Misplaced Pages

:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

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.
< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:33, 30 September 2015 editSNUGGUMS (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers121,188 edits OneClickArchiver archived User:Simpleabd reported by User:AsceticRose (Result: Blocked 48 hours) to [[Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive295#User:Simpleabd reported by User:AsceticRose (...← Previous edit Latest revision as of 11:19, 8 January 2025 edit undoShadowwarrior8 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,924 edits →User:BubbleBabis reported by Shadowwarrior8 (Result: ): fixTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Noticeboard for edit warring}}
__NEWSECTIONLINK__{{no admin backlog}}
<noinclude>{{pp-move-indef}}{{/Header}}] <!--Adds protection template automatically if semi-protected--><noinclude>{{#if:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|{{pp|small=yes}}}}__NEWSECTIONLINK__{{no admin backlog}}{{/Header}}] ]
{{pp-move|small=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}} |archiveheader = {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
|maxarchivesize = 250K |maxarchivesize = 250K
|counter = 295 |counter = 491
|algo = old(48h) |algo = old(2d)
|key = 0a3bba89e703569428f2aab1add75bd7d7d1583d2d1f397783aee23fda62b06f
|key = c95548204df2d271954945f82c43354a
|archive = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive%(counter)d |archive = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive%(counter)d
}}</noinclude>
}}</noinclude><!--<?xml version="1.0"?><api><query><pages><page pageid="3741656" ns="4" title="Misplaced Pages:Administrators&#039; noticeboard/Edit warring"><revisions><rev>=Reports=>
<!-- NOTE: THE *BOTTOM* IS THE PLACE FOR NEW REPORTS. -->


== ] reported by ] (Result: Page protected) ==
NOTE: THE *BOTTOM* IS THE PLACE FOR NEW REPORTS. -->


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Bengali–Assamese script}}
== ] reported by ] (Result: Semi, Warnings) ==


'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Tejoshkriyo}}
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Demographics of Tunisia}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Tounsimentounes}}


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
Previous version reverted to:
# {{diff2|1267607323|21:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "If you believe that my intentions are chauvinism, then you are mistaken, for the previous sentencing implies to misinform the general audience. My intention is to present what is the truth and what goes on a global scale as well as the status of the Eastern nagari -script. Bengalis are not the only ones who call this the "Bengali script", even though officially this should be called the "Eastern Nagari script". Both Bengalis and the layman global public sphere refer this as the "Bengali script"."
# {{diff|oldid=1267598936|diff=1267605297|label=Consecutive edits made from 21:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC) to 21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}}
## {{diff2|1267604312|21:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "The reference indeed mentions "Bengalis will refer to the script of their language exclusively as the 'Bengali script'", because certainly an ethnic group will attribute the script/alphabet they utilise as THEIRS but it still disregards on what goes internationally and how people approach this script in general; "...the name 'Bengali script' dominates the global public sphere". The point still stands within the limitation of the reference and takes this terminology on a broader scale."
## {{diff2|1267605024|21:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Readded the reference but changed the sentencing of the visual page for accuracy."
## {{diff2|1267605297|21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "changed page number"
# {{diff2|1267593518|20:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "It is apparent that the reference hasn't been utilised correctly. The sentence: "It is commonly referred to as the Bengali script by Bengalis" is simply incorrect, for it emphasizes that ONLY Bengalis are the one who refer this script as the "Bengali script". The reference study attached to this sentence says otherwise; "...the name 'Bengali script' dominates the global public sphere", which should tell you that not only Bengalis refer this as the "Bengali script", when non-Bengalis do it too."
# {{diff2|1267529376|14:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""


'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
# {{diff2|1267605728|21:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."
Diffs of the user's reverts:
#
#
#
# (This last one is rather dubious for reasons discussed below)


'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
# {{diff2|1267603474|21:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* January 2024 */ new section"
<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
# {{diff2|1267607080|21:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* January 2024 */ Reply"
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:


<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
and on the user's talk page under


Makes changes to longstanding version to contentious topic, removes source, doesn't abide by ], keeps edit warring and even when discussion has started in the talk page. Note similar POV removal dated and also the use of minor ('''m''') in some of the edits which are not ]. ] (]) 22:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
<u>Comments:</u> <br />
:Also note this POV arrangement . - ] (]) 22:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
*{{AN3|p}} ] (]) 02:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ] reported by ] (Result: 1 week block) ==
I am not sure this is a 3RR violation, because the 41.x IP seems likely to be the same person who recently necessitated page semi-protection on ] - the edit summaries and nature of the edits are suggestive to me that that is the case. If so, perhaps the 4th revert is justified as reverting a persistently disruptive editor - indeed, one I also reverted.


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|2010: The Year We Make Contact}}
If it _is_ a 3RR violation, of course, that also means I'm up to 3 reverts from 15:07 GMT on the 28th September onwards, so if that necessitates action, so be it.


'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Æ's old account wasn't working}}
Like last time I was here, for all I know {{u|Tounsimentounes}} is _right_, but I'm not getting anywhere on having them produce sources to demonstrate it. ] (]) 06:52, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
*'''Result:''' Semiprotected one month. ] and ] are both at three reverts and are '''warned''' not to continue. Tounsimentounes stated on Talk: ''"We had already approved of that on the "Religion en Tunisie" French page, so we started cleaning the errors on the other language's pages"'' This doesn't excuse you from persuading editors here that your changes are an improvement. ] (]) 03:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
== ] reported by ] (Result: Page protected) ==


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|EA Sports UFC}} <br />
# {{diff2|1267674154|04:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}}
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|AdrianGamer}}
# {{diff2|1267671902|04:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Multiple editors also do not support ''your'' synthesised stance."
# {{diff2|1267633237|00:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Something bad is going to happen to all of us if we don't just shut up here. Something terrible."
# {{diff2|1267482436|08:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Drop it."
# {{diff2|1267472758|07:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Just drop it."


'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->
# {{diff2|1267479624|08:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Caution: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on ]."
# {{diff2|1267669527|03:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule on ]."


'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
Previous version reverted to:
# {{diff2|1267468706|06:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Unsourced content in lead */ r"


<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
Diffs of the user's reverts:
#
#
#
#


One editor is repeatedly restoring unsourced content to lead that is currently under discussion on talk page. Including me, two editors have reverted their edits and three editors have objected to the content on the talk page. – ] (]) 04:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:


:Listen.
<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
:], you started this whole ordeal by reverting everyone's edits without taking any into consideration, and attempting to bludgeon the talk page with your comments. You have also broken 3RR rule multiple times. Now stop please. ] (]) 04:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
::You can make up whatever narratives you want. I think your contributions to the talk page discussion speak for themselves. If you think I have violated a policy, then feel free to provide that evidence. You have also now made 5 reverts in 24 hours . – ] (]) 04:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


* Æ's old account wasn't working blocked for a week. ] (]) 04:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
<u>Comments:</u> <br />
* I have tried to communicate with all the involved editors and I heard no response from them. Adding ] is definitely not acceptable. What I did is to simply revert them, as adding GAMECRUFT can be considered as . I did not break the 3RR Rule. I revert you within a 48-hour period. ] (]) 16:10, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
] it is not a valid reason to remove content. Removing valid content is vandalism. --] (]) 16:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
:: Except that you were reverted by at least three editors for adding content that adds nothing to the article and which can be considered ] so you are the one going against policy. And anyone who looks at the article history can see that you are the one edit warring.--] (]) 16:34, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
:: It is not valid content. It's inappropriate per guidelines that are already established. If you want to re-add it then you need to open a discussion about why this case is exempt from the guidelines. --] (]) 18:54, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
*{{AN3|p}} There's a few IP's that sound the same at the article... ] <sup>]</sup> 21:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


== ] reported by ] (Result: Indefinitely blocked) == == ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked one week) ==


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|The Naked Communist}} <br /> '''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (film)}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Hawljo}} '''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Chance997}}


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
Previous version reverted to:
#
#
#
#


'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
Diffs of the user's reverts:
#
#
#
#
#


'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:
Also this warning, for a separate article:


'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: - not article Talk page, but mine, where I recommended taking this persistent edit to the article Talk page


<u>Comments:</u> <br /> <u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
Newly created account, edit warring on at least two articles, no engagement on any Talk page, persisting beyond warnings. ] (]) 22:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
:Also at or beyond 3RR at and . ] (]) 22:46, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
*{{AN3|n}}. I've indefinitely blocked the user as ].--] (]) 23:25, 29 September 2015 (UTC)


Chance997 has been repeatedly and persistently editing the plot summary for the page on this film to include the words "<code><nowiki>a ] containing an ] alien ]</nowiki></code>" (with those hyperlinks) as opposed to "a meteorite containing an alien hedgehog", in addition to other similar additions of unneeded wikilinks for common words such as "fox", "warrior", "sheriff" and "mad scientist". They have also made other superfluous additions, such as unneeded additional words specifying characters' physical characteristics (adding the words at one point, which is unnecessary for the plot summary as, not only is this description trivial fluff, these characteristics are shown in the film poster and in the top image on the dedicated article for the ]). These changes have been reverted multiple times, by myself, ] and ], citing ] as the reason for reverting them. I have attempted to engage them in discussion both on their user talk page, and on the article's talk page, as has Carlinal, and they have been unresponsive, and simply continued in restoring their preferred version. After warning and informing them about the guidelines on edit warring, plot summary length, and the need for communication, I have come here to report them for edit warring after they have continued to stonewall me and the other editors on the article. ] '''''<small style="font-size:70%;">(])</small>''''' 12:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
== ] reported by ] (Result: no action) ==


I'll just add that this editor has been troublesome for quite some time. I just had to do a mass revert at ] to remove excessive overlinking. They have so far refused to respond to any warnings at their talk page. ] (]) 15:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Uniformitarianism}} <br />
*{{AN3|b|one week}}. ] (]) 15:59, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Hal2k1}}


== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked 48 hours) ==
<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|2024 United Kingdom general election}}
Previous version reverted to: "Uniformitarianism is the assumption that ..."


'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|ToadGuy101}}
<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
Diffs of the user's reverts:


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
# 14:14, 26 September 2015‎ ''"Uniformitarianism is claimed to be an assumption that ..."''
# 23:36, 26 September 2015 ''"Uniformitarianism is the principle, claimed by some to be an assumption, that ..."''
# 10:23, 27 September 2015‎ ''"Uniformitarianism is the principle or assumption that ..."''
# 11:06, 27 September 2015‎ ''"Uniformitarianism is the principle or assumption that ..."''


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
# {{diff2|1267771905|16:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
# {{diff2|1267757010|14:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])Stop whining about him"
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Hal2k1#Notice_of_Edit_warring_noticeboard_discussion
# {{diff2|1267751151|14:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1267747621|13:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""


'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
# {{diff2|1267751597|14:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Uniformitarianism#HELP.21.21.21.21_Page_has_been_sabotaged_-_Once_again.2C_.22Uniformitarianism.22_is_not_an_assumption


'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
<u>Comments:</u> <br />
# {{diff2|1267301347|14:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC) on Talk:2024 United Kingdom general election}} "/* Adding other mainstream parties to info box. */ new section"


<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
Please be advised that this account was created with the sole purpose of using the 3RR noticeboard and hopefully settling this dispute. I have been posting as the IP in the attempt at dispute resolution linked above. I'm unsure whether or not this would count as a 3RR violation (the warning was issued after the final edit, and I am also at the third revert, meaning that I am also at least due a warning, if not more) but there is quite a lengthy dispute surrounding it for which I have asked administrator intervention.


User started the talk page thread themselves after their infobox change was reverted twice on 4 January, and has responded there, but after telling other editors that change requiring consensus "isnae how Misplaced Pages works" today they have gone back to reverting it again. ] (]) 18:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Since around March of this year, ], first under an IP, then with a registered account, began attempting to add original research (stating conclusions from sources that are not stated by the sources themselves) to the article that directly contradict the reliable sources. Though corrected several times by other editors since then, he continuously re-introduces his edits, insisting that the reliable sources are "wrong" and refuses to acknowledge that his edits constitute original research despite explanations and warnings from at least two other editors.
*{{AN3|b|48 hours}}. ] (]) 18:35, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ] reported by ] (Result: Indeffed as NOTHERE) ==
The diffs listed above have been part of an attempt to obfuscate the meaning of the opening sentence, which describes uniformitarianism as an "assumption" in accordance with the reliable source underpinning it. ] believes that this contradicts his original research and should be removed from the article.
] (]) 12:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
*{{AN3|n}}. I've semi-protected the article for one month to at a minimum reduce the disruption from accounts who are not logging in. Another administrator is free to take more focused action against a particular editor.--] (]) 14:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
::Re. Your semi-protected notice, I think it should be clarified that I have been posting and editing under the 217.x IP. It is a dynamic public IP which I have no control over, so not an attempt at sockpuppetry.] (]) 14:41, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
{{an3|s}} The report was stale even at the time of posting. I see the editor has now taken to writing huge walls of text so hopefully the edit warring is now over. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 17:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|1000mods}} <br />
== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked then unblocked) ==
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Mindxeraser}}


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
;Page: {{pagelinks|Turkey}}
;User being reported: {{userlinks|Heimdallr of Æsir}}


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
;Previous version reverted to:
#
#
#
#


'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
;Diffs of the user's reverts:
# ] "(I used to consider myself a Hellenophile (listening to Dalaras, etc.) but thanks to Greeks like Dr.K and Athenean, I can't help but wish for the complete economic collapse and starvation of Greece.)"
# {{diff|oldid=683462163|diff=683473103|label=Consecutive edits made from 13:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC) to 14:37, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}}
## {{diff2|683467633|13:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Adding the original link, which is given as the source of this map in Wikimedia Commons: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/kurdish_lands_92.jpg"
## {{diff2|683473103|14:37, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "I checked out the Talk page and there is obviously no consensus at all. Unlike the situation in Iraq and Iran, there is no regional district or subdivision named "Kurdistan" in Turkey. Also, the map is from 1992 and therefore obsolete."
# {{diff2|683427626|06:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Those are two different, separate sources. The precise definition in the original CIA map is "Kurdish-inhabited area". Changing this definition amounts to "POV", while combining separate sources to reach a new result amounts to "original research"."
# {{diff2|683308221|13:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)}} "This is what the original CIA source says. Stop POV pushing: https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Kurdish-inhabited_area_by_CIA_(1992).jpg"
# {{diff2|683295820|11:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)}} "The CIA map says "Kurdish-inhabited areas", not "Kurdish-majority areas": https://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Kurdish-inhabited_area_by_CIA_(1992).jpg"


'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''


<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
{{AN3|b|indef}} as ]. ] (]) 21:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ] reported by ] (Result: /64 blocked two weeks) ==


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Fernanda Torres}}
;<u>Comments:</u>


'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|2804:7F0:9701:8C07:BEC:7870:C52:1B53}}
Obvious sock of {{vandal|Lord of Rivendell}}. Will not stop relentless edit-warring. Edit-warring MO identical to other socks. Has been blocked for edit-warring recently. ]&nbsp;<small><sup style="position:relative">]<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.5ex;*left:-5.5ex">]</span></sup></small> 14:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:Note that there's actually a two-week-old SPI on this user still active at ]. --] (]) 15:51, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:Was blocked then unblocked by {{ul|Black Kite}}. This is also being discussed at ]. Suggest we close this discussion. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 17:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
== ] reported by ] (Result: blocked) ==


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
;Page: {{pagelinks|Narcos}}
# {{diff2|1267808569|20:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Reverted edits by DandelionAndBurdock."
;User being reported: {{userlinks|Signedzzz}}
# {{diff2|1267807858|20:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Restored old version."
# {{diff2|1267807213|20:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Restored old version."
# {{diff2|1267806982|20:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Restored old version."
# {{diff2|1267806103|20:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Restored old version."


'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
;Previous version reverted to:
# {{diff2|1267807698|20:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Caution: Unconstructive editing (])"
# {{diff2|1267808131|20:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Disruptive editing (])"


'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
;Diffs of the user's reverts:
# {{diff2|683508974|18:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 683508500 by ] (])"it's an issue of undue weight to include only negative reviews". this version contains the same reviews - explain"
# {{diff2|683508285|18:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 683507906 by ] (])dont be ridiculous. you made 1 cmt so far, that the reviews are all negative, which you yourself dont even believe"
# {{diff2|683507287|18:42, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 683507133 by ] (])no consensus - or discussion - for your change"
# {{diff2|683506272|18:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "/* Reception */ per talk"
# {{diff2|683214650|21:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 683213820 by ] (])justify your edit on talk"
# {{diff2|683213454|21:44, 28 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 683212909 by ] (])no, re-adding the source of the contradiction, and splitting RT section in 2 is clearly not an improvement. please justify this on talk"
# {{diff2|683212721|21:37, 28 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Undid revision 683211591 by ] (])youve replaced the "positive reviews" self contradiction, moved RT because it's not "positive" enough, not an improvement"


;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
# {{diff2|683236055|00:53, 29 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on ]. (])"
# {{diff2|683508075|18:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]. (])"


<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
{{AN3|b|two weeks}} The whole /64 since this involved relevant information on a BLP. ] (]) 21:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Ongoing discussion at ].
;<u>Comments:</u>


== ] reported by ] (Result: Page already protected) ==
Signedzzz has been edit warring with myself and another user for the last couple days (there are likely more than the seven reverts provided above, but four in 20 minutes should be enough to prove the edit warring exists). There is a discussion on the talk page but I'm not honestly sure what his objection is, other than there being "no consenus" for said changes (despite the fact that two other users find the changes to be improvements). The user in question has also been blocked thrice since last November for edit warring. ''']''' 19:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Template:Twenty20 competitions}}
:This user has made 2 comments on talk:
*one in which he agrees with the other user that the reviews are all negative (and therefore the section needs rewriting) - which he doesn't believe, since his preferred version contains precisely the same reviews
*and today, he claims to have added a positive review, which is simply untrue
:Reverting his reverts seems to be the only way to get him to engage on article talk. Unfortunately his 2 comments there indicate that, so far at least, he is unwilling or unable to make any honest or useful comments. ] (]) 19:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
::I've explained why I feel the version you keep reverting from is better . You haven't explained why you keep reverting to that version. ''']''' 19:26, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:::*You say you've explained. Which of your two comments contained the explanation, the or the ?
:::* explained very clearly why I prefer the old, stable version. ] (]) 19:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:::*Did you read it? What is "The reviews selected by Rotten Tomatoes clearly make more sense in the RT section" if it's not an explanation? Why do you claim that a) the reviews were all negative and b) that you have added a positive review? These are both completely false claims. ] (]) 19:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:::*Now you are using a comment you only just added after filing this report, to cover up for the fact that you never attempted to explain your reverts before. ] (]) 19:52, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
:::::Sorry but it's hard to take seriously any comment that opens by dismissing concerns raised by two users with the phrase "which no one believes." You should also see how other articles handle critical reception: it's not the way you think it should be. Finally, your little comment does not justify reverting four times in 20 minutes. That's the issue here and I'm done responding to your pointless queries. If you'd like to consider improving the article, great; that discussion goes on the talk page. ''']''' 19:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
::::::*And by the way, I already , and answered, your only explanation "putting the negative review separately is better", before your belated comment just now confirming that. I shouldn't have to guess what your argument actually is, you should just state it to begin with. ] (]) 20:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I've blocked for a week. Calidum: it takes two to edit war and you are not blameless here. &mdash;&nbsp;Martin <small>(]&nbsp;·&nbsp;])</small> 20:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Csknp}}
== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
;Page: {{pagelinks|Poppy straw}}
;User being reported: {{userlinks|RajanMarwaha}}


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
;Previous version reverted to:
# {{diff2|1267452946|04:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}}
# {{diff2|1267525585|14:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)}}


;Diffs of the user's reverts: '''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
# {{diff2|1267644988|01:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "ONLY Warning: Edit warring (])"
# {{diff2|683502828|18:11, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Opium Poppy straw can be one of several different things: ## What is left after the poppy seed harvest, so the dried stalks, stem and leaves of poppies grown for their seeds ## The dried leaves and stalk harvested after the seed pod has been used for tr"
# {{diff2|1267646582|01:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* January 2025 */ Reply"
# {{diff|oldid=683505997|diff=683508758|label=Consecutive edits made from 18:39, 30 September 2015 (UTC) to 18:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}}
## {{diff2|683506768|18:39, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "##What is left after the poppy seed harvest, so the dried stalks, stem and leaves of poppies grown for their seeds ## The dried leaves and stalk harvested after the seed pod has been used for traditional opium extraction ## The dried leaves, stalk a"
## {{diff2|683507171|18:41, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "##What is left after the poppy seed harvest, so the dried stalks, stem and leaves of poppies grown for their seeds ## The dried leaves and stalk harvested after the seed pod has been used for traditional opium extraction ## The dried leaves, stalk a"
## {{diff2|683507544|18:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "##What is left after the poppy seed harvest, so the dried stalks, stem and leaves of poppies grown for their seeds ## The dried leaves and stalk harvested after the seed pod has been used for traditional opium extraction ## The dried leaves, stalk a"
## {{diff2|683508758|18:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "##What is left after the poppy seed harvest, so the dried stalks, stem and leaves of poppies grown for their seeds ## The dried leaves and stalk harvested after the seed pod has been used for traditional opium extraction ## The dried leaves, stalk a"
# {{diff2|683515494|19:38, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Decorative Dried Flower producer/growers and wholesalers ( such as UK FLOWER POWER) based in Europe, hand pick the decorative mature seeded pods/heads with or without the stalks for use as floral decorations for visual gratification in arrangements, these"
# {{diff2|683517789|19:54, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Poppy straw (also poppy chaff or husk) is a by-product of the poppy seed harvest, used as seeds in food such as bread. To get poppy straw from opium poppy (Papaver Somniferum.L) the crop is harvested when fully mature and dry in the field, minus the ripe"
# {{diff2|683520478|20:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Poppy straw (also poppy chaff or husk) is a by-product of the poppy seed harvest, used as seeds in food such as bread. To get poppy straw from opium poppy (Papaver Somniferum.L) the crop is harvested when fully mature and dry in the field, minus the ripe"
# {{diff2|683523271|20:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)}} "Editing requested"


;Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: '''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
# {{diff|oldid=1267699885|diff=1267736737|label=Consecutive edits made from 07:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC) to 12:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC) on User talk:Vestrian24Bio}}


<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
This user has been changing the template format and moving to inappropriate title despite warning and discussion. <span class="nowrap"><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#0078D7;">'''''Vestrian'''''</span>]</span> 02:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
: I told the user not to make any changes until the discussion is over and a consensus is reached... but, they are just doing it... <span class="nowrap"><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#0078D7;">'''''Vestrian'''''</span>]</span> 02:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
*{{AN3|p}} (by {{u|BusterD}}) ] (]) 06:42, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==
;Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|UNITA}}


'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|5.187.0.85}}
;<u>Comments:</u>


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
Well past 3RR ] (])(]) 20:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
*I've just given the user advice to discuss desired changes on the article talk page and to go in smaller chunks, requesting specific changes. We'll see what the user does based on that advice. —''']''' (]) 21:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
# {{diff2|1268102471|04:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268102394|04:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268102305|04:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268102212|04:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
# {{diff2|1268101573|04:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"


'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==




'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
;Page: {{pagelinks|Hell in a Cell (2015)}}
;User being reported: {{userlinks|Lord Laitinen}}


https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hell_in_a_Cell_%282015%29&type=revision&diff=683523276&oldid=683523111
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hell_in_a_Cell_%282015%29&type=revision&diff=683525106&oldid=683524649
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hell_in_a_Cell_%282015%29&type=revision&diff=683525934&oldid=683525476
User has clearly broken the 3RR, he's claiming that the content can't be added because it hasn't been officially announced but ] says otherwise. Also claiming that the source isn't reliable by his standards. I could easily get 5 more references that say the same exact thing, but the problem is when he undoes these edits he's also re-adding unreferenced material I removed from the page.


<u>'''Comments:'''</u> Vandalism
Additionally, this was left on my talk page. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AFunkatastic&type=revision&diff=683526014&oldid=683524744
Claiming I've been adding unsourced material, even though as you clearly can see from the sources above that I was adding sourced content and removing unsourced and inaccurate content. And he was reverting said edits meaning he was doing otherwise.] (]) 20:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


== ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==
Would also like to refer to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&oldid=681980048 where roughly two weeks ago I reported countless users/IP's as the page ] was under intense vandalism on the day of the event. I think it's possible one of the users that owned one/multiple of these IP's/usernames could possibly be attempting some sort of "revenge/retribution" as I reported a large amount of users. Normally I wouldn't assume this but seeing as this user is edit warring on another wrestling page I felt necessary to point it out. I've discontinued editing this page until this report is reviewed as the user showed no signs of stopping.] (]) 21:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Ahmed al-Sharaa}} <br />
{{AN3|comment}} My main complaint against this user was their clear violations of ], though their source, which contained naught but speculation and events expected, but not assured to happen, was a secondary concern of mine. In summary, I am simply trying to make sure that this user does not pass off speculated events and announcements which have not yet happened as facts. I also wish to note that this edit war started with a blatant insult by ] against my editing skills in the comment section of his first revert of my correction. Thank you. <span style="font-family: Brush Script MT"><span style="color:#800080">'''Lord Laitinen''' (])</span></span> 21:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|BubbleBabis}}


'''Previous version reverted to:'''
:User keeps claiming WP:Crystal was violated, despite<ref>http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/another-bout-announced-for-wwe-hell-in-a-cell-spoiler/</ref><ref>http://www.pwmania.com/spoilers-wwe-smackdown-taping-results-for-10115</ref><ref>http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2573757-wwe-smackdown-spoilers-complete-results-and-analysis-for-october-1</ref><ref>http://whatculture.com/wwe/wwe-spoiler-big-match-added-to-hell-in-a-cell.php</ref><ref>http://www.wrestlinginc.com/wi/news/2015/0929/602170/spoiler-another-main-event-revealed-for-wwe-hell-in-a-cell-pay/</ref><ref>http://www.24wrestling.com/spoiler-another-hell-in-a-cell-match-announced/</ref><ref>http://www.prowrestling.net/article.php?WWE-News-New-Hell-in-a-Cell-match-announced-Smackdown-spoiler-44233</ref><ref>http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/625069-new-match-added-to-wwe-hell-in-a-cell-ppv-spoilers</ref><ref>http://www.inquisitr.com/2458973/on-upcoming-smackdown-wwe-to-announce-roman-reigns-match-for-hell-in-a-cell-card/</ref> sources all over the internet saying the same exact thing. This is clearly a spoiler and not speculation (Show is taped Tuesday and airs Thursday) ] clearly overrides ]. As for the user in question as you can see by the three edits I linked above, he reverted three of my edits (technically four because the first edit reverted two edits I made) based on his own interpretation of the guidelines and not the actual guidelines in place. ] (]) 21:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
# (31 December 2024)
# (6 January 2024)
# (7 January 2025)
# (8 January 2025)

'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' (7 January 2025)


'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''

<u>'''Comments:'''</u> The user was warned multiple times to not insert ] ] in a page which is a ]. Despite this, the user has made no attempt to refrain from disruptive editing behaviour or initiate a discussion on the talk page.<br />

] (]) 11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 11:19, 8 January 2025

Noticeboard for edit warring

Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General
Articles,
content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard Shortcuts Update this page

    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 {{subst:An3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.

    You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

    Additional notes
    • 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.
    • Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection.
    • 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.

    Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

    Twinkle's ARV can be used on the user's page to more easily report their behavior, including automatic handling of diffs.
    Click here to create a new report
    Noticeboard archives
    Administrators' (archives, search)
    349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358
    359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368
    Incidents (archives, search)
    1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165
    1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175
    Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
    472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481
    482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491
    Arbitration enforcement (archives)
    327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336
    337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346
    Other links

    User:Tejoshkriyo reported by User:Fylindfotberserk (Result: Page protected)

    Page: Bengali–Assamese script (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Tejoshkriyo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 21:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "If you believe that my intentions are chauvinism, then you are mistaken, for the previous sentencing implies to misinform the general audience. My intention is to present what is the truth and what goes on a global scale as well as the status of the Eastern nagari -script. Bengalis are not the only ones who call this the "Bengali script", even though officially this should be called the "Eastern Nagari script". Both Bengalis and the layman global public sphere refer this as the "Bengali script"."
    2. Consecutive edits made from 21:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC) to 21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 21:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "The reference indeed mentions "Bengalis will refer to the script of their language exclusively as the 'Bengali script'", because certainly an ethnic group will attribute the script/alphabet they utilise as THEIRS but it still disregards on what goes internationally and how people approach this script in general; "...the name 'Bengali script' dominates the global public sphere". The point still stands within the limitation of the reference and takes this terminology on a broader scale."
      2. 21:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "Readded the reference but changed the sentencing of the visual page for accuracy."
      3. 21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "changed page number"
    3. 20:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "It is apparent that the reference hasn't been utilised correctly. The sentence: "It is commonly referred to as the Bengali script by Bengalis" is simply incorrect, for it emphasizes that ONLY Bengalis are the one who refer this script as the "Bengali script". The reference study attached to this sentence says otherwise; "...the name 'Bengali script' dominates the global public sphere", which should tell you that not only Bengalis refer this as the "Bengali script", when non-Bengalis do it too."
    4. 14:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC) ""

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 21:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Bengali–Assamese script."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 21:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ new section"
    2. 21:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "/* January 2024 */ Reply"

    Comments:

    Makes changes to longstanding version to contentious topic, removes source, doesn't abide by WP:BRD, keeps edit warring and even when discussion has started in the talk page. Note similar POV removal dated 10 December 2023 and also the use of minor (m) in some of the edits which are not WP:MINOR. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 22:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

    Also note this POV arrangement . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:Æ's old account wasn't working reported by User:Notwally (Result: 1 week block)

    Page: 2010: The Year We Make Contact (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Æ's old account wasn't working (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 04:22, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
    2. 04:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1267669354 by Notwally (talk) Multiple editors also do not support your synthesised stance."
    3. 00:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Something bad is going to happen to all of us if we don't just shut up here. Something terrible."
    4. 08:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1267479503 by Notwally (talk) Drop it."
    5. 07:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "Just drop it."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 08:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on 2010: The Year We Make Contact."
    2. 03:55, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on 2010: The Year We Make Contact."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 06:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Unsourced content in lead */ r"

    Comments:

    One editor is repeatedly restoring unsourced content to lead that is currently under discussion on talk page. Including me, two editors have reverted their edits and three editors have objected to the content on the talk page. – notwally (talk) 04:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Listen.
    Notwally, you started this whole ordeal by reverting everyone's edits without taking any into consideration, and attempting to bludgeon the talk page with your comments. You have also broken 3RR rule multiple times. Now stop please. Æ's old account wasn't working (talk) 04:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
    You can make up whatever narratives you want. I think your contributions to the talk page discussion speak for themselves. If you think I have violated a policy, then feel free to provide that evidence. You have also now made 5 reverts in 24 hours . – notwally (talk) 04:30, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:Chance997 reported by User:SilviaASH (Result: Blocked one week)

    Page: Sonic the Hedgehog 3 (film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Chance997 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:

    Comments:

    Chance997 has been repeatedly and persistently editing the plot summary for the page on this film to include the words "a ] containing an ] alien ]" (with those hyperlinks) as opposed to "a meteorite containing an alien hedgehog", in addition to other similar additions of unneeded wikilinks for common words such as "fox", "warrior", "sheriff" and "mad scientist". They have also made other superfluous additions, such as unneeded additional words specifying characters' physical characteristics (adding the words "red-striped black hedgehog" at one point, which is unnecessary for the plot summary as, not only is this description trivial fluff, these characteristics are shown in the film poster and in the top image on the dedicated article for the fictional hedgehog in question). These changes have been reverted multiple times, by myself, User:Carlinal and User:Barry Wom, citing MOS:OVERLINK as the reason for reverting them. I have attempted to engage them in discussion both on their user talk page, and on the article's talk page, as has Carlinal, and they have been unresponsive, and simply continued in restoring their preferred version. After warning and informing them about the guidelines on edit warring, plot summary length, and the need for communication, I have come here to report them for edit warring after they have continued to stonewall me and the other editors on the article. silviaASH (inquire within) 12:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    I'll just add that this editor has been troublesome for quite some time. I just had to do a mass revert at Sonic the Hedgehog 2 to remove excessive overlinking. They have so far refused to respond to any warnings at their talk page. Barry Wom (talk) 15:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:ToadGuy101 reported by User:Belbury (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

    Page: 2024 United Kingdom general election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: ToadGuy101 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 16:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1267757647 by CipherRephic (talk)"
    2. 14:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1267751974 by John (talk)Stop whining about him"
    3. 14:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1267747738 by Czello (talk)"
    4. 13:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC) ""

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 14:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on 2024 United Kingdom general election."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 14:09, 4 January 2025 (UTC) on Talk:2024 United Kingdom general election "/* Adding other mainstream parties to info box. */ new section"

    Comments:

    User started the talk page thread themselves after their infobox change was reverted twice on 4 January, and has responded there, but after telling other editors that change requiring consensus "isnae how Misplaced Pages works" today they have gone back to reverting it again. Belbury (talk) 18:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:Mindxeraser reported by User:Viewmont Viking (Result: Indeffed as NOTHERE)

    Page: 1000mods (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Mindxeraser (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:

    Comments:
    Blocked indefinitely as NOTHERE. Daniel Case (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:2804:7F0:9701:8C07:BEC:7870:C52:1B53 reported by User:DandelionAndBurdock (Result: /64 blocked two weeks)

    Page: Fernanda Torres (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 2804:7F0:9701:8C07:BEC:7870:C52:1B53 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 20:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Reverted edits by DandelionAndBurdock."
    2. 20:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored old version."
    3. 20:10, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored old version."
    4. 20:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored old version."
    5. 20:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored old version."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 20:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing (UV 0.1.6)"
    2. 20:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing (UV 0.1.6)"

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments: Blocked – for a period of two weeks The whole /64 since this involved relevant information on a BLP. Daniel Case (talk) 21:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:Csknp reported by User:Vestrian24Bio (Result: Page already protected)

    Page: Template:Twenty20 competitions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Csknp (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 04:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
    2. 14:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 01:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "ONLY Warning: Edit warring (UV 0.1.6)"
    2. 01:40, 6 January 2025 (UTC) "/* January 2025 */ Reply"

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. Consecutive edits made from 07:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC) to 12:09, 6 January 2025 (UTC) on User talk:Vestrian24Bio

    Comments: This user has been changing the template format and moving to inappropriate title despite warning and discussion. Vestrian24Bio 02:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

    I told the user not to make any changes until the discussion is over and a consensus is reached... but, they are just doing it... Vestrian24Bio 02:29, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

    User:5.187.0.85 reported by User:Darth Stabro (Result: )

    Page: UNITA (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 5.187.0.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 04:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1268102408 by Untamed1910 (talk)"
    2. 04:43, 8 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1268102323 by Untamed1910 (talk)"
    3. 04:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1268102267 by Untamed1910 (talk)"
    4. 04:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1268101988 by MrOllie (talk)"
    5. 04:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1268074482 by MrOllie (talk)"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments: Vandalism

    User:BubbleBabis reported by Shadowwarrior8 (Result: )

    Page: Ahmed al-Sharaa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: BubbleBabis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. (31 December 2024)
    2. (6 January 2024)
    3. (7 January 2025)
    4. (8 January 2025)

    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 sourced contentious material in a page which is a living person's biography. Despite this, the user has made no attempt to refrain from disruptive editing behaviour or initiate a discussion on the talk page.

    Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 11:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

    Categories: