edit warring. Is now edit warring on ]. Two reverts on 10 Jan and 2 on 11 Jan. ] ] 16:09, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
*Blocked indefinitely.--] (]) 16:29, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: Fully protected for one day) ==
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Ebrahim Raisi}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Taha Danesh}}
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
#
#
#
#
#
'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
The latter four reverts were made within a two hour period and therefore a clear violation of the three revert rule. In each of these reverts they were restoring "several" as an estimate despite it being completely unsourced. In their reverts they claimed that the sources cited such as Amnesty International and NBC news are "clearly biased and politically motivated". They further claimed that "thousands" which I added from the sources was unsourced even though I quoted the relevant text from Amnesty. They were warned four days before for edit warring over this exact issue on the related ]. User:HistoryofIran and told them to go talk. They also warned them for edit warring but Taha Danesh quickly . A couple days later Taha Danesh resumed edit warring this time on Ebrahim Raisi.
*Fully protected by another administrator.--] (]) 23:14, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Shaggy (musician)}}
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|2A02:85F:F0DC:1CBA:E06E:9D08:A856:D9F6}}
'''Previous version reverted to:'''
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
# {{diff2|1268885591|01:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268882978|01:01, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268882249|00:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268878341|00:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268832934|19:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
# {{diff2|1268885720|01:18, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."
'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
# {{diff2|1268886077|01:21, 12 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* User:2A02:85F:F0DC:1CBA:E06E:9D08:A856:D9F6 */ new section"
When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.
The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from.
Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed.
Definition of edit warring
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.
Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)
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.
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: (7 January 2025)
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:
Comments: The user was warned multiple times to not insert poorly sourcedcontentious material in a page which is a living person's biography. Despite this, the user has continued to insert original research, while making no attempt to refrain from disruptive editing behaviour or initiate a discussion on the talk page.
I've made my position clear. There is NO source that supports your version that between October 2006 and January 2012 he was not a member of any group. The current version is both manipulative (goes from 2006 Mujahideen Shura Council straight to 2012 al-Nusra) and contradicts RS that mention him as member of ISI in that period. There are RS that support my version, none that supports yours. A revision that'd include "2008-2012 ISI" (which would bypass his prison years 2006-08) would be a better solution. But a career infobox that straight-up omits the entire 2006-12 period is unacceptable.--BubbleBabis (talk) 19:41, 8 January 2025 (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. And really, this deserves more talking out on the talk page, which hasn't seen any discussion of this for a week (But, that having been said, if it continues like this I or another admin may be less tolerant). Daniel Case (talk) 23:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
This article is about a highly anticipated film with a large base of interest. There are hundreds of references available following its teaser and poster release, and it has been confirmed that principal photography has begun. Despite all this, the user CNMall41 has draftified the article multiple times. When asked about the policy, he simply forwarded the entire article, which was edited by multiple editors, to satisfy his personal ego. His actions are not collaborative and should be noted. Shecose (talk) 09:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
That is because CNMall41's only possible actual justification for the move warring against a draftification objection is block evasion, and their actions would normally lead to a block. And even if this is block evasion, waiting for the investigation's result would have been advisable. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Page protected: Move protection for now, and if redirection is still desired, please start a deletion discussion for it (WP:ATD-R). Even if this is sockpuppetry, the page qualifies neither for G5 (due to substantial edits by others) nor redirection as a form of reverting block evasion (due to collateral damage). In such cases, it can help to focus on the content and decide independently of whether someone might be a sockpuppeteer. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
I realize the policy states, An editor must not perform more than three reverts, right? This is three, not more than three. It shows the desperation. Shecose (talk) 07:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Shecose, an editor must not perform twenty reverts either, yet that doesn't mean nineteen reverts are fine. Edit warring isn't limited to violations of the three revert rule. You both have edit warred. The edit war has ended since, and no action is needed here; if any action is taken, that's via the sockpuppetry investigation, but we don't need to keep the edit warring report open in the meantime. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:
Comments:
I also find the baseless message the user had left me personally intimidating . Threats to report my 3RR message . Is this how unwelcoming Misplaced Pages is supposed to be? PhilipPirrip (talk) 09:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
01:39, 11 January 2025 (UTC) "←Created page with '== January 2025 == Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that 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. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. You didn't read the MOS:TVCAST carefully before rethinking about your edits carefully. IMDB is not a credible source to use for TV series. So, stop putting uncredited cast members if there's no reliable sources. JRGuevarra (talk) 03:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)'"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
The user was not following the MOS:TVCAST correctly as the user continue to put uncredited cast members without reliable sources, which are not credited from the TV series. I tried to convince the user to stop and answered questions from what the user asked, but the problem is still ongoing. JRGuevarra (talk) 03:13, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
YOU ARE JUST BEING BIASED!!!! THERE ARE LOT OF CASTS BEING ADDED IN TV SERIES WIKIPEDIA ARITCLE WITHOUT BEING CREDITED IN THE TV ITSELF BUT THEIR NAMES ARE THERE. YOU ARE JUST BEING SELECTIVE!!! Winaldcruz088 (talk) 03:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
THERE ARE SECTIONS IN WIKIPEDIA WITHOUT NECESSARY CITATIONS OR LINKS AS LONG AS THEY APPEARED IN THE SERIES THAT IS FINE TO PUT THEIR NAMES THERE TO BE CREDITED. Winaldcruz088 (talk) 03:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:
Comments:
The latter four reverts were made within a two hour period and therefore a clear violation of the three revert rule. In each of these reverts they were restoring "several" as an estimate despite it being completely unsourced. In their reverts they claimed that the sources cited such as Amnesty International and NBC news are "clearly biased and politically motivated". They further claimed that "thousands" which I added from the sources was unsourced even though I quoted the relevant text from Amnesty. They were warned four days before for edit warring over this exact issue on the related Ruhollah Khomeini. User:HistoryofIran reverted them and told them to go talk. They also warned them for edit warring but Taha Danesh quickly deleted the notice. A couple days later Taha Danesh resumed edit warring this time on Ebrahim Raisi.
Update this page
You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
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. And really, this deserves more talking out on the talk page, which hasn't seen any discussion of this for a week (But, that having been said, if it continues like this I or another admin may be less tolerant). Daniel Case (talk) 23:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Page protected: Move protection for now, and if redirection is still desired, please start a deletion discussion for it (WP:ATD-R). Even if this is sockpuppetry, the page qualifies neither for G5 (due to substantial edits by others) nor redirection as a form of reverting block evasion (due to collateral damage). In such cases, it can help to focus on the content and decide independently of whether someone might be a sockpuppeteer. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:51, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Blocked indefinitely Jauerback/dude. 14:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Blocked – for a period of 48 hours 331dot (talk) 09:20, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
