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

< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 02:28, 6 December 2006 view sourceKhoikhoi (talk \| contribs)71,605 edits →[] reported by User:[] (Result:): 31 hours← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 01:46, 24 January 2025 view source Zinnober9 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers52,996 editsm Wiki-link in external-link syntax error addressed
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Short description\|Noticeboard for edit warring}}
	<center>'''Do not continue a dispute on this page: Please keep on topic.'''</center>
			{{pp-sock\|small=yes}}
			<!--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
			\|archiveheader = {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
			\|maxarchivesize = 250K
			\|counter = 491
			\|algo = old(2d)
			\|key = 0a3bba89e703569428f2aab1add75bd7d7d1583d2d1f397783aee23fda62b06f
			\|archive = Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive%(counter)d
			}}</noinclude>
			<!-- NOTE: THE BOTTOM IS THE PLACE FOR NEW REPORTS. -->

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Page protected indef) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|List of religious slurs}}
	{{Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRHeader}}
	{{adminbacklog}}
	<!-- 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-->

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Xuangzadoo}}
	==Violations==

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	Please place new reports '''at the bottom'''.

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	===] reported by ] (Result:)===
			# {{diff2\|1270068423\|19:29, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (rv, none of that contradicts my edits. There are no sources which call "pajeet" a religious slur directed at Hindus. It's only a religious slur for sikhs. There are no sources which call Chuhras Christians or Hindus, they are muslims. There are no sources which mention "cow piss drinker" originating in the US, it's from South Asia. None of my edits contradict what the talk page says.)"
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			# {{diff2\|1270041541\|16:57, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (The articles specifically mention "pajeet" as a religious slur directed at sikhs and/or as a racial slur directed at other south asians. There is no mention of "pajeet" being directed as a religious slur at Hindus.)"
			# {{diff2\|1270039369\|16:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Hindus */ not a religious slur targeted at Hindus, removed"
			# "The two sources added for "Pajeet" specifically mention that it's directed at Sikhs or at south asians racially, not at Hindus religiously, removed. "Sanghi" does not have a separate mention for Kashmir in any of its sources, removed. Added disambiguating link to Bengali Hindus. Corrected origin of "cow-piss drinker" to the correct country of origin as mentioned in the source. Added further information for "Dothead"."
			# "Undid revision 1269326532 by Sumanuil"
			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
			# {{diff2\|1270041824\|16:58, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Edit warring on ]."

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	] violation on
			# {{diff2\|1270040704\|16:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* 'Anti-Christian slurs' */ cmt"
	{{Article\|Democratic-Republican_Party_(United_States)}}. {{3RRV\|Pmanderson\|Septentrionalis}}:
			# {{diff2\|1270045411\|17:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Kanglu */ add"
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	* Previous version reverted to: though he concealed it by the use of a one word change in a more recent version apparently to escape detection in the 3RR process in this version:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	Most changes are compound changes, seemingly also intended to elude detection, so the references below are for the last change in each compound change set:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

			All these reverts yet not a single response at the talkpage. - ] (]) 01:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

			:I am replying here as I'm not sure what you want from me.
	Time report made: ] 02:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			:Every edit I made is fairly accurate and doesn't contradict or vandalize any of wikipedia's rules.
			:] (]) 07:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
			:: You are still edit warring without posting at the talkpage. - ] (]) 16:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
			:: More reverts , can someone do something? - ] (]) 01:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
			::: {{AN3\|p}} I also note the user has been alerted to CTOPS, which I protected the page under, so there will be no room for argument if this behavior continues. ] (]) 23:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Stale) ==
	''' Comments:'''There have been several points at which we had arrived at a consensus with Pmanderson\|Septentrionalis, though invariably each time he returned to his original point. He has set others up for 3RR in the past (myself included), but immediately afterwards pretends to agree with a new consensus until his 4RRs become 'stale', then it's back to his same old tricks, at which he is quite accomplished. As he has set up others in edit wars, posted 4RR notices, and escaped unscathed, it is only fair that he face the same music himself and wear the badge he foists upon others. Then perhaps he will truly participate in collaborative editing, instead of drawing us (and yes, I am to blame too) into senseless lameness.

			'''Page:''' ] <br />
	Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR"
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Kelvintjy}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan&oldid=1217491179
	I'm afraid this seems stale to me. If its continuing, you'll need to update it ] 09:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	===] reported by User:] (Result: prot)===
			# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan&oldid=1227039793
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan&oldid=1229865081
			# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan&oldid=1230019964
			# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan&oldid=1230184562

	Extensive ] violations on
	{{Article\|Kofun period}}, {{Article\|Joseon Dynasty}}, and {{Article\|Korea under Japanese rule}} and attempts of 3RR avoidance by editing from ip. {{3RRV\|User:Room218}} and his ip addresses (see detail: ]):
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	{{Article\|Kofun period}}
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert: Room218
	* 2nd revert: Room218
	* 3rd revert: 75.7.7.49
	* 4th revert: 75.7.7.49
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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 edit warring / 3RR warning: See July 24th 2024 ''' https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Kelvintjy
	{{Article\|Joseon Dynasty}}
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert: Room218
	* 2nd revert: Room218
	* 3rd revert: Room218
	* 4th revert: Room218
	* 5th revert: 75.6.246.2
	* 6th revert: Room218

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' See "Biased" https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan
	{{Article\|Korea under Japanese rule}}
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert: Room218
	* 2nd revert: Room218
	* 3rd revert: Room218
	* 4th revert: 75.7.7.49
	* 5th revert: 75.7.7.49

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Kelvintjy
	Time report made: 04:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <~~!--~~ ~~Optional~~ -->		<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />

			Hello
	''2006-11-12T20:17:48 Steel359 (Talk \| contribs \| block) m (Protected Kofun period: Edit warring )'' ] 09:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			the user Kelvintjy has been engaged in another war last summer and was banned from the ] page. He's been pursuing an edit war on the ] page too without daring give explanations on the talk page though he was invited to do it many times. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 19:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
			*{{AN3\|s}} ] (]) 20:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
			*:@] you blocked this user from the page ] in Aug. 2024 for the same reasons. ] (]) 12:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			*:You also block Raoul but later unblocked him after he made his appeal. ] (]) 00:37, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

			I don't understand the user always keep targeting me. I am more of a silence contributor. I had seen how the complainant had argue with other contributor in other talk page and after a while the complainant stay silent and not touching certain topic and instead keep making edit on articles related to ] or ]. Now, he is making a lot of edit on ]. ] (]) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
	===] reported by User:] (Result:96 hours)===

			== ] reported by ] (Result: 1RR imposed on article) ==
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Romanians}}. {{3RRV\|Constantzeanu}}:

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Elon Musk}}
	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Ergzay}}
	Time report made: 08:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' ~~Comments~~:'''~~<br>~~		'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	Please check his block log. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 19:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
	:96 hours.''']''' (]) 04:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	===]/] reported by ] (Result:)===
			# {{diff2\|1270885082\|18:31, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Reverting for user specifying basically ] as their reasoning"
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			# {{diff2\|1270881666\|18:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) I believe you have reverted this edit in error so I am adding it back. Rando tweet from a random organization? The Anti-defamation league is cited elsewhere in this article and this tweet was in the article previously. I simply copy pasted it from a previous edit. ADL is a trusted source in the perennial source list ]"
			# {{diff2\|1270878417\|17:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Removing misinformation"
			# {{diff2\|1270875037\|17:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Discussion ongoing and it's incorrect as well"
			# {{diff2\|1270724963\|23:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Revert, this is not the purpose of the short description"
			# {{diff2\|1270718517\|22:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (]) Elon is not a multinational"

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	] violation on
			# {{diff2\|1270879182\|17:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Warning: Three-revert rule on ]." {{small\|(edit: corrected diff)}}
	{{Article\|Georgi_Parvanov}}. {{3RRV\|Petervonpauer}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	* Previous version reverted to:
			# {{diff2\|1270885380\|18:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC)}} "stop edit warring now or it all goes to ANI" {{small\|(edit: added diff, fix date)}}
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert: <small>(as an IP, see history for continuous reverts by the same IP)</small>
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	* Warnings (not 3RR): ], ]
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	Time report made: 13:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			Breach of ] {{small\|(added comment after 18:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC) comment added below)}}. ] (]) 18:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

			] seems to be making a mistake here as several of those edits were of different content. You can't just list every single revert and call it edit warring. And the brief edit warring that did happen stopped as I realized I was reverting the wrong thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Elon_Musk&diff=prev&oldid=1270879523 ] (]) 18:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
	Fmt; Why is the IP the same? ] 14:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
	: What do you mean? It should be different perphaps? Also, please note two further Petervonpauer reverts: and . The guy's now been blocked for over a month, so I guess this report doesn't really matter now, but we could have prevented the reverts earlier :) '']]]'' 18:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
	:: I mean, why is the IP the same person? How do I know? But as you say: ''2006-11-13T15:35:38 Shreshth91 (Talk \| contribs \| block) blocked "Petervonpauer (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1.34252 months (vandal - only)'' ] 18:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
	::: Ah, I see, I had misunderstood you :) Well, it's an obvious sockpuppet — why would anyone else insert the same POV external links again and again? Possibly I should've brought this to ] or somewhere else as it involves sockpuppetry, but anyway, it's been solved already. '']]]'' 19:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			:Read the bright read box at ] (. ] (]) 18:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
	===] reported by ] (Result: 24h)===
			::@] So let me get this straight, you're saying making unrelated reverts of unrelated content in a 24 hour period hits 3RR? You sure you got that right? As people violate that one all the darn time. Never bothered to report people as it's completely innocent. If you're heavily involved on a page and reverting stuff you'll hit that quick and fast for a rapidly updated page. ] (]) 18:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			:::]: {{tq\|An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period.}} – ] (]) 19:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::Well TIL on that one as that's the first time I've ever heard of that use case and I've been on this site for 15+ years. 3RR in every use I've ever seen it is about back and forth reverting of the _same content_ within a short period of time. It's a severe rule break where people are clearly edit warring the same content back and forth. Reverting unrelated content on the page (edits that are often clearly vandalism-like edits, like the first two listed) would never violate 3RR in my experience. ] (]) 19:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::I'd honestly love an explanation on that rule as I can't figure out why it makes sense. You don't want to limit people's ability to fix vandalism on a fast moving page. ] (]) 19:08, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::::]: {{tq\|There are certain exemptions to the three-revert rule, such as reverting vandalism or clear violations of the policy on biographies of living persons}}. – ] (]) 19:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::::No I mean even in the wider sense. Like why does it make sense to limit the ability to revert unrelated content on the same page? I can't figure out why that would make sense. The 3RR page doesn't explain that. ] (]) 19:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::::Vandalism is an exemption. But vandalism has a narrow definition. ] (]) 19:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:Should be added, that I was in the process of reverting my own edit after the above linked comment, but someone reverted it before I could get to it.
			:The 18:12 edit was me undoing what was presumed to be a mistaken change by EF5 that I explained in my edit comment as they seemed to think that "some random twitter account" was being used as a source. That revert was not reverted. The 18:31 edit was a revert of an "i don't like it" edit that someone else made, it was not a revert of a revert of my own change. ] (]) 19:17, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::Frankly, I thought your characterization of IDONTLIKEIT in your edit summary was improper and was thinking of reverting you, but didn't want to be a part of what I thought was your edit war. ] (]) 19:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::We can agree to disagree, but the reasons I called it IDONTLIKEIT was because the person who was reverted described the ADL, who is on the perennial sources list as being reliable, in their first edit description with the wording followed by after another editor restored the content with a different source, which is the edit I reverted. ] (]) 19:34, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::Looks like you have seven reverts in two days in a CTOP. I've even seen admins ask someone else to revert instead of violating a revert rule themselves. ] (]) 19:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::::What is a CTOP? ] (]) 19:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::::A CTOP is a ]. ] (]) 19:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:In Ergzay's defense some of these reverts do seem to be covered under BLP, but many do not and I am concerned about the battleground attitude that Ergzay is taking. The edit summaries "Discussion ongoing and it's incorrect as well" and "Removing misinformation" also seems to be getting into righting great wrongs territory as the coverage happened whether you agree with the analysis or not. ] (]) 20:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			::@] Thanks but at this point things are too heated and people are so confident Musk is some kind of Nazi now nothing I say is gonna change anything. It's not worth the mental exhaustion I spent over the last few hours. So I probably won't be touching the page or talk page again for several days at least unless I get pinged. The truth will come out eventually, just like the last several tempest in a teapots on the Elon Musk page that eventually got corrected. Misplaced Pages is gonna be Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 21:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::{{tq\|Misplaced Pages is gonna be Misplaced Pages.}} If your argument is that Misplaced Pages is wrong about things and you have to come in periodically to fix it; that’s not an argument that works very well on an administrative noticeboard -- and certainly not a good argument here at AN3. ] (]) 22:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::I wouldn't worry all too much about it, 1rr for the article will slow things down and is a positive outcome all things considered. ] (]) 03:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::This is an incorrect characterization of the discussion. The people you were edit warring with said, correctly, that he was accused of having made what looks like the Nazi salute. As you know from the video and the sources provided, this is objectively correct. You just don't like the fact that reliable sources said this about him. Nobody is trying to put "Elon Musk is a Nazi" in the article. ] (]) 23:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			: Based on the comment in response to the notification for this discussion, {{tq\|"I've been brought to ANI many times in the past. Never been punished for it"}}, I was quite surprised to see that the editor didn't acquire an understanding of 3RR when in 2020. That's sometime ago granted, but additionally a lack of awareness of CTOP, when there is an edit notice at Musk's page regarding BLP policy, is highly suggestive of ]. This in addition to the 3RR warning that was ignored, followed by continuing to revert other editors, and eventually arguing that it must be because I am wrong. If there is an essay based on "Everyone else must be wrong because I'm always right" I'd very much like to read it. As for this report, I primarily wanted to nip the edit war in the bud which appears to have worked for now, given the talk page warning failed to achieve anything. I otherwise remain concerned about the general ] based indicators; disruptive editing, battleground attitude, and lack of willingness to collaborate with other editors in a civil manner. ] (]) 23:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
			:: I have decided, under CTOPS and mindful of the current situation regarding the article subject, a situation that I think we can agree is unlikely to change anytime soon and is just going to attract more contentious editing, that the best resolution here, given that ''some'' of Ergzay's reverts are concededly justified on BLP grounds and that he genuinely seems ignorant of the provision in 3RR that covers ''all'' edits (a provision that, since he still wants to know, is in response to certain battleground editors in the past who would keep reverting different material within the same 24 hours so as to comply with the ''letter'', but not the ''spirit'', of 3RR (In other words, another case of ])) is to put the article under 1RR. It will be duly logged at CTOPS. ] (]) 00:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::We are likely to see Ergzay at ANI at some point. But as I was thinking of asking for 1RR early today; I'm fine with that decision. ] (]) 00:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::Good decision. I otherwise think a final warning for edit warring is appropriate, given the 3RR violation even excluding BLPREMOVE reverts (first 4 diffs to be specific). There's nothing else to drag out here given Ergzay intends to take a step back from the Musk article, and per above, there is always the ANI route for any future incidents. ] (]) 00:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			::@] My statement that you quoted there is because I'm a divisive person and people often don't like how I act on Misplaced Pages and the edits I make. People have dragged me to this place several times in the past over the years and I've always found it reasonably fair against people who are emotionally involved against dragging me down. That is why I said what I did. And as to the previous warning that you claim was me "not getting it", that was 3 reverts of the same material, and with a name 3RR the association is automatic. Edit: And I'll additionally add, I'm most certainly interested in building an accurate encyclopedia. Misplaced Pages at some point in the past lost its mind and has determined that truth seeking is not the ultimate goal, but simply regurgitating sources. I'm still very happy to use sources that exist and they should be used whenever possible, but in this modern day and age of heavily politicized and biased media, editors more than ever need to have wide open eyes and use rational thinking. ] (]) 09:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::"''Misplaced Pages at some point in the past lost its mind and has determined that truth seeking is not the ultimate goal, but simply regurgitating sources''" See ]. ] (]) 19:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::And ], while you're at it. ] (]) 19:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::::"Use wide open eyes and use rational thinking (as defined by me)" seems to implicate ], as well. ] (]) 23:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Semi-protected one week; IP range blocked two weeks) ==
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Association for Renaissance Martial Arts}}. {{3RRV\|68.219.13.28}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Paul Cézanne}}
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|203.115.14.139}}
	Time report made: 14:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional --> This article has been the frequent target of (ocassionally persistant) anonymous IP vandals who do nothing but revert the page. A long process of criticism citation and removal has been taking place on the talk page, and has been archived for viewing. Regardless of invitation, many IP vandals continue to make edits, but this is the first to knowingly break 3RR (see the user's talk page - they were invited to discuss the changes in the talk page and well warned of further reverts). The ] remains in its current vandalised state because further editing from myself will break my 3RR. However, I believe I may do so without persecution per , is that the case?

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	24h. Its better not to re-revert it yourself: is there really no-one else interested? ] 15:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			# {{diff\|oldid=1271008210\|diff=1271008905\|label=Consecutive edits made from 06:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC) to 06:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}}
	*There are a couple others, but they usually have relatively busy daily lives and only stop by once a day at most. I'll leave it for them. Also, do you think it may be worth semi-protecting the page? I would hate to do so, but I think only 1/20 anons do anything to improve the page. Thanks. - ]] 15:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			## {{diff2\|1271008695\|06:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
			## {{diff2\|1271008905\|06:53, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
			# {{diff2\|1271007344\|06:44, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
			# {{diff2\|1271006989\|06:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} ""
			#

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	===] reported by User:] (Result:24h)===
			# {{diff2\|1271008376\|06:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Three revert rule */ new section"
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			# {{diff2\|1271010383\|07:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Notifying about edit warring noticeboard discussion."

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Arthur Jensen}}. {{3RRV\|BenGibson}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	Time report made: 18:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			*This is straight-up vandalism. {{U\|BusterD}} semi-protected the article for one week, and I've blocked ] for two weeks.--] (]) 14:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Reported user had self-reverted before the report was made) ==
	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	*Blocked for 24 hours. ''']''' ]\|] 02:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Droop quota}}
	===] reported by ] (Result:12h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|68.150.205.46}}
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Mutualism (economic theory)}}. {{3RRV\|Anarcho-capitalism}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:		'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	Time report made: 20:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			# {{diff\|oldid=1271015536\|diff=1271021273\|label=Consecutive edits made from 08:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC) to 08:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}}
			## {{diff2\|1271020237\|08:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
			## {{diff2\|1271021017\|08:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
			## {{diff2\|1271021273\|08:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} "Undid revision ] by ] (])"
			# {{diff2\|1271014641\|07:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)}} "there is no consensus in talk. there is no government election today that uses your exact Droop. it is not what Droop says his quota was"

			'''Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	Not simply 3RR, but reverting to Original Research and POV-pushing. already opened.
	*12 hour block, I don't see any earlier warnings (dealing strictly with the 3RR, the OR and POV is a diffferent issue). ''']''' ]\|] 02:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	**This was an improper block. Look at the claimed 4th revert. That was insertion of new content and was sourced. It was in the same general location so it looked like a revert if one didn't look closely, but it wasn't. How can I appeal this?] 15:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	===] reported by ] (Result:)===
			# {{diff2\|1270714484\|22:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ reply to Quantling"
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			# {{diff2\|1270714531\|22:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ edit reply to Quantling"
			# {{diff2\|1270714949\|22:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ addition"
			# {{diff2\|1270715070\|22:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC)}} "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ edit addition"

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u>
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Rudolf Steiner}}. {{3RRV\|Rottentomatoe}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			User has been edit-warring for the past 9 months to try and reinsert incorrect information into the article, despite repeatedly having had this mistake corrected, and a consensus of 5 separate editors against these changes. Request page ban from ], ], ], and ]. ] (]) 22:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert: (revert to )
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:

			:{{u\|Closed Limelike Curves}}, the user appears to have self-reverted less than an hour after their last edit warring continuation, and 14 hours before your report. ] (]) 00:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
			::Thanks, I missed that (I didn't notice the last edit was a self-revert). ] (]) 00:51, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			:68.150.205.46, thanks for self-reverting. Can you agree not to re-add the same material until a real consensus is found? An ] could help. ] (]) 00:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: Blocked indefinitely) ==
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Tiwana family of Shahpur}} <br />
	*
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Farshwal}}

			'''Previous version reverted to:''' ]
	Time report made: 20:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	The 3rd "revert" was simply me trying to add something in. I was editing something I agreed with, yet adding alot of extra information. I was making an edit in the 3rd "revert" then it didn't come out like I intended, so I posted it differently.
			# ]
			# ]
			# ]
			# ]

	The 4th "revert" was actually an attempt at a compromise. User Pete K, who originally made the addition I wanted to delete, told me to remove the information I agreed with and he'd consent to remove the information that I didn't agree with. User 999, who never made an original contribution to the article, then reverted.

	The 6th "revert" is laughable. Again, there were several sentences on antisemitism that I agreed with, but only took it out because user Pete K said that he'd agree to have a long quote on "Jewry" taken out if I took out the sentences on antisemitism. Then the two meatpuppets put the Jewry quote back in. So I put the antisemitism sentences back in (since I was originally the person who took them out).

	It may take a bit of investigation, but I think you'll clearly find that I only made 3 reverts.

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' ]
	Furthermore I would like to say that I never would have even made 3 reverts if I wasn't "pushed to the limit" from an obvious tag-teaming effort. I don't know if this is the place to do this, but I'd like to complain about user 999 and his partner in crime, Hanuman Das. They are obviously teaming up (I saw that they have a history of this) to circumvent the 3RR. ] 02:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' ] (from User:Farshwal themselves)
	===] reported by ] (Result:)===

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:''' ]
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Royal_Bank_of_Scotland}}. {{3RRV\|Astrotrain}}:

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	* Previous version reverted to: /
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:

			Hi, I'm just an uninvolved third-party editor who came across this 3RR violation involving the change of "Parmar Rajputs" to "Jats" in the article lead sentence. The editor themself has made a post on the talk page as seen in the diff above, but they continued to edit-war without getting a consensus first at that talk page discussion. Also worth noting the editor had received a in Sep 2024 for similar disruption, such as ], where they also made an edit changing something to "Jats". — ] ] 09:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
	* User is hostile to the Gaelic language of Scotland (e.g. "no need to use a foreign language" ), and the user is reverting on this page on the issue of the Gaelic name of the Bank. He wants either the Gaelic name out or a dispute tag if it's in, and was reverting to either of these two goals. Considers himself an experienced user, as you can see , but the user has already been blocked 3 times for violations of 3RR, last time little more than a month ago. I am now one of three users he's been reverting; I had previously offered to him to pull out of the dispute, on two occassions, and , but he ignored my offer in order to continue being a revert-warrior. I can't see what else can be done?! '''] ('']'')''' 21:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			* '''Comment''': In ] , they are using a slur against the ] caste by calling it "R*put" meaning "Son of Wh*", which is also the caste they are deliberately removing from the article. That in itself merits an indef.] (]) 12:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			*Blocked indefinitely.--] (]) 14:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: OP indeffed) ==
	Time report made: 21:50, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Bhanot}} <br />
	===] and his IP sock ] and his new sock ] reported by User:] (Result:)===
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|DoctorWhoFan91}}
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->
			{{Comment}}Now what should I say, this reckless person has crossed all limits for three revert rule and spamming on user talk with thrustful comments , and he keeps bothering me repeatedly with the same fabricated nonsense. He keeps giving those mocking statements against me for commissioning an report and is persistently stuck on the same matter over and over again. I want him to be punished for his vile actions, and for the offensive things he has said in his statements, which had a bad influence on people. He is going to everyone’s talk pages

			'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Free Republic}}. {{3RRV\|Calmheads}}&{{3RRV\|68.82.82.248}}&{{3RRV\|Captkangaroo}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	* Previous version reverted to:
			#
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
			#
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
			#
	* 1st revert:
			#
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* Bonus 5th revert:
	* Extra special socking 6th revert:

	3rr Warning -->

	Time report made: 22:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional --> After brokering an uneasy truce on the article, revertwarrior redlink shows up to revert to his preferred version, which violates NOR, NPOV, and RS. Wouldn't you know, that after warning revertwarrior redlink, some IP address favors his version also? ] 22:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

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

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Wellesley College}}. {{3RRV\|Melmoththewanderer}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	3rr Warning -->

			:I suspect a ] is coming here, but for now I'll say to OP, don't make personal attacks . Bafflingly, you linked to the NPA policy in the same edit summary. — ''']''' <sup>''(])''</sup> 11:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
	Time report made: 23:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

			:The OP account has been reported to AIV by ] with the suspicion that it's yet another sockpuppet account of User:Truthfindervert: ]. — ] ] 11:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
	''' Comments:''' User just violated the three revert rule. Although she accused me of violating this rule, I did not. I had only 3 edits within 24 hour period.
			:Yeah, kinda funny isn't it, a sockpuppet accusing others of edit-warring after move-vandalising. OP has been reported to AIV and SPI btw, so this will just led to them being blocked faster lol. ] (]) 11:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			::Could somone move the page back after OP is blocked, they have done it again. ] (]) 11:18, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::Yeah let's give the bots that fix the double-redirects a break and stop move-warring the page until the account is blocked. It's only gonna clutter the page histories and logs more and more, and the title the person is trying to move the page to isn't an unconstructive title anyway. — ] ] 11:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			::::Apologies, I got carried away trying to stop the bot. ] (]) 11:24, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::::Sock, not bot, sorry. ] (]) 11:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			:I will now direct any visiting mods to Tested account , so yes, this should be a ]. I do not know this user but there are multiple accusations of this being an LTA sock. — ''']''' <sup>''(])''</sup> 11:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			::The account is a suspected sock of ], see ]. Pinging {{Ping\|Ivanvector\|zzuuzz\|Izno}}. - ] (]) 11:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::I had said this before as well—you are the same people @]@] who want to manipulate the article in your own way and keep editing it to portray it in the same context of that past misunderstanding and conflict. So, I have nothing for you. You just keep putting in your efforts, but the consequences of your violative actions will come to you eventually. I have no answers for that, but when you are found guilty, you will have to deal with them on your own.
			:::This is my last reply, requesting administrative intervention as the accuser under the three-revert rule. ] (]) 11:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			* I have '''indefinitely blocked''' ]; almost certainly a sock but even if they aren't, they're being wildly disruptive and attacking others. ] 11:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
			:The page has also been move-protected for 2 days following a ] I made at RPP/I. — ] ] 11:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

	===] reported by ~~User:~~] (Result:)===		== ] reported by ] (Result: Warned ) ==
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|United States Board on Geographic Names}} <br />
	] violation on
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Wamalotpark}}
	{{Article\|The_End_(A_Series_of_Unfortunate_Events)}}. {{3RRV\|Clamster5}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:		'''Previous version reverted to:'''
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	Time report made: 23:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
			# , using their IP, which is ]
			#
			#
			#

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:'''
	''' Comments:''' User has frequently been reverting on this article for the last couple of days now.
	:Please provide diffs not versions. ]] 21:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:'''
	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:'''
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Dokdo}}. {{3RRV\|163.221.125.141}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	User warned about 3RR: , continues reverting.

			*Wamalotpark is edit warring with multiple editors across multiple articles, and are making the same edits .-- ]<sup>]</sup> 00:13, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
	Time report made: 06:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
			*The charge is obviously correct. ], I reverted you because no advantage should go to the edit warrior. If you revert again you will be blocked. The logged-out editing is another matter, a more serious matter, and as it happens I can see just how much of it you have been doing. You should stop doing that esp. if, as you did here, you seem to be doing it to avoid scrutiny, because it's abusive and you are going to get blocked for it. ] (]) 00:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] reported by ] (Result: No violation) ==
	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	Imposing Japanese POV in naming dispute, contrary to consensus.

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Hindi–Urdu controversy}} <br />
	===] reported by User:Calton (Result:)===
			'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks\|Augmented Seventh}}
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

			'''Previous version reverted to:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271389468&oldid=1269162140
	] violation on
	{{Article\|User:Alyeska/Battlefield_2_Ranks}}. {{3RRV\|Alyeska}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

			'''Diffs of the user's reverts:'''
	* Previous version reverted to:
			# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271341767&oldid=1269162140
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
			# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271342146&oldid=1271341767
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* ~~1st revert:~~		# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271342693&oldid=1271342146
	* ~~2nd revert:~~		# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271346369&oldid=1271342693
	* ~~3rd revert:~~		# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271384695&oldid=1271346369
	* ~~4th revert:~~		# https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271389468&oldid=1271384695
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 06:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User is removing an ] tag, calling it "reverting vandalism" and "Reverting unwanted edits of my PERSONAL PAGE." User is certainly aware of 3RR, given his last edit summary of ''3rr doesn't apply to reverting vandalism. Of course it would be interesting to see the voice of the defense silenced by blocking them. A clear violation of any attempt at due process)''<!-- Optional -->

	===] reported by User:Kiyosaki (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

			'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271427280&oldid=1271423082
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Allegations of Israeli Apartheid}}. {{3RRV\|SlimVirgin}}:

			'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271423082&oldid=1271392849
	Removal of ] information from the article. Mass revert erroneously titled "copy edit" when it involved significant content deletions of others' contributions.
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

			'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:''' https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271428457&oldid=1271428288
	Comment: This user appears hostile (as the violation is only one example) to presenting reliable sources to create the basis for the article, and seeks via POV to focus on critics instead to be the basis of the article. Whether or not this is deliberate is to be reviewed. However, I cannot believe that a mass revert of content can be called a "copyedit" because WP:copyedit does not refer to covering content reverts.

			<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br />
	Time report made: 06:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

			The article in question presents one-sided information, and that too sometimes using unsourced and questionable sources. The language Urdu is part of the Pakistani identity, and this article does not engage with the perspectives of Pakistanis who argue that the language Urdu has its own identity, distinct from Hindi. It's culturally insensitive to dismiss the cultural identity of another community and dismiss their perspecitives entirely to push one-sided claims that only serve to undermine their identity.
	:The above was one edit and three reverts '''made on October 24'''. Kiyosaki has made this report because he has just violated 3RR himself and is trying to distract people's attention. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 07:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
			*{{AN3\|nv}} ] (]) 01:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

			::Left CTOPS notice on talk page. ] (]) 01:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
	Diffs for the sake of clarity:

	*1st edit (copy edit, which included moving a Desmond Tutu section)
	*Ist revert
	*2nd revert
	*3rd revert
	*My next edit '''restored''' the Tutu material that Kiyosaki complained had been moved during the three reverts. It was therefore a partial self-revert, not another revert. Kiyosaki has had this explained to him already several times, including in the edit summary. .

	===] report by SlimVirgin (Result: 24 hours)===

	3RR violation on {{article\|Jewish lobby}} by {{3RRV\|Kiyosaki}}

	*1st edit (removes "The expression is regarded as an ] slur" and the source)
	*1st revert (removes "The expression is regarded as an ] slur" and the source)
	*2nd revert (removes "The expression is regarded as an ] slur" and the source)
	*3rd revert (removes "The expression is regarded as an ] slur" and the source)
	*4th revert (removes "The expression is regarded as an ] slur" and the source)

	'''Comments'''

	Kiyosaki is a suspected sockpuppet who edits disruptively on a number of articles, and who has been warned about 3RR before and blocked for it once on November 9. His attempt to report me for an October 24 3RR (which was one edit and three reverts) above, because he knew he had just violated 3RR himself, is his characteristic behavior. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 07:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	:You are disruptive and you are deceptive in most of your edits. I am still learing about 3RR, and still maintain that my "revert" was an "edit", and you like to play games to hurt people. Please do not accuse others until you review your own conduct first. You flat out removed info about ] that I spent hours on including (with reiable sources/footnotes), and you removed it 4 times in 11 hours, because you are hostile and disruptive. Your actions above, speak for themselves and they continue. Thanks.] 07:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Before he created ], the same person made a few edits as {{3RRV\|Kyosaki}} without the i. One of his first edits, on October 22, was to warn another user about 3RR, so he knows very well what it is. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 07:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Rush Limbaugh}}. {{3RRV\|Eleemosynary}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	* 9th revert:
	* 10th revert:
	* 11th revert:
	* 12th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	Eleemosynary has been warned on their talk page multiple times in the past about the 3RR Rule (and has been blocked for 3rr violations in the past. Additionally they were warned today about Edit Warring and the 3RR rule on the Rush Limbaugh Talk page.

	You can check their block log here


	Time report made: 07:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''
	Here is typical entry on the talk page this person is making.
	Your stonewalling continues to be ridiculous. Your attempts to game the system and throw up procedural firewalls are laughable. That you ignore every reasoned argument is not the fault of your fellow editors. No one owes you further explanations. Eleemosynary 04:03, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	This user continues to revert entries and has begin blanking other sections of the article they feel are objectionable as well.

	:Caper13 is, true to form, dissembling. Please note the above "11 reverts" are, in most cases, for different edits. The quote he has posted for me above needs to be considered in response to his behavior on the Rush Limbaugh Talk Page, in which he has displayed bad faith editing, obnoxious cheerleading, many attempts to "game the system," and many, many 3RR violations of his own (judging by his standard). He has also chosen to "pile on" on my Talk Page (in violation of WP:DICK), after I had been warned, politely, by Allen3. I have removed his troll bait from my page, and welcome an admin's thorough examination of this matter. ] 02:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	::This is the type of personal attack and distortion we are having to deal with. My only entry on her talk page was to inform Eleemosynary (as is is advised to do on this page) that I had reported her for 3RR violation. My entry to her talk page (which she reverted calling it troll bait) is here . Eleseemosynary continues to revert entries on the page, having just made her 12'th edit in addition to those previously listed above. Can someone please address this ongoing issue. I would also welcome any Admin who wanted to examine this matter. ] 04:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::My latest edit was only after responding on the Talk Page, and was a different edit than my previous ones. Caper13 is dissembling once again. Caper13 has also shown a stubborn adversion to ANY input on the Talk Page which aims to include sourced criticism of Rush Limbaugh, or remove cheerleading. When she is called on it, she simply accuses others of "personal attacks." Not an uncommon event on political pages. ] 04:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::: I'm not going to fan the flames by defending myself point by point. I simply invite the Admin deciding this to examine all my statements and all of Eleseemosynary's statements on the Rush Limbaugh Talk Board and you can make up your own mind about what is going on there. ] 04:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::::By all means, take a look at what's going on at that Talk Page. And please note the "12th revert" listed above took place a day and a half after the supposed "1st revert." ] 04:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	] spent yesterday making ] edits to ]. I reverted him a few times but he seems unreasonable and determined to make whatever point he is trying to make. --] 04:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Please see ]'s edit history on the Limbaugh page for further perspective. You may want to check out his Talk Page. It's one of the few pages on Misplaced Pages that is actually more contentious than my own. ] is logrolling here for ]. Such activity is common for ardent Limbaugh fans currently erasing all balance from the article page. ] 14:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Pescadores}}. {{3RRV\|Jiang}}:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 07:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''
	This is not the first time this guy violates the 3RR rule. But because he himself is an admin, he kind of got out of it every time. Anyway, this time he clearly violated the 3RR rule. Furthermore, deleting things without discussion is a kind of vandalism, but he doesn't care.

	: You've forgotten the pre-version; but more importantly the 4th R is well outsied 24h ] 09:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Tipu Sultan}}. {{3RRV\|Mujeerkhan}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert: :This edit is a partial revert to remove the <nowiki>{{Dubious}}</nowiki> tag which I put there as the reference cited did not verify the text (I checked)
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * Necessary only for new users: User is not new
	-->

	Time report made: 10:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->The user is an abusive sock puppet master and has used his sockpuppets to violate 3RR on this article before. Checkuser is ].User has been trying to push a fanatic POV (for months) and is disrupting the scholarly efforts of several users to improve the article.] 10:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	fmt properly please ] 13:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Done. Dunno why this keeps happening. ] 14:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 20:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Misplaced Pages:Notability (web)}}. {{3RRV\|Rrfayette}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: various versions listed below
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert: Revert to version with minor edits.
	* 2nd revert: partial revert to
	* 3rd revert: partial revert of same material.
	* 4th revert: reverted back in material first added here
	* 5th revert: reverted back in material first added here
	* 6th revert: reverted back in material added above

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 14:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User continues to revert to his edits, even though he's been warned multiple times not to engage in edit wars. This guideline has undergone major revisions, mostly at the hands of one new editor and with no regard for consensus. <!-- Optional -->

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24 hours)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Mel Gibson}}. {{3RRV\|68.9.116.87}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * This is a warning I placed or a previous violation which I did not report (can provide diffs upon request), since user appeared to be new.
	- * Warning on talk page for this violation:

	Time report made: ~~~~~

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|University of Bedfordshire}}. {{3RRV\|62.56.125.22}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 22:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->


	===] reported by User:] (Result: protection)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|The End (A Series of Unfortunate Events)}}. {{3RRV\|User:CyberGhostface}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 23:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' A number of these edits don't follow the 3RR rules. Some of them are different edits, and one is simply reverting vandalism. Sorry. Also, Clamster5 has made several reversions as well if you check the history on the page.--] 23:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	They're all reverts, although one is to revert unrelated vandalism. Not counting that one, it still leaves 5. All the others are reverts of my edits to the page that are not vandalism. ] 23:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	:So in other words you falsely added an unrelated revert? And what, your reverts don't count? Surely you've broken the 3RR ''twice'' now, hmmm?--] 23:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	I broke the rule. But that doesn't mean you didn't. I'll remove the revert that wasn't idential to the others. Happy? ] 23:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	Theres number 6. ] 23:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	and number 7. ] 23:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	:And another one for you. You can almost smell the hypocrisy.--] 23:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	::You are aware that you've also broken it as well and that you have every chance that I do of getting blocked?--] 23:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
	Number 8. ] 23:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

	Well done children: ''2006-11-14T23:57:38 Steel359 (Talk \| contribs \| block) m (Protected The End (A Series of Unfortunate Events): Edit warring )'' ] 09:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 8h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Rudolf Steiner's views on race and ethnicity}}. {{3RRV\|Thebee}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert: (partial revert, but a revert nonetheless)
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 01:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Rush Limbaugh}}. {{3RRV\|Eleemosynary}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	:Please note the "fourth revert" is an entirely different edit from the first three, and took place nearly 22 hours after the first one. ] 15:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 04:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User has also received a warning about the 3RR rule . --'']'' <sup>]</sup> 04:32, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 8h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|List of concentration and internment camps}}. {{3RRV\|Carbonate}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	* A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed (not a diff, my warning and his reponse).

	Time report made: 06:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''
	] has edit-warred on this subject, despite having no support at all, and admins asking him to stop or be blocked .

	8h ] 09:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: sprot)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Mulatto}}. {{3RRV\|216.27.165.170}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 3RR warning


	Time report made: 21:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''

	Semi protected ] 21:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
	:Blocked ] for 48 hours for vandalism to this page. --] <sup>] · <font color="green">]</font></sup> 22:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 48h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Hilda Toledano}}. {{3RRV\|62.101.126.232}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 23:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''

	3RR by both sides; unfortunately you're an AOL anon so I can't block you much... this however is a continuation of hte same old tedious war... ] 23:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Raffles Junior College}}. {{3RRV\|Icecold1}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	* 9th revert:
	* 10th revert: Using IP 202.73.49.26 (see below)
	* 11th revert:
	* 12th revert:
	* 13th revert: (User:Icecold1 reinserted disputed edits, and deleted some valid content)
	* 14th revert:

	User was warned and informed of the 3RR policy on 02:06, 16 November 2006


	Time report first made: 04:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	* The 10th revert by IP 202.73.49.26 (after the warning) is very likely made by User:Icecold1 as evidenced by his/her . --] 04:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
	**Blocked 24 h. There was at least another 3RR violation on the opposing side earlier (13/14 Nov, ] - only reason I'm not blocking him too is that this part of the story seems stale by now. ] ] 09:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: indefinitely blocked as vandal)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Steve_Wozniak}}. {{3RRV\|Gotofbi}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert: (added after initial report)
	* 6th revert: (added after initial report)

	Time report made: 06:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' 3RR, warned <s>twice</s> three times..

	*I have blocked the user indefinitely, it was just page blanking. ] 06:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h each)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Josette Sheeran Shiner}}. {{3RRV\|Exucmember}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->

	* 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.


	Time report made: 06:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	*To accused user, please comment here below and '''NOT above'''. Thanks. ] 06:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC).
	*User has failed to attempt to achieve consensus on talk page, and instead resorts to multiple reverts, with personal attacks in edit summaries. This should be discouraged. ] 06:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC).
	*'''NOTE''': I myself have reverted in the course of this edit history, but no more than 2 times. The first time was for ease of use for my personal edits, and other than what I had objected to, I put all the rest back in, though I admit this may have not been the best way to do this. In later edits, instead of reverting I put back in information, and tried to compromise with the editor in question by moving some information to the footnotes section. He instead continues to revert and I fear this will continue until he sees that consequences exist. ] 06:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC).
	*User continues to commit 3RR multiple times, removing information from reputable source, even '''after''' being notified of 3RR. ] 06:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC).

	24h ] 09:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC). But closer inspection reveals that S has broken 3RR too ] 09:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Michael_Shields}}. {{3RRV\|D.Prok.}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 09:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	<br/>Continues to revert to a POV version, with a POV tag. ] made a good edit to get rid of uncited facts for BLP, and remove the tag, but user has persistently refused to accept it. He was notified of 3RR on article talk page. – ]] 09:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 09:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Criticism of the Qur'an}}. {{3RRV\|Arrow740}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 11:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	Please note that this was made at the request of ] on Truthspreader's talk page. Aminz has violated the format that the two sides have worked out, which is criticism followed by response. He uses POV language, stating as fact things which are only opinions of scholars, and clearly so. To get his POV across he has started to give biased "background information" to make the rest of the article appear in a different light, despite my remark that the article was already getting too long and that this was not appropriate to the article. He has started to turn the article into the exact opposite of the title by discussing new theological movements in Islam which are only tangenially related to the topic, none of this with any discussion, and in fact ignores my comments about it. He does not sufficiently respond to my comments on the talk page, and ignores my edit summaries explaning my constructive edits. His most recent wholesale revert was done without responding to my many comments about hours of work. To top it all off he has claimed on the talk pages of three admins that anti-semitism is a purely western thing! I am contributing constructively to this article and chronicling my changes and objections on the talk page and the edit summaries, unlike Aminz, so I do not believe that I should be blocked. ] 11:28, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''Comment:''' ] and I (]<sup>]</sup>) believe that every source on the[REDACTED] should be compatible with ] and ], even criticism, otherwise there will be no difference between other ]s and wikipedia. I believe that it is a poor excuse for ] rule violation. ]<sup>]</sup> 12:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:While not conceding anything in regards to other articles, as far as this article goes, a source need only be a notable critic of Islam, with reliable, verifiable work, and that's what we have. Criticism of the Quran largely takes part on the internet due to the anonymity the internet provides. ] 22:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	Thats 3R, certainly, but the prev-version is yours not his ] 14:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:a lot of the reverts are in the form of complex partial reverts so are not as easy to display. here are at least four of the more apparent whole or independant partial reverts:
	:* to

	:* of

	:* of Aminz's insertions

	:* of

	:the editor had been previously warned about 3RR: ]. ] 15:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	Please note the paragraph started with :"], an scholar of early Islamic history, states ". It is removed in the following 4 reverts:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	That quote from Professor Crone was removed four times. --] 21:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	Itaqallah, provided a fifth revert (#2 above) --] 21:57, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:I think I made a good argument why Aminz is the aggressor here. The bottom line is that I explain all my edits, make constructive changes, and attempt to discuss mine and Aminz's changes. He does not discuss his edits, and reverts repeatedly without addressing the concerns that I made very clear. As regards the Crone part, I repeatedly told Aminz that it did not belong there, as it did not fit into the overall structure of the article as decided by itaqallah and myself on this and other articles (criticism then response). He ignored my repeated comments about. ] 22:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:: I did discuss. In any case, Admin User: Robdurbar said: "what I want to press home to you is even where you are correct and other users are being disruptive rerverting more than a couple of times is not the way to do things. The three revert rule - and please make sure you've read it - is there to stop edit wars; when enforcing it, it is irrelevant who is 'correct' in any dispute" --] 22:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::You didn't. Admin, please see this which is itaqallah summarizing some of arguments. ] 22:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::this is the page for 3RR violations, not content disputes. as for misrepresenting the context of a previous discussion in which you were not involved: we were specifically talking about the format of presenting actual criticisms, which was necessary to formulate per the critique-spamming and granting of undue weight to one side, not the format of general article prose or sections within it (for which there is ], ] and others). ] 00:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::::You seem happy to write paragraphs here. It doesn't make sense to have criticism, then a response, then criticism, then a response, etc, either in the place where you applied this principle or in a full article. ] 00:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::Placing lots of pro-Islam quotes in inappropriate places violates NPOV. ] 00:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	Regardless of whether the content was justified or not, the solution is not edit warring. 24 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 08:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Fuse (explosives)}}. {{3RRV\|Snozzer}}:

	* Previous versions reverted to: and
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 3RR warning

	Time report made: 14:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''

	:I made a good faith and ] edit to this article the user ] chose to ignore and revert to his POV, having reached 3RR, he chose to seek others to revert for him. I have made additional edits to this article, and those edits that fell outside of the fuse/fuze issue were also reverted, the last edit which is shown as 4th Revert is actually of a extensive rewrite of the article to help clarify the terminology for a wider audience."] \| ]" 15:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Your fourth revert is just that - you extensively rewrote the article against consensus, and then reverted to that newly rewritten version. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	24 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 08:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Beit Hanoun November 2006 incident}}. {{3RRV\|RunedChozo}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: he removes the picture
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->
	He is not new user and seem to be knowledgeable on[REDACTED] rules (see contribs)

	Time report made: 16:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' The image that he is removing is fair use.<!-- Optional -->
	* This user has also violated 3RR on ] (, , , , and so on) as well as made multiple personal attacks (, , ) after being shown ]. Please consider an extended block for multiple 3RR violation and disregard for NPA. -- ] <code>@ 2006-11-16T16:44Z</code>

	3RR + NPA = 24h ] 17:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 48h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Josif Runjanin}}. {{3RRV\|Factanista}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 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. -->
	* Warned abour 3RR: , , , , , , .

	Time report made: 17:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' Done despite reams of arguments supplied on the ], which he has not been able to counter. He was told that he had "broken the 3 revert rule" and that he would reported, just before he reverted and retorted that the users who opposed him would be reported. i.e. He is conciously ignoring rules he's aware of {{unsigned\|Estavisti\|17:50, 16 November 2006}}

	:My reverts were done in good faith and to prevent POV. The users Estavisti and Panonian constantly insist that the name under which the person described in the article is known in Croatia is "incorrect" and "croatisted" which is clear POV. All I did was put the Croatian version in the brackets according to[REDACTED] policy, I did not change the name of the article or anything else. I am also strongly considering to report the mentioned users for vandalising and especially Panonian for personal attack because he called me a nationalist on my personal talk page. In short this is a classic content dispute where these two users are trying to enforce their POV. --] 18:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Factanista, Misplaced Pages's 3RR limits to itself - just that. It doesn't matter what your edits are (as long as it's not cleaning up vandalism or self-revering). --] 19:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::I AM cleaning up vandalism. Enforcing POV and removing his name in Croatian is vandalism. Also putting that Osijek was in Military Frontier is also incorrect information and is also cleaning up. I have not removed anything from the article save for rephrasing POV and removing incorrect info. --] 19:46, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::The Osijek issue is wholly unrelated to the name issue. '''No one removed the name in Croatian, as can be seen in any of the diffs listed above'''. It was simply rephrased to note that Josip is a Croatisation of the man's name, not his actual name. Is that so unacceptable, accuracy in Misplaced Pages? --] 19:58, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::::The Osijek issue is related to the article issue, adding that it was part of Military Frontier is wrong information and is to be removed, insisting on wrong information is violation of rules. Also stating that his name in Croatian is "croatised" or "incorrect" version is POV and POV is indeed unacceptable. --] 20:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::::It's not - you can edit stuff about Osijek in the article while not reverting the language issue, but you ''choose'' to revert at the same time.--] 20:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::::::Yes it is. One is POV other is incorrect information, enforcing both is vandalism. --] 21:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::::::I don't think the latter is incorrect info... as for disputing - well, this is '''not vandalism, but a content dispute'''. Nevertheless - the subject here is whether you broke the 3RR rule or not - and it appears that you did. Your discussions are off-topic here. --] 21:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	----
	I added the 8th revert of ]. Even after all these warnings, he reverted again. --] 19:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	Versions variate across the days, but the dispute (over which the reverting was in progress) is the very same. --] 19:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
	----
	Just noting here that I've added the 9th revert, after all these warnings. I think this deserves a strong response, as this user being deliberately disruptive and ignoring all warnings and advice. People like this really drag down the collaborative culture of Misplaced Pages, when they couldn't care less about the acceptability of their behaviour. --] 19:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
	-----
	48h--] 21:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 8h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Fred Newman}}. {{3RRV\|BabyDweezil}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:

	* 3RR warning:

	Time report made: 18:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User:BabyDweezil cites what I think are unjustified concerns about BLP at ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	8h ] 20:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Line of succession to the Russian Throne}}. {{3RRV\|Tfoxworth}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 21:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''Comments:''' User incessantly reverts pages to versions that are stylistically wrong and inaccurate. User deduces actions to user being correct and others being wrong. ] 21:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
	:Similar behaviour is being exhibited at ]. This vandal, with nothing to contribute, ought to be banned. ] 21:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 21:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24 hours)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Socialism}}. {{3RRV\|Donnachadelong}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:


	Time report made: 21:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' He is aware of 3RR , . ] 21:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	:You must be careful yourself. Do not engage in multiple reverts except to fight vandalism. ] 02:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: prot)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Bodhidharma}}. {{3RRV\|Freedom skies}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 1st revert: to
	* 2nd revert: to
	* 3rd revert: to
	* 4th revert: to
	* 5th revert to (also reverts in principle to )
	*6th revert to
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 22:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User was warned on ] and for 3RR in the past <!-- Optional -->

	:Page protected by ]. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 09:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block; 24h for McGee)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Midnight Syndicate}}. {{3RRV\|GuardianZ}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	User has been previously warned about 3RR:

	Time report made: 23:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User continues to revert the article. ] 06:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:This report is a bit stale—the reverts are nearly four days old. However, in the more recent edit war that occured on the article today, ] broke 3RR, while GuardianZ didn't. 24 hours for Skinny McGee. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 09:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 31h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|List_of_best-selling_computer_and_video_games}}. {{3RRV\|A_Link_to_the_Past}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->

	- His block log:


	Time report made: 05:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''

	He has been blocked for 3RR a couple of times, most recently on November 11, 2006. ] 06:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:The first edit isn't a revert. The following three are. - ] ] 05:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	::The first edit is a revert. ] 06:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::If it is a revert, what did I revert? Something from several days ago. Just because I reverted two things on the same page (if you can even call it a revert, since I reverted edits made by someone that made them days ago, and considering that person said they do not care). It is no different from reverting two things on two pages. - ] ] 06:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	::::Deliberately gaming the system by knowingly reverting up to the limit is also a reason to block. '''] <sup>] · ] ]</sup>''' 07:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::::For which both the one who filed this so-called 3RR violation and WhiteMinority have done, but since they can do six reverts combined...
	:::::And my reverts were justified. He was blanking the majority of the article with no justification. - ] ] 07:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	Can someone please show me how the first edit qualifies as a revert? <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 09:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:He removed figures, renamed some games. If I'm understanding ] correctly, a revert is the undoing of an editor's work, a revert may involve as little as adding or deleting a few words or even one word. ] 09:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	31 hours for ]. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 09:59, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:'''ANOTHER CASE WHERE NOT BREAKING THE 3RR IS WORSE THAN BREAKING IT'''.{{unsigned\|Fys}}
	::how so? admins are still allowed to second-guess intentions and context in good faith. Repeat offenders should be blocked for longer periods. ] <small>]</small> 11:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::I do not believe users should be blocked because admins have "second-guessed" what they intended to do. Anyone could be blocked on such grounds. ]. ] ] ]. 11:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	::::indeed, technically. this is why giving out admin buttons involves some amount of confidence. And you may imagine what happens to an admin (out of a population of 1,000 admins) that is repeatedly caught dealing out blocks for no good reasons? In any case, this page is not for discussing the merits of the 3RR, and your concerns belong on ]. ] <small>]</small> 11:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on {{Article\|Sathya Sai Baba}}. {{3RRV\|SSS108}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 06:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' User has been for violating ] and is in continual violation of ]. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 06:45, 17 November 2006.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

	:It's only a 3RRvio when you have more than 3 reverts '''in 24 hours'''. No block. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 09:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Midnight Syndicate}}. {{3RRV\|GuardianZ}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	User has been previously warned about 3RR:

	Time report made: 10:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' He violated 3RR several days ago and despite my attempts to get an administrator's attention the case remained untouched until this morning and has become stale. Now the user has once again violated 3RR in the same article. ] 10:11, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:I see that he's reverted since I last saw the page, hence breaking 3RR. 24 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 10:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by SlimVirgin (Result:24 hour block)===
	3RR on {{article\|Allegations of Israeli apartheid}} by {{3RRV\|Kiyosaki}}

	*'''Version reverted to''' , removed that ] uses the term (focusing on the removal of that one term for the sake of clarity)
	*1st revert removed that ] uses the term.
	*2nd revert removed that ] uses the term.
	*3rd revert removed that ] uses the term.

	*'''Version reverted to''' added a new section header "Commentators who have criticized the term".
	*4th revert reverted to the section header "Commentators who have criticized the term".
	*5th revert , reverted lots of material, including reverting to the section header "Commentators who have criticized the term".

	'''Comment'''

	Kiyosaki doesn't like this article and seems to be trying to sabotage it by making lots of fiddly little reverts to confuse people and game the system. I've picked out <s>four</s> five of the recent ones: three of them reverting to a version where he removed ] (among other things), and <s>one</s> two where he reverted to a new header he'd added, which is <s>four reverts in 14 hours</s> five reverts in 15 hours. I've given the dates and times of the versions he reverted to in each case. He's been warned about 3RR many times and blocked twice for it since November 9. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 10:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	*I do like the article and have been adding and contributing to it. You don't like the article, who are you kidding??] 12:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:He continues to revert. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 11:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	HELP!!!! please let me review this before anything/block. Thanks. Let me see what is going on. Thank you.] 11:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	HELP!!!! I have been contributing to the article, please review the discussion. If I reverted 3 times, it was an accident and mistake. I don't believe I have violated the rule, let me review before being blocked. Thanks. ] 11:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	There is a discussion page section about the above "Jewwatch" thing. I asked for response but there was none from anyone, please review the section. SlimVirgin, you are not being kind.] 11:25, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	I have been trying to learn the 3RR rule, not break it. Please help me lookinto it and understand it. Help!] 11:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:I offered you the opportunity to revert yourself so it would at least only be 4RR and not 5RR, but so far you haven't taken it. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 11:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	OK, it's been 1 minute, what are you talking about? What???!!! How do I revert my so-called revert? I am serious, I am having trouble following this, please give me some time to review. ] 11:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:It has not been one minute; it has been nearly half an hour, and for someone whose ''entire contribution history'' is practically nothing but reverting, it's odd that you suddenly don't know how to do it. Please undo all the changes you made with your last revert. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 11:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	It has been 'minutes' since you laid this charge on me. Give me some time to think. Can you do it for me? I seriously don't know what to revert back to, OK?] 11:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	According to the above don't those "edits" (not reverts) span over 24 hours? Please someone help me here. Thank you.] 11:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:You first reverted at 19:53 on Nov 16 and your fifth revert was at 11:05 on Nov 17. That's about 15 hours. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 11:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	Trying to understand:

	*1st EDIT (why do you call this a "revert"?)

	You say the 5th "revert" was only 1 revert AFTER YOUR REVERT prior here:

	:To any admin watching this, every time he violates 3RR, he says he doesn't understand it, and argues that this first or second reverts weren't really reverts, but his subsequent attempts to game the system show he understands it very well. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 11:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	--All I can say is that this is bizarre, I have been editing in good-faith, not trying to break any rules that seem quite unclear to me when presented as above. Please HELP ME someone. I am being railroaded, and I don't mean to break any rules!!! I AM NOT GAMING ANYTHING.] 11:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Then revert yourself. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 11:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	How? Explain it. To what? ] 11:51, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Revert to the version before you last reverted and add the more recent editor's changes (he fixed a typo and removed blockquotes). Once someone else reverts your changes, which I have deliberately not done, you won't be able to revert yourself, so please do it smartish. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 12:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	CAN SOMEONE HELP ME? See above. My first "revert" was an EDIT. and the so-called "4th revert" was totally a different edit than #1 edit. Can someone please help me?!!!] 11:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	Legit edits as per talk: , please help me from getting railroaded. ] 11:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	*My first "revert" was an edit not a revert, my fourth so-called "revert" was a completely separate edit. Are you gaming the system? Please explain already. I do not understand. I think you are wrong, so shouldn't someone explain to me? thanks.] 12:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Again, for the benefit of any adminstrator who looks at this, before he created ], the same person edited as {{3RRV\|Kyosaki}} without the i. One of his first edits, on October 22, was to warn another user about 3RR. He ''knows'' what it is. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 12:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	::: I can confirm that Kiyosaki is gaming the system tiny edits with no summaries (after many requests not to do it). His blocking history is also telling. I am not blocking him only because we conflicted. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 12:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	Oh please. Kindly show the "gaming". Your showing up here is gaming. ] 12:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::Now he's pretending he reverted his last revert, but he didn't. This was the revert he needed to undo. I'm done posting here. He's playing games. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 12:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	you reverted first here at 10:46 and then you refer to at 11:05 '''Your "rv" was prior. Let's just cool it already, OK. You know you are trying to railroad me and
	I'd like to know why.'''] 12:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	Go ahead and do it for me. Please. If you are sure of what you are talking about.

	You know Slim, I really cannot follow this. For the benefit of any administrator, please kindly review this, I didn't and know not what he is talking about. Please someone, if I have broken the rule by the letter, I cannot understand exactly what or how, so please feel free to correct the page, if I haven't done so. Yes I know where the 3RR rule page is, and I have reviewed it, however, I cannot understand how Edit 1 and Edit 4 over the time elapsed above violates the rule. I am not gaming anything, but I am being railroaded, imho. Please help me and thank you.] 12:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	I don't know who these people are, or why they are hostile, but I am right, and I am being totally railroaded. ] 12:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Accusations of not knowing the rule or not understanding that reverts needs not be linked are acceptable in new users, not in people who have been here for well over a month and who have come into contact with the rule before. The first revert of a sequence need not revert to a page that had been in action within the last 24 hours. And anyway, remember that the 3RR is not a licence to revert three times; even if you had not broken the rule, I'd have been tempted to block for edit warring anyway. --] 12:36, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 3 days)===

	] violation on {{3RRV\|RunedChozo}}
	{{Article\|November 2006 Beit Hanoun incident}}.

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 19:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' I hope I did this right. Anyways, the issue is that RunedChozo doesn't like the picture, and has removed it now 4 times. This editor has also been hassling my talk-page -- another 3RR violation which I won't bother reporting, but the interested can examine at their leisure. ] 19:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''RESPONSE''' This user and his buddies have been waging edit wars to try to POV the article; they created a POV Fork which was deleted, they instituted a bad-faith argument trying to POV the name of the article, and now they are trying to shoehorn POV information into the article. As per Misplaced Pages policy, I'm fully ready to be blocked, but they should be blocked too. ] 19:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:it is saddening to see that this user has been revert warring as soon as he returned from a block for violating 3RR, not only on ], but also on ] (, ). ] 20:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Blocked again for 3 days. Behavior of other participants will be investigated. ] ] 20:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::Follow-up: On a brief investigation, I cannot see disruptive edit warring on the other side; it's apparently a unilateral edit war against a consensus-minus-one. Although I personally don't like that picture either. ] ] 20:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:]]] (Result: no block; 24h for Diehard)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{]}}. {{3RRV\|Lord Neezi}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 00:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	This user is one of many that is deleting cited information from an entry. The user in question removes the ] tag unexplained, even though the citation for that genre uses emo as a genre for the band.

	:In order to have a 3RRvio, you have to have more than 3 reverts in '''24 hours'''. Additionally, unlike Neezi, you broke 3RR on the article. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 00:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Mulattopeople}}. {{3RRV\|Mulattoempires}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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. -->
	*

	'''Comments:''' ] has moved ] to ].

	Time report made: 00:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	:24 horas. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 00:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Spelling reform of the Armenian language 1922-1924}}. {{3RRV\|Serouj}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: , multiple versions
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- Your report may be ignored if it is not placed properly.
	-->

	Time report made: 00:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' * I warned the user regarding 3RR when we both reached our third revert with a link to ] in an edit summary. However he chose to ignore it and responded with a personal attack and possibly a threat.--] 00:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	:24 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 02:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Jalayirids}}. {{3RRV\|E104421}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 01:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	Dmc, at ], confirmed these two were certainly the same editor. E104421 has a history of edit warrning. I personally feel this block should be 72 hours, but that's your call. '''] <sup>] · ] ]</sup>''' 01:58, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''Steel359 (Talk \| contribs \| block) blocked "E104421 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 6 days (Edit warring and sockpuppetry)'' ] 09:44, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24 hrs for both)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Indian Caste System}}. {{3RRV\|BhaiSaab}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	reverts to the following versions:

	*
	*
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert: (Note:Partial revert to earlier version by removing sources)
	* 4th revert:

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here:User is not new

	-->

	Time report made: 05:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''User has edit-warred on this article before.] 05:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC) <!-- Optional -->

	'''Comment:''' Just barely past 3RR. Waited for it. Gamed system.] 05:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Please see the ], and then notice where Hkelkar put the "dubious" templates. Unfortunately no one has yet provided an outside view. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	:'''Comment''' - Consult ] with 5 blocks for edit warring/3RR]].<b>] </b><font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 05:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	:'''Comment''' - There is a debate progressing there and an RfC will take time. I begged BhaiSaab to let the tags remain but he did not listen.] 05:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Note that Hkelkar has also made four independent reverts of my edits: , , , ] <sup>]</sup> 05:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Only one of those edits is a revert. The others involved removing his misrepresentations and were not reverts at all (which version did I revert to?). The last was to re-insert the tag that he removed without discussion, an act of vandalism on his part.] 05:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::Misrepresentations of what? The sources state the exact same thing I inserted. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::They do not.] 05:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::In any case, they were not reverts on my part, whole or partial. The debate over your misrepresentations does not belong in this page.] 05:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	::::Well, let's see. The first diff was a partial revert of . The second diff was a revert of . The third diff was a revert of , and the fourth was a revert of my removal of bogus templates, as you've pointed out. ] <sup>]</sup> 05:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	::No, wrong, my revert was to fix your vandalism of removing a template that I put there. Removal of template is vandalism so it doesn't count.] 08:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	Just thought I should point out admin ]'s on this issue:
	"It seems to me, as an outside editor, that BhaiSaab has given reputable sources for reasonable material. Hkelkar, it seems is indulging in a certain amount of unneccessary ]..." ] <sup>]</sup> 06:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
	::And my response ] 08:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Both ] and ] are blocked for 24 hrs - 3RR violations and edit warring. Please note both are subjects at the ]. ] 12:59, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:<font color="green">]</font> (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Leo Frank}}. {{3RRV\|68.9.116.87}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Leo_Frank&direction=next&oldid=85910663
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 05:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''
	User recently received a 3RR warning
	on another article (and subsequently followed me to ]). Doesn't seem to be getting it.

	24h ] 09:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:Misterrick (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Atlantic City, New Jersey}}. {{3RRV\|B64}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4st revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' ] is adding unverified information and removing important notations from the article and continously reverting edits by myself and other users. He has been asked nicely to please add an appropriate citation but he has ignored these requests and has now resorted to sending obnoxious messages via email.


	Diffs not version please. And don't forget the prev-version ] 20:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: wrongly blocked for 24 hours, subsequently unblocked)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Palestine}}. {{3RRV\|Ian Pitchford}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 19:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	Experienced user, has been warned many times on his talk page even though he constantly blanks it out without archiving. ] 19:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	:] is blocked for 24 hours as he had previously been blocked for 3RR for 8 hours. ] 20:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

	*'''ANOTHER WRONGLY IMPOSED 3RR BLOCK''' subsequently overturned.

	===] reported by User:<tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> (Result: 3h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Tibet}}. {{3RRV\|Mamin27}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* Diff of 3RR warning before this report was filed here:

	Time report made: 04:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	User decided to include an insult about my "hidden agenda" in the final revert. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 04:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
	:''04:32, 19 November 2006 Tawker (Talk \| contribs \| block) blocked "Mamin27 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 3 hours (WP:3RR - http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Mamin27_reported_by_User:Khoikhoi_.28Result:.29)'' ] ] 16:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Landmark Education}}. {{3RRV\|Sm1969}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<b> From the accused, please see an explicit ArbCom defense to 3RR, detailed at length and please contact Admin Jossi first. ] 05:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC) </b>
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	* 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.


	Time report made: 04:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	*'''NOTE to the Accused:''' Please respond if you wish in the comments section '''here below'''. Please start comments below mine. Thanks. ] 04:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC).
	*'''NOTE:''' for Administrators, see ] 04:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC).
	* '''Comment:''' ] prefers to edit war and summarily delete whole blocks of sourced information, rather than attempt to discuss on talk page. Even when a consensus is reached on the talk page to add fact{{fact}}, and wait for other editors to add the needed citation, ] just goes ahead and summarily deletes material soon after anyway. User has a habit of continually violating 3RR and edit-warring, and then attempting to justify this with various types of ends-justify-the-means, arguments. ] 04:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC).
	<b> Response from accused: Please see the ArbCom ruling regarding 3RR. Further per Jimbo Wales, adding "fact" and "citation needed" is not the right remedy. Removing the offending UNSOURCED material immediately is the remedy. Let me get the Jim Wales quote. </b>

	http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Biographies_of_living_persons&action=edit&section=3

	<blockquote>
	] has said:

	:"I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons." <ref name=Jimbo/>

	He considers "no" information to be better than "speculative" information and reemphasizes the need for sensitivity:
	Addition from sm1969: ArbCom notes that the priniciples for ongoing organizations are similar to biographies of living people, the specific context Jimbo was addressing.
	</blockquote>

	* '''Comment:''' I will refrain from further edit-warring with this editor on this article page, and wait for this issue to be resolved. ] 04:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC).
	*'''Comment:''' Also a very interesting note in the edit history ''"this is also an exception to 3RR per the arbitration Smeelgova was involved in"'', makes one think ] is actually aware of his actions here, and at the same time attempting to rationalize away his 3RR violations. ] 05:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC). '''Please also note''' that the arbcom ruling this User attempts to cite has no bearing on other articles, and was only a ruling relative to a separate article. ] 05:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC).

	** From the accused, the ArbCom ruling has everything to do with the reversions here. The ArbCom ruling addresses specifically UNSOURCED negative information about ongoing enterprises, here: Landmark Education.

	** From the accused (sm1969):
	<b>First defense</b>: Per ArbCom ruling, poorly sourced and unsourced negative comments on ongoing enterprises (Landmark Education) are similar to Biographies of Living People, and such edits may be redacted immediately and are <b> an explicit exception to the 3RR rule.</b> All of the edits cited in the 3RR report are TOTALLY unsourced as shown below.

	http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hunger

	<b>ArbCom: Articles regarding ongoing enterprises (continued response from accused sm1969</b>)
	2) The principles of editing articles about ongoing enterprises are analogous to those which govern ]. As applied to this matter, unsourced or poorly sourced negative material may be removed without discussion, such removal being an exception to the 3 revert rule ]. This extension of policy is based on the proposition that any unsourced or poorly sourced negative material is potentially harmful.
	:''Passed 6 to 0 at 14:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

	Let me now show you that the information is unsourced or poorly sourced ] 05:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	EDIT-0 (original reversion):
	This is redacting a report from the US State Department. If you look at the URL that is the reference of this report:
	http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71367.htm This URL says absolutely NOTHING about Landmark Education and I made Smeelgova aware of this. This is precisely the poorly sourced negative information--totally unsourced--that Smeelgova cites. The ArbCom ruling that unsourced negative material may be redacted immediately is per ArbCom's own words, an exception to 3RR. (Calling something a "cult" is definitely negative information, and, in fact, Landmark Education has received many retractions, forced through the legal system, for the use of the world, "cult.")

	EDIT-1: This is redacting information that the Government of Sweden "classified Landmark Education as a new religious movement." If you read the actual source Smeelgova cites, it says NOTHING about Landmark Education. Smeelgova later posted an edit that Smeelgova would later substantiate it. The ArbCom ruling gives me, in my understanding, the right to redact unsourced negative information, even as an exception to 3RR, ArbCom's precise wording as noted above. Jimbo says not to put a "fact" citation, but to remove the edits, aggressively.

	EDIT-2: This is redacting the UNSOURCED Austrian government classification again. However, there is a twist. Here Smeelgova cites two URLs. The first one is to the official US State Department report on religious freedom and the second is to some unknown web site where someone posted the information. Both reference URLs purport to be a copy of the US State Department report on religious freedom in Austria. However, the OFFICIAL US State report referenced URL given here has NOTHING about Landmark Education. (The official web page of the US State Deparment giving the report definitely trumps a second-source copy of the exact same report.) This is, once again, ArbCom ruling that unsourced negative information may be redacted as an explicit exception to 3RR. I posted numerous comments on the talk page about this--the official and fake URLs and reports--and on Smeelgova's Talk page directly.

	EDIT-3: Now, we are back to the Swedish government report again, which is totally unsourced negative information about Landmark Education. ArbCom also held this to be an explicit exception to 3RR. Smeelgova even noted that Smeelgova would provide the information later.

	EDIT-4: This edit is redacting both A) the UNSOURCED Swedish government report and B) the UNSOURCED US State report on Landmark Education (because the official URL on the US State Department web site does NOT mention Landmark Education). Again, this is consistent with the ArbCom exception to 3RR for UNSOURCED negative information on ongoing enterprises.

	EDIT-5: This edit is another redacting of UNSOURCED negative information. The URL provided is dead. This is yet again an ArbCom exception to 3RR for UNSOURCED negative information.

	I have repeatedly tried to work with Smeelgova. I have brought up the issues with Admin Jossi and Admin William Connelley numerous times. I believe the ArbCom was quite explicit in why this policy is there. Putting up dramatically UNSOURCED negative information damages Misplaced Pages. User Smeelgova could have substantiated his or her edits and responded to my lengthy criticism on the Talk Page, but chose to continue putting back the negative UNSOURCED information, in violation of the ArbCom ruling above in which Smeelgova was a participant.

	<b>I believe that ArbCom made this an explicit exception to 3RR because such UNSOURCED negative material is harmful to the organization affected and to Misplaced Pages and that it can "removed without discussion" (ArbCom's exact words). The exception to 3RR means that having it up for even an hour is considered a greater damage to the defamed organization and damage to Misplaced Pages than redacting TOTALLY UNSOURCED negative information about ongoing enterprises. I believe you should cite Smeelgova for edit warring (3RR)--bringing in UNSOURCED negative information no basis, even when warned numerous times on the Talk page. (In fact, Smeelgova was recently cited for edit warring and blocked for 24h.)</b>

	Here again is the ArbCom URL and the exact quote:
	http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Hunger

	<blockquote>
	2) The principles of editing articles about ongoing enterprises are analogous to those which govern ]. As applied to this matter, unsourced or poorly sourced negative material may be removed without discussion , such removal being an exception to the 3 revert rule
	</blockquote>

	Even in this case, before reverting again, I contacted Admin Jossi to see if ArbCom precedents were binding, and he said they may choose to enforce them. I request that you do. The specific UNSOURCED edits Smeelgova has added are factually false and defamatory and totally unsourced. This 3RR report is, in my opinion, a total abuse of the process.

	The only other block ever, on me, was from Smeelgova for redacting contributory copyright infringement. The first time it happened, Admin Connelly gave me an 8h block. The second time, when I got other admins involved Admin Jossi, for the exact same set of reversions, the Admins (Jossi and Connelly) said I was acting in good faith.

	Again, please see ] (an Admin) familar with the interactions between Smeelgova (my accuser) and me (the accused).
	] 05:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	Again, please note that this is TOTALLY unsourced information. There is just NOTHING in the references Smeelgova gives, except the fake US State Department report, contradicted by the URL of the real US State Department given in the same edit. It is NOT a matter of interpretation. There is NOTHING in the source addressing Landmark Education, the ongoing organization damaged by the TOTALLY UNSOURCED edits of Smeelgova's.

	Please also note the top of this Admin Board for 3RR:
	<blockquote>
	If you violate the three revert rule, after your fourth revert in 24 hours sysops may block you for up to 24 hours. In cases where multiple parties violate the rule, sysops should treat all sides equally.
	Chronic offenders may be subject to rulings by the Arbitration Committee.
	</blockquote>
	I believe this specifically says that ArbCom is a higher authority than 3RR, and ArbCom's ruling in this matter is perfectly analogous to my reversions of Smeelgova's UNSOURCED negative edits about an ongoing enterprise. Smeelgova should be cited for a 3RR for continually bringing in the UNSOURCED negative information that was the source of the ArbCom ruling. It damages the organization and it damages Misplaced Pages. Again, please look at the six edits and see who is violating the spirit of Misplaced Pages. ArbCom says I should remove the UNSOURCED negative information without discussion and that it is an <b>explicit exception to 3RR</b>. ] 07:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	UPDATE: Smeelgova has been putting in dead links and zero source references before, per the exact same ArbCom ruling:
	http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/Hunger
	<b>Critical references</b>
	4) Some of the references used, especially to the critical material supported by Smeelgova, lead to dead links, lack a page reference, or are inaccessible to an ordinary reader .

	:''Passed 6 to 0 at 14:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

	I believe this represents a continued pattern of abuse by Smeelgova, my accuser in this 3RR. ] 08:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


	'''Comment''' There does not appear to be a case of 3RR here at all. One of the five reversions cited above is a different piece of material. Of the other four, two occured in a 24 hour period staring 1:45 on 17 Nov, and the other two ocurred within a period starting 11:48 on 18th Nov. There have not been as many as 3 reverts within 24 hours (and definitely not more than 3).

	It should also be noted that ] has a history of aggressive editing (often based on poorly sourced material, as seems to be the case here) in furtherance of a particular POV, of making repeated wholesale reverts of other editors' work, and of making egregious complaints against editors who do not share his/her agenda. ] 17:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	: I also find it very significant that, as Sn says, there are two different version of what purport ot be the same info: the offical state dept that does not mention Landmark, and the AmPat version that does. The latter must have had the Lamdmark info faked into it. Which makes SM's role in this rather dubious ] 20:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	No block ] 09:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:Warning)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Umbria}}. {{3RRV\|Gwernol}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: --] 07:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
	Seems to be racist anti-Umbrian motives at play.

	:You haven't informed ]. I suggest no block. ]. ] ] ]. 20:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	Warned ] ] 01:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Evidence of evolution}}. {{3RRV\|Kdbuffalo}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 20:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' This user has a long list of rule violations (see ]). He habitually deletes any comments left on his talk page without replying to them, making it impossible to interact with him.

	::Frankly, this is not a violation of 3RR because the 1st diff u present as the 1st revert was actually this person's first edit to the article within 24 hrs. Thus, he's stopped (at the moment) at the 3rd revert. ] 20:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::I agree, and would add that the history of the page clearly shows that the edits are to different sections. User has clearly not broken 3RR. ]. ] ] ]. 20:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::Yeah, let's dance around boys. The intent is there and you both know it. Fine, it'll gp to AN/I based on the following: ''Users may be blocked for edit warring or disruption even if they do not revert more than three times per day.'' ] 21:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	:The rules are made specific for a reason. If you'd like to go to AN/I, go ahead but I don't see the usefulness of sarcasm. I would suggest a greater emphasis on dispute resolution process. ] 21:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	The report isn't valid anyway, the diffs have to be to that users version, not from it ] 22:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by SlimVirgin (Result: 48h)===
	3RR on {{article\|Leo Frank}} by {{3RRV\|68.9.116.87}}

	*Previous edit (removed ])
	*1st revert (removed ])
	*2nd revert (removed ])
	*3rd revert (removed ])
	*4th revert (removed ])

	'''Comment'''
	The anon keeps removing that Leo Frank belongs in ], saying there are no sources who say he was wrongfully convicted, but just about every source who has written about the case says it was a miscarriage of justice, and they're cited in the article. He has been blocked twice for 3RR, on Nov 14 and 18. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 20:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	:48 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 21:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Thank you. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 21:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result:48 hours)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|1929 Hebron massacre}}. {{3RRV\|Nielswik}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 23:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	*'''Comment''' Nielswik keeps reverting and does not even engage in talk. This is his typical style, and this is not the first time he violates 3RR. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 23:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	::You bring this here hours after the last edit, and without warning ]. Suggest no block. ]. ] ] ]. 23:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	: Well he was blocked several times for 3rr before so he knows the rules, 48 hours ] ] 00:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:: Indeed, his talk page is full of 3RR warnings. I doubt he needs another one. ←] <sup>]]</sup> 02:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::Regardless of whether he has been told before, it is a matter of common courtesy and fairness to give a warning each time. Also, ] has no email address enabled, making it impossible for Nielswik to raise objections about the block with him. ]. ] ] ]. 09:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	I reabled my email, he was revert warning in several articles at the same time by looking at his talk page, he is on the way to being blocked for much longer or arbcom if he doesn't stop revert warning in articles. ] ] 21:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Marco Polo}}. {{3RRV\|Factanista}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	Time report made: 23:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' Factanista reverted the article 5 times in 25 hours and 25 minutes, but he avoided, I don't know if voluntarily or by chance, to revert more than 3 times in strictly 24 hours. By the way, Factanista has already been blocked ], so he is aware of Misplaced Pages policy on edit wars. ] 23:21, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Exactly: he didn't break the 3RR. You haven't warned him. Suggest no block. ]. ] ] ]. 23:30, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
	::From ]: ''reverting fewer than four times may result in a block depending on context. Furthermore, making reversions just outside of the twenty four hour "deadline" may still result in a block'' (gaming-the-system clause). I wouldn't have blocked normally as the article has now been protected anyway, but Factanista seems to be additionally involved also in other edit wars in parallel, and has a history as an edit warrior, therefore 24 hours. Feel free to overturn. ] ] 02:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::Why was ] not told about this report and allowed the chance to come here and make his case? I think this should be overturned, and given that the blocking admin has consented, I urge another admin to do so. ]. ] ] ]. 09:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:BostonMA (Result: <s>24 hours</s> Revoked)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Communism}}. {{3RRV\|172}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	User is familiar with 3RR

	Time report made: 00:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' I've blocked this user for 24 hours - his reverts composed of full and partial reverts of other people's work. ] 02:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:See ]: block was overturned by ]. ] 14:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	::see instead ] please - thanks. ]<sup>]</sup> 20:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Josif Runjanin}}. {{3RRV\|Estavisti}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	Time report made: 01:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' Estavisti reverted the article 4 times in the last 24 hours. He evaded it until this time and is extremly persistant in this edit-warring and enforcing his POV.
	:Can't see how the first "revert" listed above is a revert to the "previous version". In fact, the contentious "Croatised" seems to have been introduced for the first time with that edit, which leaves us only with three reverts subsequently. ] ] 01:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	::It's true that what I did could be viewed as reverting 4 times, and if it is viewed like that then I hold my hands up. The first edit introduced "Croatisation" in that place in the article for the first time, but the word had been included in previous revisions. I ''did'' explain my edits carefully on the ] and ] didn't seem to understand what "Croatised" means and that it doesn't have pejorative or negative connotations, so it seemed OK to revert. To put the dispute in context, we've (myself, ] and ]) been dealing with a very uncooperative user on this article, who seems to have limited comprehension of English (User:Factanista, who reported me here). Incidentally he was recently blocked for 48 hours for reverting the article in question 9 times in 24 hours, persistently ignoring 3RR warnings. I notice furthermore that he has now been blocked for 24 hours for engaging in similar antics ''again'', on another article. If my edits are judged to have violated 3RR (which is by no means clear) I hope these circumstances will be taken into account. // ] 02:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


	===] reported by User:] (Result:Protected)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Midnight_Syndicate}}. {{3RRV\|Skinny_McGee}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* ]

	Time report made: 05:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''
	] keeps removing edits and citations. I have tried to involve every one of his edits while retaining my own contributions and those of a few other's along with line citations and references, but ] just keeps removing ALL new content and reverting to text that is misleading, not cited, and shown to be untrue when checked against older sources. I have checked his content and most of his edits are deceptive—changing dates, changing credits, removing notable content, citations and references—to make the article read in a misleading way that discredits one of the former band members/producer of two albums. His only edits are to this page and he seems to be one of the band members trying to edit his own page so as to promote an entirely different history of the band than what has been otherwise verified prior to some breakup among the members. He only posts links to personal interviews that actually contradict older news articles, radio interviews and cd liner notes (which he also keeps removing from reference list). It appears he is trying to rewrite history using Wiki as a platform. He keeps calling any other edit done to this page "defamatory" and he is suspected of sock-puppetry with maybe 4 to 6 other names. ] has been warned of civility issues and 3RR a few times in the past. ] 05:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:I am removing edits and citations that are defamatory to band or self-promo for Joseph Vargo. ] and ], who have both posted using the same IP address ] are trying to turn this article into a vehicle to promote Joseph Vargo, a former business partner of the band, and to diminish the accomplishments of Midnight Syndicate. I am not trying to discredit anyone - just listing the credits as they appear on the CDs. They continue to link to defamatory sites and interviews and I'm just trying to keep a clean article. The only admin who has weighed in on the article ], stated that their edits are promo for Joseph Vargo when reverting the article on November 17 at 21:40. - ] 15:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	::I'm not an administrator, but I agree with SkinnyMcgee that the version Oroboros and GuardianZ have been pushing is a promo for Joseph Vargo. ] 19:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	Doesn't look like the edit war is going to end anytime soon, protected. ] ] 21:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] ] (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Antisemitism}}. {{3RRV\|Truthspreader}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 09:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:No block. 1) User has not been warned or notified. 2) The edits are not reverts: in the middle he added two more sources and referenced extra text. ]. ] ] ]. 10:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:: I find this decision curious. The edits clearly are reverts - 3 of them are marked as such. All the edits (inc the first) remove ''The ], ]'s holy book, accuses the ]s of corrupting the ]. Muslims refer to Jews and ]s as a "]"; Islamic law demands that...'' and replace it with ''There was not such a thing that would be called Antisemitism in Muslim lands...''. There is no warning; but TS seems happy to quote wiki policies and thus can be assumed to be familiar with them ] 10:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::What decision? ]. ] ] ]. 10:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::I cannot see ] in the list of administrators. ] ] 11:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::::A mistake which will no doubt be rectified in due course. ]. ] ] ]. 11:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	Hmmm, clearly I've been assuming too much. 24h ] 11:17, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] 24h ===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Academic_elitism}}. {{3RRV\|Asmodeus}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 13:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h. Please mark reverts as such; and don't submit counter-reports just for "balance" ] 16:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Prick_Up_Your_Ears_(Family_Guy)}}. {{3RRV\|L0b0t}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 15:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	This is not the first article this has taken place on (see ], which resulted in a full protection, on my behest), and there are plenty more examples than given. This user appears to believe that they are enforcing the rules, and continuously cites a handful of WP policies. Discussions have taken place on my user talk page, his user talk page (I've also warned him about 3RR here, but he tends to delete contents of his talk page often), ], ], and the talk pages of this article and Hell Comes to Quahog. –] 15:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:All of my edits were to remove material that violates established policies and guidelines. I will be happy to back off until discussions are done however, so far, consensus is on my side. I'm sorry people seem to think that there is a place in the general purpose encyclopedia for fan speculation and inference based on facts not in evidence, but there is not. Wikipedias editorial standards are extremly lax and editors unwilling to follow such simple rules as ] and ] are not welcome here. As for the reverts, I will back off but when can one consider a discussion closed? How many seasoned editors saying there is no place in the encyclopedia for unsourced edits does it take for people to understand that there is no place in the encyclopedia for unsourced edits? Cheers. ] 15:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:If Lobot is prepared to commit himself to not engaging in multiple reverts again, then there is no need for a block. ] 17:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	::I would be happy to comply with that request, this is merely a content dispute and I apologize to any admins who had to waste their time going through this contraindicated cruft. ] 18:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] \| ] (Result: 1/24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|special relativity}}. {{3RRV\|207.200.116.139}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: Also see this diff:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 17:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' This user is persistently editing the ] page for his own conventions and POV. See this edit history: Their edits are being consistently reverted.

	Given 1h as AOL... may need page prot is persists ] 18:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Marriage}}. {{3RRV\|Rbj}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->User has previously been blocked for 3RR. Most recently on ].

	Time report made: 18:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 19:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: indef)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Pretenders_to_the_kingdom_of_Portugal}}. {{3RRV\|62.101.126.232}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 19:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	The user has been vandalising articles relating to the historic Portuguese monarchy in an attempt to add support for a false pretender (that is someone who claims to be a dynast of a royal family but really is not). His edits are misleading and are an attempt to feed false information into Misplaced Pages. I should also note that he is a sockpuppet (one of several) of a banned user named ]. The other sockpuppets are ]. Even though this is merely a 3RR write-up, an admin would probably be interested in checking out the edit histories. ] 19:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Also, this is the user's 2nd 3RR... His first was for 48 hours. My opinion is that it should become permanent. ] 19:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	I've indef blocked this as a presumed edit-warring sock ] 19:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:''(]])'' (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Islamic extremist terrorism}}. {{3RRV\|DAde}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->


	*
	*
	*
	*
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 19:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' This user has repeatedly been blocked for revert warring on this article. When the article is not {{]}} he edits as an IP when it is he edits as ]. Myself, ] and ] have been reverting his POV pushing (adding quotes of the ] in an undue weight fashion) but this user fails to understand and based upon his numerous blocks over this I'd say it's time to bump up the block time on this occassion. ''(]])'' 19:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h for both)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Doctor's Advocate}}. {{3RRV\|Pinerosp}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: <br>

	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 20:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' Doesn't seem to want reviews that don't give above average ratings. I have left 3 warnings in edit summaries about not removing content. User has also been previously told not to reverting content without giving any reason. Has also reverted such info beyond 24 hours. ] 20:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)



	===] and ] by ] <sup>(])</sup> (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	] and ]. {{3RRV\|Mdhennessey}} and {{3RRV\|Lordkinbote}}:
	: ]
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert: - ]
	* 2nd revert: - ]
	* 3rd revert: - ]
	* 4th revert: - ]
	* 5th revert: - ]

	: ]
	* 1st revert: - ]
	* 2nd revert: - ]
	* 3rd revert: - ]
	* 4th revert: - ]

	: Also, ] has now started recerting me on ]
	* 1st revert:

	:Warnings:
	*
	*

	Time report made: 21:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''
	This was all done while the article was placed as a . --] <sup>(])</sup> 21:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	*I admit to being baffled. Unless these 2 are one person - and you don't say they are - then this report makes sense. Contrariwise, you have broken 3RR yourself, and get 24h ] 23:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
	**The edit that you cited as my fourth was the last one where I said that ], and then that one was reverted. These two editors were going after me over three different pages.

	**]
	**]
	**]

	::I was under the impression that if a couple of users were ] another that this counted as an ]. This is why I went ahead and reported it as a 3RR. I also thought that ] () and ] () were not tolerated and that making wholesale changes to an article see and after a formal request like a to a page, and also fell under the ].

	::Last week, I put that article in question up for renaming. I have posted my reasons and today, each time the article was changed by the two other editors in question. I referred to the discussion page, referred to the requested page move and asked them to stop it. What else was I supposed to do? --] <sup>(])</sup> 02:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] ] (Result:No violation)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Clothing}}, {{Article\|Undergarment}}, and {{Article\|Temple garment}}. {{3RRV\|Duke53}}:

	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	On Undergarment:
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:

	], a pattern began with this article
	previous version reverted to
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	* 9th revert:
	Time report made: 22:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' -- This report should also go for ]; both have been warring with one another on both articles: ] and ].

	:A valid report needs diffs for ''four'' reverts. ] ] 01:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	::Not only that but for temple garment, we don't do "edits over several days". Has to be in a 24H period. I'd post to AN or AN/I and go that route. --]<sup>]</sup> 11:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	::: What recourse does an editor have against someone who falsely accuses him of breaking policy? This guy has falsely accused me of having sockpuppets in the past and now this; it appears that he has some <I>'axe to grind'</I> and it also appears that his knowledge of Misplaced Pages might not be as strong as it should be (<I>he also didn't post a 3RR warning at my user page or the article talk pages before reporting this; isn't that a requirement?</I>). BTW, there <I>was</I> a 3RR violation on 11/20/06 at {{Article\|Clothing}} and another 3RR violation on {{Article\|Undergarment}}, both by ]. <font face="raphael" color="green">] \| <sup>]</sup></font> 05:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
	i apologize ** ]<small> ]</small> 16:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::: The above result says 'No violation', which is half true; there was no violation by me but there was a 3RR violation by ] on <B>each</B> page I mentioned. The intent of the original complaint was against me but I don't think that the actual 3RR violation should be ignored or excused. His apologizing doesn't make it go away or right. <font face="raphael" color="green">] \| <sup>]</sup></font> 19:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] and ] on ] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Empire of Atlantium}}. {{3RRV\|Crooked allele}} and {{3RRV\|200.253.168.2}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: (more or less) (couple of minor changes, but see for non-Allele version prior to 4 reverts)

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Allele, and before him {{User2\|Harvardy}} have been engaged in a content dispute on the page with {{User\|Gene Poole}} primarily. The IP edits today are obviously and transparently Allele using an IP to avoid it looking like it's him. No need to checkuser: the article history is rather clear that it's a sock.

	Time report made: 22:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


	===], ], and ] reported by User:] (Result:72 hours)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Xbox 360}}. {{3RRV\|123wiki123}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:

	Second batch of violations:

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 23:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	123wiki123 is a now-acknowledged alt account/sockpuppet of ], as is the anon address (see and ). He has been warned (and blocked) multiple times for violating 3RR on the ] article before (see and ), and has used sockpuppets in the past to try to avoid bans under the 3RR (confirmed by checkuser, see ). He was recently granted an unblock request by Netsnipe on the condition that he avoided disruptive editing (see ). It looks to me like he's not keeping that promise. ] 23:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Love how you forget to include that the reason for the reversion are your violations of ], you constantly ignore guidelines and when you can't get your way so you come here. Stop ignoring policies/guidelines and making it look like enfocement and abiding of policy is "disruptive editing".] 02:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	:: "But my edits were better" is a very poor excuse for violating the 3RR. ] 02:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	::: "I follow the rules and am stopping someone who doesn't is a good reason to do so.
	I also find it interesting that, after two reverts from you. ] manages to show up for his first appearance in this article since the last time you had be blocked for your rule breaking, and again, manages to agree with you. Wish I had someone who followed me around, helping me workaround the 3RR and voice the same opinion I have on a talk page.] 02:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::: Not that this is at all relevant, but only one of us has been blocked for violating Misplaced Pages policies, and ]. And, in fact, "I am stopping someone from violating the rules" is ''also'' a terrible reason to violate the 3RR. The only reverts that that's permitted for are those that are unquestionably simple vandalism, which neither my nor Nuggetboy's edits were. Have a nice day. ] 03:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	: Can someone please address this report? Whether it's to accept or reject it. Thanks. ] 12:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	As there was no reasons to evade the 3rr rule as per ], I am blocking Deathseeker with his alternate account and ip for 72 hours as there have been 2 previous blocks for 3rr. --] \| ] 13:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:Indef, and <s>], 24 hours</s>)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Princess_Daisy}}. {{3RRV\|DaisyDefender}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	Time report made: 01:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	This case is way too complex to list the diffs involved. Just check through the history of {{la\|Princess Daisy}} to see these repeated edits. —] (]) 01:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	Next time please leave difs, blocked for 24 hours for like 6rr, blocked ] as well as he should know better. ] ] 01:59, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	While you guys are obviously correct here (and we need people like you to get the cruft off this ''encyclopedia''), current Misplaced Pages policy must be upheld. Plus, should rollback really be used in such a manner? — ''']]]''' 02:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	Well I found out that DaisyDefender is a banned user evading block, so it's indef and I unblocked AMIB ] ] 02:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	That makes much more sense; Ryulong and AMIB are too experienced to overstep 3RR that obviously (not to mention with rollback). — ''']]]''' 02:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	:Actually, I was unaware of any sockpuppetry until I get pinged by this in the RC channel. I just saw a hell of a lot of unencyclopedic cruft (which is probably what AMIB saw first), and I reverted once, and then did a vandal revert and warn with 3RR before listing here.—] (]) 02:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Jackie Chan}}. {{3RRV\|Chaotaoquan}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	* 9th revert:
	* 10th revert:
	* 11th revert:

	Time report made: 04:47, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''

	24h ] 09:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Antisemitism}}. {{3RRV\|BhaiSaab}}:

	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* Warning given:

	Time report made: 05:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	I've asked the user to self revert --] 05:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	He has self-reverted . He didn't know he has broken 3rr rule . He did that as soon as he noticed that. --] 06:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)



	User has self-reverted, but is cautioned to behave better in future. Please don't clutter the page with discussion. No block ] 09:30, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Mercury_Topaz}}. {{3RRV\|Giannial1985}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 16:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	Warned, but seems to have ignored you. 24h ] 16:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 12 hours)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|September 11, 2001 attacks}}. {{3RRV\|Cplot}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	User had been . --] <small>(])</small> 18:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	: 12 hours. ] 20:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24 hours)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Vedic_Sanskrit}}. {{3RRV\|Freedom_skies}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 20:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	* All four reverts have in common the goal to make Max Muller the most prominent citation (which is contested by other editors). ] 20:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
	*Edits made in response to . I think you'll see that he edited the article thrice as well. This is in addition to my advances of him asking me for references and personally talking it out either on the talk page (an act which i have ) or talking on his personal page (another duty which i ).

	The user who lodged the complaint is too proud to ask me for further citations when I made it clear that I would provide them on request (in the edit summaries) and yet despite despite my making it clear that I have additional citations he goes ahead and writes ''"All four reverts have in common the goal to make Max Muller the most prominent citation (which is contested by other editors)"''. The only one time he did talk was in a distastefully gleeful mocking of the 3RR, which he said he was going to inflict on me .
	] 20:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	::'''Comment''' - Crculver has a history of 3RR violation, and Freedom skies has merely added info which has been vandalized. Besides Crculver's edits were ] and with the intention to game 3RR.<b>] </b><font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 20:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	::] has been warned with {{tl\|3RR}} and ] has been blocked for 24 hours. ] 20:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::Why would he be warned? ] shows he's been blocked multiple times for 3RR . <b>] </b><font color = "blue"><sub>]</sub></font> 21:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Crculver has not broken 3RR but he's close to it, so he must be warned not to engage in any more revert warring. Freedom skies also has previous blocks over 3RR. ] 21:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h each)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Thomas_Jefferson}}. {{3RRV\|Pmanderson}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: ] 04:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	Comment: All four reverts have in common the goal to make Democratic-Republican the name of Jefferson's movement (which is contested by other editors) and to remove references to Jefferson/Madison letters. He's gotten away with flaunting 3RR at least twice that I've seen in the last two months, getting off because the reports about him were 'stale'. He's submitted 3RRs against others in the past recommending blocks (even against ones that had not been warned), so he knows what the violation is.

	:I may have lost count; if so, I regret both the fact, and the 15 minute slip. If I had realized that Skyemoor had reverted four times, I would have reported it here. But I am perfectly willing, have on the talk page, and had with me, to use neutral language and avoid the issue, either to use no party name or explain in full. Skyemoor has insisted on the bizarre and misleading usage that Jefferson founded the "Republican Party", and has systematically reverted attempts at compromise. (All of these are responses to Skyemoor's reversions, btw.) ] 06:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
	*Version Skyemoor has been reverting to
	*1st revert
	*2nd revert using pop-up
	*slight change of basis, producing this edit:
	*3red revert
	*4th revert

	If I have erred in puirsing this revert warrior, it's my first time. But there is a compromise proposal on the talk page; I'm going to go discuss it. ] 06:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	:This has been going on for far too long. Blocked both (Skyemoor's 4th is just outside 24h, Pmanderson's just barely within; history of edit-warring over precisely this issue on both sides.) ] ] 08:25, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|WWE New Year's Revolution}}. {{3RRV\|TJ_Spyke}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	Please make him stop reverting this. If you check his talk page, 3 people agree this is the actual poster, while he is the one and only person who disagrees. Thank you.

	24h for TJS, definitely. Not sure about Trosk, and not time to check properly ] 19:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	:If you haven't the time to check properly perhaps you should leave it to those who have. Otherwise it looks like favouritism. ]. ] ] ]. 22:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 8h)===

	] violation on
	]. {{3RRV\|Kobrakid}}:
	: ]
	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:

	:Warnings:
	*

	''' Comments:'''
	--] 19:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


	8h. Discussion removed - this is not the place for general chit-chat. Edit comments like ''revert to last version by Kobrakid. Everyone just slow down'' are a bad idea ] 23:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Juan Cole}}. {{3RRV\|Commodore Sloat}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:
	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 00:53, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' ] has initiated yet another edit war on a recently unlocked article. He has made a minor revision to his revert in order to avoid 3RR. ] 00:53, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	There are only two reverts; {{User\|Armon}} is totally misrepresenting the facts. Looking at the edit history of the article, my was a revert to his previous version; then he with a cryptic explanation. Rather than reverting, I to take into account the point he seemed to be trying to make. This was not a "second revert" as he claims; it was a rewrite of the same material in an attempt to compromise. He then again, without taking into account my attempt to compromise. I then -- this was my first revert to a different state, though he erroneously calls it my "3rd revert." However. Armon then to his original state - the grand total revert count is 3 reverts for Armon, 2 for csloat. If anyone should be blocked for revert warring it should be Armon, not csloat. Is there a Misplaced Pages policy against filing misleading 3RR reports? ] 03:40, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Reverting to minutely different versions is an attempt by csloat to ]. He objected to mention of Cole's sympathy for Israeli divestment campaigns. There are now at least three different editors who have checked the cites and agreed that it is accurate. See and the . He is now attempting to wikilawyer about the phrase "blanket ban" because the cite was dropped from my version. It was however the phrase used by Cole in the old version, which sourced Cole's blog, that he reverted to. I also quoted it in my edit summary "Israeli academics as a class have not done anything wrong and it is not right to subject them to a '''blanket ban'''." Please take his page disruption into account when deciding on the length of his block. ] 05:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	::Please ], Armon. I was not "gaming the system"; I was attempting to compromise based on your cryptic edit summary that there was a POV problem. The differences between versions was not minute; I removed the material I thought you had objected to on NPOV grounds and made changes I thought were appropriate as a compromise. I had no way of knowing how invested you were in the "divestment" issue as you did not mention it until you filed this 3RR report. This is not the place to go over our differences in terms of content, but I am not "wikilawyering" the phrase "blanket ban"; I objected to it because it was not present in the cite you cited on the page (it is from another source that was not cited in your version of the page). I even stated that if you wanted to quote the blog I would not object (though I still don't see how it is notable). I think it is unfair to report me for 3RR based on this when I was trying to compromise, and when you actually reverted more than I did. I also don't see any evidence of "page disruption" and I fear that you are making assumptions of bad faith. ] 07:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::This is a perfect example of csloat's gatekeeping and self-justifications. Only that which ''he'' deems "notable" or "relevant" is allowed without a drawn-out battle consisting of various "unwinnable" ] arguments which only serve to inflame tensions and drive off other editors. His "compromises" consist of removing the cited content, that for whatever reason, he objects to. As for assuming good faith, that is not something he extends to other editors, as can been seen from an even cursory glance at ]. I have repeatedly asked him to stop this. ] 08:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	They seem fairly clear reverts to me - all remove the disinvestment bit. 24h ] 08:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:NRen2k5 (Result:No action taken)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	]. {{3RRV\|Netscott}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 05:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	User seems to be experienced however a constant rulebreaker. Has been harassing me, constantly reverting that which he does not agree with, constantly reverting my statements about his reverts, and making crass appeals to authority. Seems that while he enjoys seeing me punished, he can't even stand being called out on his violations. — <span style="font-family: Monotype Corsiva, cursive;">]</span> 05:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
	:The appeal to authority of which I'm speaking is . This man is so absolutely full of himself. — <span style="font-family: Monotype Corsiva, cursive;">]</span> 05:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
	::] is directly relevant to this. '''] <sup>] · ] ]</sup>''' 05:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
	:::This is a simple case of not harassing users in their userspace. Refrain from doing so in the future. If someone removes your comment, they have read it, and there is no need to revert it back. The only times when this becomes iffy is with warnings. So there for, no action taken. <font color="DarkGreen">]</font><sup>]</sup> 05:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
	::::'''Note:''' NRen2k5 was blocked for the personal attack calling me a "racist" (and probably this harassment) surrounding this report. Of course as of today I've become a "". ''(]])'' 06:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Zen}}. {{3RRV\|Freedom skies}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	<!-- For simple reverts. For more complex reverts, please include information
	about which previous versions are being reverted to. -->
	* 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. -->
	<!--
	- * 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.
	3RR warning was made , before a block.
	-->

	Time report made: 12:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' All of these reverts attempt to remove from the article any suggestion that the Bodhidarma story is legendary or traditional. The user was warned about the 3RR on 20th November, and was blocked for 24 hours the next day for ignoring the warning. The first of the above edits to ] was made only half an hour after the block expired, and the user has again infringed 3RR within hours of the block expiring. A longer ban seems appropriate now. --] 12:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	*Spot what's missing? There is no link to the 'previous version reverted to'. ]. ] ] ]. 12:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	This is my first posting here and I apologise if I've misunderstood the format. The 'previous version' is , and the user has effectively confirmed that the first edit was a revert by using the summary ''"(restoring text from encyclopedia brittanica)"''. If I've misunderstood the rules, do please let me know; I am trying to get this right. --] 13:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	You did indeed omit the prev-version, as do all to many others. However, #1 is a revert, as suggested by the "restoring" and shown by ; so is #2. #4 is is, because it dupes #3. Oh, and so is #3 . 24h, then ] 13:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] \| ] (Result: 3h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Mike Mendoza}}. {{3RRV\|Mike_mendoza}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 14:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	The user and the article are connected, as confirmed by an admin (per standard procedures). Repeated attempts to get the user to explain his position have failed (postings on his talk page, postings on the article's talk page). after the 4th revert.

	:This issue should really be dealt with through the ] and ] policies rather than the three revert rule. A person's faith is unquestionably personal information. One needs to remember . ]. ] ] ]. 15:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	3h, and a note on his talk page to try using the talk page. The material appears to be sourced and non-libellous, so I don't see how BLP applies ] 19:57, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|September 11, 2001 attacks}}. {{3RRV\|Cplot}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 18:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:'''

	] was blocked for 3RR on the same article on November 21. ] 18:19, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	:: Please take a look at this article. The behavior of the core group is quite disconerting. My recent reverst were simply to maintain a NPOV dispute discussion and tag on the article. Within minutes this core group of editors has insisted the discussion has gone on too long.

	:: My reverts have been in no way disruptive and wre only to maintain the NPOV tag. A good solution would be to protect the artcile with the NPOV tag on it and allow this NPOV dispute discussion to go forward. --] 18:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	:As evidenced by invitation the user in question reverted while fully aware he was doing something that warrants a block. ] 18:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	You've only listed 3R ] 22:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

	4th dif now supplied. 24 hours. ] 02:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	----

	Just to follow up and register my frustration (not sure if this is the place, but there doesn't seem to be anyone to turn to about his dispute), JoushaZ who finally jumped in to block me was involved in this debate. Adierre who added the 4th revert also reverted 4 times along with me and he was not blocked. I have never encountered such a group of editors and administrators who hold no regard for Misplaced Pages policies as I have on this article . I stepped in as a lowly editor to try to correct what was clearly an article and debate in trouble. This is the thanks I get: two consecutive blocks by JoshuaZ (involved in the debate). First for only 3 reverts. Then for a legitmate 4 revert violation, but a violation that simply sought to maintain a legitmate NPOV template that should not have been removed within minutes.. --] 06:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:// ] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Igor_Rakočević}}. {{3RRV\|Clipper471}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 03:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->massive edit warring going on here

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h both)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Ian_Mahinmi}}. {{3RRV\|Downwards}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 04:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' Ignoring vote on Talk page; personal attacks on multiple users<!-- Optional -->

	:Blocked both parties for 24h, investigating further. See also related report above. Massive, sterile edit-warring over several articles, >10 reverts per side per article within few hours. ] ] 06:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	Further to the above: This is just ridiculous. This is what I found:
	*{{article\|Erick Barkley}} 41 reverts each side since 20 Nov
	*{{article\|Barry Sumpter}} 35 reverts each side since 20 Nov
	similar on:
	*{{article\|Leandro Barbosa}},
	*{{article\|John Salmons}},
	*{{article\|Ian Mahinmi}},
	*{{article\|Igor Rakočević}}
	Given the massiveness of the revert-warring, the pettiness of the topic, and the blatant failure of both sides to seek a reasonable consensus, I think I'll up both blocks to 48h, even for a first offense. Plus another 24h for Downwards for personal attacks in the process. Give some other editors a chance to work it out in peace in the meantime. And I'd recommend to other admins to hold both these guys to something like a 1RR parole on these articles ever after. Feel free to review. ] ] 06:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Thomas_Begley}}. {{3RRV\|Beaumontproject}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	*

	Time report made: 15:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	*Note that the final revert at 13:10 is by ], not ]. I'm reporting it here because it is such an obvious sockpuppet (similar username run together with no spacing or caps, only after I warned Beaumontproject, ] at the same moment in the same dispute (note that there is no wikilink between ] and ], so it's hard to believe that a new user would stumble across both articles and revert them both at the same time)). ] 15:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	*Are you for real? Firstly, that other user is nothing to do with me so lets get that clear - what is so obvious that its is a sockpuppet? Because we both have a name beginning with a B? Secondly, I did not break the 3RR, the first change was an edit because I had seen that it was wrong and the second two were reverts. That is when I stopped editing the article, I then went into the history of the article and spotted that it was you who had deleted out the reference to Volunteer - therefore it is you who has broken the 3RR and your edit is going against the consensus, in fact today you have broken the 3RR on the ] and ] pages also. Get down off your high horse and just face that your opinion does not match those of the majority! ] 16:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	It looks like 3RR to me, and the sock accusation seems very likely. I've blocked Bp for 24h; and the "sock" indefinitely. Mind you DU got the "prev version" wrong. This would be a marginal 3RR offence if it wasn't for the sock, so I hope others will feel free to review it ] 16:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:Warning)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Unterseeboot_552}}. {{3RRV\|71.75.217.133}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	*

	Time report made: 18:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	User:71.75.217.133 has made repeated copy and paste reverts to the article demonstrating heavy POV and without sources and refuses to enter into discussion over the content of his reverts. An attempt to have the page semi-protected was unsuccessful, but the user has now violated 3RR.--] 18:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	*An anon, looks like a fixed IP, with no edits to any other pages. Looks very like a newbie and we all know what we're not supposed to do to them. Almost certainly not aware of the 3RR, and the warning did not give a link to it. I suggest a polite warning from a non-involved admin. ]. ] ] ]. 18:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	*I gave him a proper warning. If he reverts one more time, block ] ] 18:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


	===] reported by ] (Result: 24 hrs, but unblocked early after agreement)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Tesla_(band)}}. {{3RRV\|BabuBhatt}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	An established user, but was notified of 3RR .

	Time report made: 19:53, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' Album covert image being used for something other than an album article, so was removed. User reverted it four times, the last revert being done after being told of potential 3RR violation if reverted again.

	* The real issue here is whether it qualifies as 'fair use' for an album cover to be used on the article about the band. This is really a technical question and the template on Fair use says that such an image may be used "solely to illustrate the audio recording in question"; it doesn't say specifically it has to be an article on the recording. In any event, this issue is one of copyright and not of an intent to stoke an edit war. The best way to deal with this is to work out the copyright issue rather than issue blocks. Why not try a fair use review on the image? ]. ] ] ]. 20:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	:*It isn't being used to illustrate the audio recording in question, it's being used to illustrate the band. I went through this with the Billy Joel article, and covers are only for the album article, or a mention of the album in an article. The 3RR violation is there, he was requested to revert, he didn't. Though he has found the time to go through my contrib list and edit many articles I've recently contributed to which he hasn't touched before today (check his contribs). ] 20:22, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	::*This could be getting into angels dancing on the head of a pin territory - is this "Here's an article about the band Tesla, and here's a picture of the band taken from one of their albums" or is it "Here's an article about the Band Tesla, and here's a picture of one of their album covers"? The latter would seem to be appropriate for fair use. Really it's a technical issue of copyright law (IANAL) and not appropriate to deal with through 3RR enforcement. ]. ] ] ]. 20:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	::*The license is fairly clear. Regardless, 3RR was knowingly violated after a warning. ] 20:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	24 hours. This user made the fourth revert after being warned he had made three, and then rejected the chance to self revert, although his contributions show that he has still been editing since he was offered that chance. ] ] 20:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	*Image in question has been replaced by the band's logo, which creates an acceptable fair use situation. Hopefully this is amenable to all parties and the underpinnings of this dispute will evaporate. --] 22:03, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	Thank you for that, Durin. I think the situation has calmed down now. In any case, following agreement, I unblocked BabuBhatt. It was a first offence. ] ] 22:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result:No action)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Panorama_Tools}}. {{3RRV\|GraemeL}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 19:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:'''
	*No comments on this one. It's just annoying now. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 19:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
	*All reverts were removing commercial links and a site containing material in violation of copyright. As such, they were reverting simple vandalism and thus not subject to the 3RR. --] ] 20:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
	*Discussions were being had whether or not these edits did remove external links that did not conform to Misplaced Pages's ] policy. There is no blanket statement in the policy that say ''no commercial links''. Considering the history of this technology, there's a lot of notable things that were deleted without discussion from GraemeL. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 20:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
	*Not to mention that in each and every single one of their edits, they're deleting links to related software released under GNU free licenses. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 20:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	*Not enough context regarding the nature of the links; several were shareware, though. No action. ] 09:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:No action)===

	] violation on
	]. {{3RRV\|Chowbok}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 22:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	;Comments:
	The user's only activity at Misplaced Pages is whimsically tagging of images to ensure their deletion. While he might have succesfully tagged the copyvio images on his way, much of his activity endangered images that are perfectly within the policy, and are critical for the articles they illustrate. User is deaf to the arguments from other users and instead of carrying his crusade to the policy pages, chooses instead to arbitrary tag images he selects on the whim. ] page documents many responses and explanations but the user prefers to ignore attempts to discuss and continues his assault. His position on the image above was rejected by several experienced editors in good standing well familiar with the Misplaced Pages policies on image. User:Chowbok in response resorted to wanton revert warring and bad-faith accusations of his opponents in vandalism. Putting his general behavior aside for a wider user conduct action, this report narrowly addresses the issue of revert warring and plain 3RR violation. --] 22:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
	:As Irpen's comments make clear, he is simply reporting me because he disapproves of my actions generally. This is simple, petty harrassment. Removing an RFU tag is vandalism, pure and simple; no different from removing an AfD or copyvio tag. (It's not true that tagging images is my "only activity", BTW; I've created many articles and added many images, as anyone who looks past the last few weeks in my edit history can see).—] ] 23:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	This is an interesting response that defies the AGF, our most basic policy, right in its face. I do have a problem with the above user's general attitude but those I will take to RfC or ANI or ArbCom as I see fit. This, however, is a report about a narrow action of the user, wonton edit warring and it is posted here where belongs. His urge to delete a specific image led him to a plain edit war against several users who simply were restoring the consensus at the page. The above calling a 3RR report as harassment has as much a validity as calling his opponents "vandals", also exemplified above. --] 06:14, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	*Some of these link are not working for me. Also, please use diffs. ] 09:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:24 hrs)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Venezuelan presidential election, 2006}}. {{3RRV\|The 13th 4postle}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->
	User was warned: ]

	Time report made: 23:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

	*24 hours. ] 08:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:24 hrs)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Moshe_Levinger}}. {{3RRV\|Amoruso}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->


	Amoroso was warned and asked to self-revert here:
	Time report made:03:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
	''' Comments:''' this edit-war is basically about whether <nowiki>]</nowiki> should be added to the article. The subject of the article is an Israeli citizen who was convicted by an Israeli court and served time (twice) in jail. As such, he fulfills the criteria for this category, as stated here: :"Israeli criminals are Israeli citizens or permanent residents who have been convicted of crime by an independent court of justice." There is also a "See also"" link he objects to.]

	'''Comment''': '''Bogus report''' obviously. RR doesn't apply here because of ]. ] accused him of being a part of an underground movement with no refs by putting the underground link to the "see also" section when the article doesn't mention the underground. He then failed to give those refs when asked in talk . The libel information was therefore reverted and the ] link removed. Huldra then admits it's an edit-war - basically him trying to make libel comments over a living person without discussing it in talk (the see also link) and without any evidence - and I see this report of his as abuse of the system, gaming and apparently not good faith. ] 03:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments: '''The first time Amoroso mentioned the "see also" ] link was at <b>02:10, 25 November 2006</b> (that is: <b>after</b> he has reverted 4 times). (I do of course not agree with his argument that I "accused him(=Levinger) of being a part of an underground movement with no refs by putting the underground link to the "see also" section"). And I am not finding any refs. now; as local time is about 4:45 AM and I´m going to sleep...Finally, a ] is <i>always</i> a female, please!! Regards, and good-night, ] 03:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''Comment''': Obviously Huldra's allegation here about the time zone is wrong and seems to be an outright lie, since he himeslf talked about the link here on '''23:50, 24 November 2006 which was before all reverts or at the latest 01:50, 25 November 2006 before 2-3 reverts also''' so Huldra already knew that this was problematic. '''With now Huldra admitting''' that he didn't find any refs yet continued to place this link to associate ] with the group without any proof, I think it's clear why this report is faulty and in fact no 3RR took place obviously (per the rule "All users are encouraged to remove unsourced or poorly sourced blatantly defamatory, potentially libellous information about living persons... Reverts made to enforce this provision are generally not considered contentious"). Action can also be taken against Huldra for violating ] in such a blunt way trying to associate the cases with obviously no proof or knowledge of the material. ] 04:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''Comment''': It is completely obvious that Amoruso violated 3RR; he should just take his punishment. The issue is a commonplace content dispute and his claim that his bad behavior is justified by ] is bogus. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 07:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
	:Zero comments are of course in bad faith, him being a regular 3RR violator, he's just annoyed on a personal basis. Obviously no 3RR took place. ] 15:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	:: "Obviously no 3RR took place." - Please excuse me, but I think the sourced statements indicate otherwise. ] 18:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	*24 hours. ] 08:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:No action)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Joe Volpe}}. {{3RRV\|GoldDragon}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: (with a further alteration)
	<!-- 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. -->

	Comment: I've already warned GoldDragon about 3RR violations on this page. , . ] 23:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

	Update: GoldDragon has now self-reverted the page. He also , which I can only assume is bad protocol. ] 01:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	I already reverted back to CJCurrie's version. ] 01:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	To his credit, he has. He also a second time, which I can only assume is really bad protocol. ] 01:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	*User self-reverted. ] 08:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:No action)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Howard Moscoe}}. {{3RRV\|GoldDragon}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 1st revert: (One of GoldDragon's prior deletions of the "juvenile temper tantrum" line can be found here: )
	* 2nd revert: (which returns lines from this edit: )
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	Comment: GoldDragon was blocked for a 3RR violation on this page earlier this year. ] 00:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	Update: GoldDragon a few moments ago without self-reverting on this page. ] 01:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	I already reverted back to CJCurrie's version. ] 01:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	To his credit, he has. He also a second time, which I still think is bad protocol. ] 01:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	*See above. ] 08:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:jd2718 (Result:24 hrs)===


	] violation on
	{{Article\|Babi_Yar}}. {{3RRV\|Hillock65}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:



	* Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here: ]

	Time report made: 08:27, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' I engaged ] on the article's talk page and on the user's talk page, and even as we agreed to compromise changes, he continued to revert back to his uncompromised version. ] 08:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	*24 hours. ] 08:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Panorama Tools}}. {{3RRV\|Wuz}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 20:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	Only 3R so far - please don't push it up to 4. No warning either ] 20:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|MICHAEL_RICHARDS}}. {{3RRV\|KazakhPol }}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to:

	Not verbatim reverts, but the gist/bias reintroduced is the same.

	<!-- 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. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 23:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:
	Me and other users have been reverting his changes due to original research/bias on the Michael Richards incident. Couple examples:

	1. introducing his OR + POV saying Richard's publicist "erroneously stated that Richards is Jewish." when there's already considerable dialogue on the discussion page about Richard's Jewish-ness or lack thereof.
	2. misleading statements by breaking the section into two, then stating "publicist Richards hired after fallout from his comments, Howard Rubenstein, confirmed the report." Which gives the semblance Rubenstein was hired after the Jewish incident instead of the Laugh factory incident.

	After his 1st very rude revert (stating "Do not remove this again"), I reverted and mentioned there's already discussion and the Jewish stuff shouldn't be modified till there's consensus it should be added. He reverted right away saying there's no consensus the statements should be removed. I reverted again, this time stating my reasons 1 & 2 above on his user page. He reverted right away, marking my edit as vandalism, and added test1 to my talk page. As I do not want an edit war I tried to engage him in dialogue again on his talk page (which he deleted claiming vandalism) , to which he responded by writing on the Michael Richards talk page claiming I'm a vandal and use sock puppets and my--and those of a couple others who evidently disagreed with his views--edits should be watched out for. I responded to his accusations, which he deleted from the talk page again claiming vandalism. After another user reverted his changes on the Richards, he reverted again for the 4th time in 24 hours.

	I want to add there're very opinionated posters from both camps (this one is just a particularly fervent and I feel a bit maliciously manipulative one from the anti-Richards camp. I find bias in the pro-Richard camp as well). The page may be worth a look for admins to make a final edit, clean up facts + non neutral POV, then just lock it till people's emotions cool down.

	'''Comments'''<!-- Optional -->
	No block - he didn't revert more than 3 times in 24 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 05:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 1 week)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Xbox_360}}. {{3RRV\|123wiki123}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 05:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:'''<!-- Optional -->

	A .

	:One week. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 06:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)



	===] reported by User:] (Result: 8h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Opus Dei}}. {{3RRV\|User:Pradeshkava}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	<!-- 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. -->


	* User Warned:
	* Warned Again:

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 09:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' consist exclusively of promoting the religious group "Opus Dei". There are a number of other editors who have similar patterns of editing exclusively to promote that organization-- is there some way to check and see if they are they same person? --] 09:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Blocked 8h by William Connolley. -- ] ] 21:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
	:: Oops - apologies ] 21:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Intelligent design}}. {{3RRV\|Robben salter}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->
	Warned:

	Time report made: 09:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' I cannot revert again without breaking 3RR myself. Can the reviewing admin please check that this user's insertions actually ''contradict'' the citations at the end of the sentence (which existed prior to their interference) and revert to the longstanding consensus on this controversial article? ] 09:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)<!-- Optional -->

	Its hard to see edit 4 as a revert. Vandalism maybe, but not a revert ] 09:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Christopher_Michael_Langan}}. {{3RRV\|DrL}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	* DrL keeps removing any reference to Langan being related to intelligent design and also insists on portraying fellows at ISCID as "philosophers and scientists" not ID proponents, which is what Dembski et al are best known for. ] 19:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
	::24 hours. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 19:31, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 24h)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Template:Campaignbox Yugoslav Wars}}. {{3RRV\|MaGioZal}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 21:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' User engages frequently in edit wars. These changes and reversions were made without approval by the community on the template's talk page. Possible other 3RR on other pages like , --] (]) 21:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 22:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

	:''' Comments:''' OK, I’ve accepted the blocking but I’ve posted my opinion about this on my talk pages. Besides,

	:''If you find yourself in a revert war, it is a good idea to ensure that the "other side" is aware of the 3RR, especially if they are new, by leaving a warning about WP:3RR on their talk page. Administrators are unlikely to block a user who has never been warned.''

	:Well, I’ve not been warned before the post of 3RR violation here.--] 05:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:Jayjg (Result: 24hr)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Misplaced Pages:External links}}. {{3RRV\|JJay}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 00:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	*Experienced editor, has been editing regularly for over a year. Was kind enough to mark his reverts as reverts. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 00:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	*Blocked, 24 hrs ] 00:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:Jayjg (Result: 24hr)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Misplaced Pages:External links}}. {{3RRV\|2005}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 00:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:'''
	*Experienced editor, has been editing regularly for over a year and a half. Was kind enough to mark each of his reverts as a revert. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 00:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	*Blocked, 24hr. ] 00:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	**The fourth revert was strictly addressing vandalism. Please read ] and remove the inappropriate block.

	I think the 4th R was anti-vandalism, so I've removed the block. However... please reconsider your behaviour on that page ] 10:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:Warning)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Rush_Limbaugh}}. {{3RRV\|WillyWonty}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 02:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' User has been previously warned about 3RR on his page. Not all reverts are identical but substantially the same reinsert. We tried to TALK to user but refuses to compromise.

	* Caper13 admits that he is editing paragraphs for which he hasn't read the sources so that those paragraphs reflect his personal point of view rather than factually represent the sources. As such, his edits are attributing statements to people and news organizations that they did not make. I am just correcting to his insertion of POV misinformation. Are we supposed to allow unsourced POV misinformation in articles? ] 02:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	<!-- Optional -->

	::I'm gonna ] here. This is a violation of the rule and the user will be warned and educated about the rule. --] 08:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Transnistria}}. {{3RRV\|Mark us street}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	* 9th revert:
	* 10th revert:

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	* Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here .

	Time report made: 11:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	**MariusM left a notice on my user talk page asking me to enforce this. I let him know that 3RR enforcement is not something I have chosen to do. Nonetheless, I am coming here to say that in this case someone should certainly be doing it. This article has been a real problem in this respect: two or three pro-Transnistrian-independence users, Mark among them, have been attempting to present this breakaway province as a beacon of democracy, and have been fighting by every means at their disposal, fair or foul, to have their minority viewpoint dominate the article. - ] \| ] 16:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' ] is the editor of the , previously he edited at Misplaced Pages under the name ]. His website is made with the purpose of making propaganda for international recognition of secessionist regime of Transnistria and he want to make this propaganda also through wikipedia. His reverts mainly are dealing with changing the description of Transnistria from "region" to "country" and denying of the existence of terrorism in Transnistria (he change "terrorism" with "violent incidents" - we are talking about explosions in a bus and a van which killed and wounded many people). Also, he want to promote his website in the External links of Transnistria article - I think this is a conflict of interest.--] 11:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	'''Later comment''': I added the 9th and 10th revert, which were done after the report was made.--] 12:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	OK, 24h; it would have been helpful had you pointed out why some of these were reverts, cos it wasn't obvious. I'm confused as to why M(u)S has two accounts; but I can't see any obvious abuse-by-socking ] 17:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 8h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Umar}}. {{3RRV\|Suhrawardi}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	**3RR notice given:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	Time report made: 15:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' discussions alluded to are presented here (], ]). user insists on inserting theories amounting to original research which are not supported by the text he is citing. ] 15:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	8h. I thought I'd written this before... ] 18:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Venezuelan presidential election, 2006}}. {{3RRV\|The_13th_4postle}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 17:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	User has been habitually warned not to violate the 3RR in this case the reverts was to the removal of a very POV source to a crowd estimate.] 17:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	Your prev-version is to your version; its supposed to be to one including the rv'd text (which I take to be the globovision link) ] 18:31, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	:I guess I did not know which to put, the rv have been more selectivre rather than traditional reverts. ] 18:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 31hrs)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|2001 Macedonia conflict}}. {{3RRV\|64.107.2.62}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	Warned twice:

	Time report made: 20:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' Personal attacks , repeatedly reinserting inappropriate ext links, very uncooperative user. ] 20:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
	:Blocked for 31 hours 3RR and civility. ]] 21:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Yu-Gi-Oh!_GX_media_and_release_information}}. {{3RRV\|64.34.166.230}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	'''Comments:''' Pictures were removed from this page due to constant and bizarre sockpuppetry involving ], but this anonymous user (who also seems to post as ] and may very well be another Bobabo sock) insists on reverting it back because the new style "looks ugly". ] 21:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (]) (Result:24H)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Operation Gladio}}. {{3RRV\|Seabhcan}}:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	'''Comments:''' Hoax tag is discussed on talk page, which Seabhcan denies. Seabhcan previously protected a version of the article, although he is engaged in a dispute there, after reverting to his preferred version. Previous 3RR two weeks ago. ] (]) 04:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	:Blocked for 24 hours. --]<sup>]</sup> 06:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Network Neutrality}}. {{3RRV\|66.7.225.34}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->
	User has two accounts, see ] as well; it's unclear why he's using two accounts; but he's not a new user.

	Time report made: 05:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''Comment:''' The user's claims of reverting vandalism and accusations that anyone disagreeing with him works for Google aren't helping, either. User is a long-time revert warrior on this article. --] \| ] 07:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	24h 10:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 3h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Template:Campaignbox Yugoslav Wars}}. {{3RRV\|Laughing_Man}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	**Warned:
	* 4th revert:

	'''Comment''': this user has being engaged in edit wars and disputes (sometimes, in a ) in many articles about ], ], ] and ] in general.

	Time report made: 08:14, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	This is indeed 3RR, but from a few days ago. Hmmm, I think a token 3h block ] 09:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Jake_Plummer}}. {{3RRV\|71.93.193.3}}:


	* 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. -->

	* <s>1st revert: </s>
	*1st revert:
	*2nd revert:
	*3rd revert:
	*4th revert:
	*5th revert:
	: also there was this spam site
	*
	with this listing
	*On-line Pro-Jake Plummer Shop
	*both sites, sale merchandise and have the same text letplummerplay

	*

	Time report made: 07:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	update 12:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' reverts are basically the same, blanking content, which was reference, adding a span link to a fansite with an online store, was warned for spamming test0. the user online store sells t-shirt of the football players number that the article is about, the blanking is that another football player has replaced the player the article is about.



	: You're reporting one revert?!? ] 09:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
	::No there are many, I misunderstood this "If all the reverts are the same, please just provide the version-reverted-to" my mistake, this is my first time filling this form. --] 12:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	Blocked for 24h. However... please be careful yourself; you could be judged to have broken 3RR ] 12:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
	:I can't revert this users last revert? if not will you please do it,<s> correct me if I'm wrong, I was under the impression that if it's vandalism of form like blanking or spam 3rr doesn't apply?</s> --] 12:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
	:: I just reread 3rr, I see what you are say --] 12:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:24 hours)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Christopher_Michael_Langan}}. {{3RRV\|DrL}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 09:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	* DrL was blocked for 24 hours for 3RR at 12:31 on 27 November: 1 hr and 2 minutes after the block expired DrL was back at the same article reverting, violating 3RR again within 8 hrs.
	* As with the last incident recorded above, these are complex reverts. DrL keeps removing any reference to Langan being related to intelligent design, removing or weakening references to his wife, and also insists on portraying Langan's lecture as being on CTMU, not intelligent design. ] 09:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
	* All the diffs are not similar; only two are. Although, this might be considered as ]. I feel that we must ] and let the editor go with a warning. — ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 13:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
	::You don't need to revert to ''the same'' version in order to violate the 3RR, just re-add or re-remove something that was added or removed in a prior edit.
	:::In reverts 1,3 and 4 she re-inserts <nowiki><ref></ref> The ISCID's journal <cite>Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design</cite> published a paper in September of 2002 in which Langan explained his "Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe" in detail.<ref>Langan, Christopher M. (2002). . ''Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design'' '''1.2-1.3'''</ref></nowiki>

	:::In revert 2 she admits to a revert in the edit summary (''replaced popsci reference''); she added <nowiki>In ] Langan was featured in '']'' magazine, where he discussed his "Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe" (CTMU).<ref>Quain, John R. (], ]). . ''Popular Science''.</ref></nowiki>
	::There are four clear reverts here. ] 13:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	:::I understand that, but blocks are supposed to be preventive and not punitive. Moreover, as this user claims that s/he has discussed this issue with another user; we must assume good faith and warn him for good. As far as I can see, this user has not engaged in further revert-warring elsewhere (since this report was made); hence this case is closed, in my opinion. Yours truly — ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 15:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	::::Nick, it looks to me as though this user is trying to game the system, and he has just returned from a 3RR block, so I've blocked for 24 hours. There are four reverts of: "In ] Langan was featured in '']'' magazine, where he discussed his "Cognitive-Theoretic Model of the Universe" (CTMU)<ref>Quain, John R. (], ]), . ''Popular Science''.</ref>, a metaphysical model of reality." Or similar wording. He was careful not to make it exactly the same wording each time, but the edits don't have to be identical to be reverts. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 16:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:Both blocked for 24h and 31h respectively)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Republic of Ragusa}}. {{3RRV\|Giovanni Giove}}:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Francesco Patrizi}}. {{3RRV\|Giovanni Giove}}:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:
	* 8th revert:
	* 9th revert:
	* 10th revert:
	* 11th revert:
	* 12th revert:
	* 13th revert:
	* 14th revert:
	* 15th revert:
	* 16th revert:
	* 17th revert:

	Time report made: 14:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	'''Comments:''' I did some minor grammar correction and rephrasing to the articles in question...then comes the mentioned user and starts enforcing his POV and massive edit-warring on several articles. He did the same to Marco Polo article which was also locked and protected some time ago. Of course there need to be two to Tango but I was merely reverting his removal of content and POV enforcing. If need be I shall as well bear the consequences. Btw. I also have reason to believe that this user has a sockpuppet ] who was vandalizing the ] article recently.

	:I have blocked ] and ] for 24 and 31 hours respectively. — ]<span class="plainlinks"> [http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Log&user=Sir+Nicholas+de+Mimsy-Porpington <font color="black"

	title="Admin actions"><sup>'''{L}'''</sup></font>]</span> 15:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (R: 24h) ===
	* 1st revert Novemebr 29th
	* 2nd revert Novemebr 29th
	* 3rd revert Novemebr 29th
	* 4th revert Novemebr 29th
	* 5th revert Novemebr 29th
	Was warned after 4th revert and had just come off a 24 hour block for persoanl attacks, ] 20:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	Would be nice had you actually filled out the proper form, and even reported the right user... sigh... I guess you're too busy for that kind of thing. Still its 4R so 24h ] 20:20, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	My apologies for my mistakes, did my best. i believe it was 5 as he had already been engaging in this reverting before , ] 20:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result: 1 month)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|Andy Rooney}}. {{3RRV\|BricksFromEurope}}:
	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 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. -->

	Was asked repeatedly by both myself and ] to engage in discussion on the talk page rather than revert. Warned after the third revert. Looking at the user's talk page, it appears he has a history of personal attacks and nonsense additions. ] <sup>]</sup>⁄<sub>]</sub> <small>• 21:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)</small>

	Time report made: 21:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	;Comment: Please block this user indefinitly as a troll. S/he is now spamming user pages with . -- ]] <small>21:21, 29 November 2006 (])</small>

	Blocked elsewhere for 1 month for the spam ] 00:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 1 week)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{article\|Lăutari}}. {{3RRV\|Greier}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	<!-- 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:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 21:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

	;Comment:User Greier is a long time user and should know the rules by now, as he's been blocked several times for 3RR violations. Also, anonymous user has been deleting this report from the page, calling it a 'typo'. May or may not be related to Greier.--] 22:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
	:OK. I've had to re-add this report twice now.

	:: 1 week for personal attacks and other problems in the 3RR as long as his repeated tendency to violate 3RR.


	===]/] reported by User:Spark (Result: 24h for anon)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Operation Gladio}}.
	{{3RRV\|CJK}}
	{{3RRV\|65.185.190.240}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2st revert:
	* 3nd revert:
	* 4rd revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 22:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' Per , and more clearly, (where he writes in CJK comment section without protest from CJK), this is the same user using a named account and an IP account to circumvent 3RR. His next edit in the article was to put up a , which was reverted by another user.

	I've blocked the anon for 24h. I'm not quite sure how useful blocking CJK would be, so I haven't. But if he does it again... ] 20:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Template:Messianic Judaism}}. {{3RRV\|Inigmatus}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->
	*Was warned beforehand

	Time report made: 19:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	24h ] 20:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


	===] reported by User:] (Result: warned)===




	Time report made: ] 00:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	An impressively malformed report. Warned; but so should you be, for deleting warnings. ] 12:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 8h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Republic of Macedonia}}. {{3RRV\|ZoguShqiptar700}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	*

	Time report made: 00:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	8h ] 09:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:31h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Palestinian refugee}}. {{3RRV\|81.208.95.27}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	* warning
	* User was also being very uncivil and cocky in defiance with last edit summary.

	Time report made: 03:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	Rebuttal: My first edit was decidedly ''not'' a reversion, but the removal of disputed content which the reporting user insists on restoring on multiple pages over the objections of many other editors and with no attempt to seek consensus. (For the history of the dispute see ] and ].) Since the first edit the user cites was not a reversion but a removal of content of disputed reliability, the rationale for which was explained clearly in the edit summary, therefore there was no violation of 3rr.

	The central point here is that ] is attempting yet again to gain the upper hand in a content dispute by seeking admin intervention. For complaints of user's history of this kind of system-gaming tactic, of which this bad-faith 3rr-reporting in the attempt to prevail in a content dispute is only one example, see ]. He either cannot or will not seek consensus, preferring edit warring and bad-faith incident reporting instead of reasoned discussion. The voluminous negative commentary and complaints on ] show the record of this behavior.

	As for my supposed "incivility," "cockiness" and "defiance", I deny all three: given the user's history, ''q.v.'', my warning was a reasonable attempt to prevent his customary next action. In addition, there can be no question of "defiance," as the user wields no authority I could be defying.

	Also, no suitable warning was placed on my talk page.

	] 04:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
	* 24 hours for 3RR violation, and an additional 7 hours for blatant wikilawyering; editor is obviously well aware of the 3RR, history of this article, and that his reverts were reverts. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 04:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Homeopathy}}. {{3RRV\|LeeHunter }}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 07:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	User has been blocked before on this article for 3RR . ] 07:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 09:31, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:SlimVirgin (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on {{Article\|New antisemitism}}. {{3RRV\|Aminz}}:

	*1st edit , added a disputed tag
	*1st revert , restored disputed tag
	*2nd revert , restored disputed tag
	*3rd revert , restored disputed tag
	*4th revert , restored disputed tag = four reverts in 21 hours.

	'''Comment'''
	Aminz is restoring the disputed tag because we don't want to include more material about how Muslims were allegedly never antisemitic before the establishment of the State of Israel. We are resisting this because (a) there is already material in the article saying that, (b) it's not clear that it's accurate, and (c) it's not really relevant to the concept of '''new''' antisemitism, which is what the article's about. Amibz has been blocked six times before, several for 3RR. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 03:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 09:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Tennessee Volunteers football}}. {{3RRV\|69.254.111.207}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 05:54, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	User is also clearly the same user as ] (see article history; conversation went across IPs). If we include that user's contrib , we go up to 5. Was warned , ; stated that he will continue to make reversions
	Request that someone add this to their watchlist, too, for sprotect purposes, as user has history of IP hopping.

	24h. Report back if another IP takes up the rv's... ] 09:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:96 hour block)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Treaty of Nöteborg}}. {{3RRV\|Jaakko_Sivonen}}:

	* Previous version reverted to: (Previous to what reverted by whom?)

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Previous 3RR incidents:
	*]
	*]
	*

	Time report made: 11:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' Some users in Fi-wiki fall under the category of "language warriors". Jaakko Sivonen is bringing his war into the English Misplaced Pages.
	*User has been blocked for 96 hours. 4th 3RR vio in less than a month. --]<sup>]</sup> 12:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] 17:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC) (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	]. {{3RRV\|Spylab}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 17:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments: Spylab violating the 3RR in an edit conflict about the POV of the article in question. And btw, this temple is very confusing.''' <!-- Optional -->

	Malformed report; however contiguous edits only count as one revert hence no block ] 18:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:<tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> (Result: warned)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Talk:Jalal_ad-Din_Muhammad_Rumi}}. {{3RRV\|Striver}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 19:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	Please see , and his block log. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 19:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	:It is worth noting that Striver started a section with the heading "WTF?!", so the issue of the civility should probably be taken into account here, too. ] ] 20:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	See ] 20:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	]. {{3RRV\|Panarjedde}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 05:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	While this is technically four reverts in 31 hours, there are (IMHO) aggravating circumstances in play:

	* This user is a repeat offender of the 3RR rule. A careful examination of his edit history will show that after his last 3RR block on November 8, he learned to work around the 24h timer on this and other articles in which he engages in edit-warring.
	* After the second of these four reverts, another editor (who is, incidentally, an admin) advised him against a third revert on his talk page.
	* When I restored the previous edit after his third revert, I left my reasons for supporting the group consensus on his Talk page. He proceeded with a fourth revert and ''also'' reverted my comments in the discussion on his Talk page, as shown here: ] 05:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
	* There has since been a fifth revert. An additional editor (and admin) subsequently pointed out to the user that he's pushing POV in defiance of consensus, and I'm hopeful that he'll have the good sense to stop. ] 14:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Bindi (decoration)}}. {{3RRV\|Bharatveer}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: (note that, Bharatveer is reverting to a particular wording (i.e. replacing "Hinduism" with "Hindu Dharma")
	<!-- 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:

	*'''Comment''':Bharatveer insists that his preferred wording, "Hindu Dharma" must replace the English language word "Hinduism". The matter has been discussed in the talk page many times, and the user has not shown any solid arguments supporting his claim. User has been requested in the talk page of the article not to break 3RR. User has previously been blocked for 3RR (on a different article). --] 07:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
	*:Very sorry to see a wiki admin stooping to such lowlevel tactics.He is downright lying about first edit on december2nd .Pls see that I did not make any edit on that article on 2nd December. -] 07:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
	*::You can't fake logs, Bharatveer.--] 08:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
	*:::You can see from the history , that my edit was made on 3-Dec (04:14) , which was NOT a REVERT.So I have made only 3 reverts and did not violate 3RR.-] 08:27, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
	*::::3RR covers doing the same sort of edit repeatedly, revert or no.—] (]) 08:31, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


	*'''Additional diffs''': I'm placing these here to show that Bharatveer is, indeed, making the same unilateral edits replacing "Hinduism" with "Hindu Dharma". He has been asked in the discussion page to show any quantitative argument for doing so, but has not done that at all, and also retorted with vague replies directed at other editors. Anyway, following are some more diffs. Also note that Bharatveer's edit warring over the same issue led to the protection of the article, and he has resumed the same edit war right after the article was unprotected.

	**
	**
	**
	**

	* Therefore, Bharatveer definitely has violated 3RR through repeated reverts to make the same edits as linked above. Also, per ], the repeated reversion of the phrase is considered reverts, and I've provided links to 4 of them made within the space of a couple of hours. Thanks. --] 10:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 10:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Taba Summit}}. {{3RRV\|Timeshifter}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	*5th revert:

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->
	*Warning given and during the edits too.

	Time report made: 08:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	This user has been somewhat difficult. The section originally had no sources, after several reverts he eventually added a couple of references, however they did not support the material. He was warned repeatedly not to violate the 3RR, but he chose to ignore this advice.- ] \| ] 10:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h. — ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 12:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Keyi family}}. {{3RRV\|Keyi1}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:

	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 15:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	See
	:There doesn't seem to be a breach of ] on the page and I have warned both the users against revert-warring with each other. However, as I see from the history of the article, the revert-war has a history of a few days; the users should be blocked immediately in case they fail to take notice of the 3RR warning which I have posted on their respective pages. — ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 15:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|9/11 conspiracy theories}}. {{3RRV\|SalvNaut}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	Time report made: 17:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' I don't know much about this revert war, except that SalvNaut has violated 3RR. --] 17:55, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 19:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


	===] reported by User:] (Result: no block)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Philosophy_of_mathematics}}. {{3RRV\|Lucaas}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 21:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	First of all; this is my first attempt at navigating the 3RR report process
	so plz. assume good faith before you jump all over me:) -- there is at the
	very least an edit war brewing on this article, b/w Lucaas (the user reported)
	and a couple other users.

	: It may be your first time, but it must be obvious that listing the reverts is needed. Lucaas has only 2R today, so I don't see this as valid ] 21:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:Spark (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Viruses_of_the_Mind}}. {{3RRV\|NBeale}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 02:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' The paragraph that starts with "The claims that..." was reverted 4 times in 24 hours, and a few more times prior to that. Discussion in talk asked for justification for the additions, which was not given.

	24h ] 23:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 31 hours)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Transnistria}}. {{3RRV\|Mark us street}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	* 7th revert:

	* Necessary only for new users: A diff of 3RR warning _before_ this report was filed here

	Time report made: 13:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' Check his block log. User is editor of "Tiraspol Times", a website which support the international recognition of Transnistria - a secessionist region in ]. Some of the reverts are self-promotion - he want to include a link to "Tiraspol Times" in Misplaced Pages article.--] 13:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	'''Later adition''': I added the 7th revert, as this user is not stoping from edit warring.--] 15:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	:31 hours. <tt class="plainlinks">]]</tt> 02:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Best_Buy}}. {{3RRV\|B2bomber81}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments: 1/3 for Best_Buy article. None of these users were really "in the right," since they all contributed to this horrible edit war.''' <!-- Optional -->

	''2006-12-05T01:44:46 Joe Beaudoin Jr. (Talk \| contribs \| block) blocked "Momoj (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (two violations of 3RR and vandalism edits to user pages)'' ] 09:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Best_Buy}}. {{3RRV\|Momoj}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments: 2/3 for Best_Buy article. None of these users were really "in the right," since they all contributed to this horrible edit war.''' <!-- Optional -->

	===] reported by User:] (Result:Protected/24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Best_Buy}}. {{3RRV\|Onorem}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 18:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments: 3/3 for Best_Buy article. None of these users were really "in the right," since they all contributed to this horrible edit war.''' <!-- Optional -->
	:I protected the page. Really bad edit war. Also blocked user for 24H. --]<sup>]</sup> 12:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|List of dictators}}. {{3RRV\|195.92.67.74}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 19:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	Please format properly ] 23:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	:From what I can see, this is an IP address hopper, so I don't see how a block would help. --]<sup>]</sup> 12:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by ] (Result:24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Best Buy}}. {{3RRV\|Momoj}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 00:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' This is the second 3RR violation by this user on this page within 24 hours. User also .

	Given 24 hours by ]. ]<sup>]]</sup> 03:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result: 24h)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Steven Plaut}}. {{3RRV\|Carpu}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 23:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional --> This is a new account, which has been used only to make the same edit to this one article (five times in two days so far). I believe it is a sockpuppet for one of several users already blocked for vandalism to this and other articles. ] 23:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 09:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:]KhadimNaby (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Islam in the United States}}. {{3RRV\|PelleSmith}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->


	* 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. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 14:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' This user tried to reverting changes without proper explanation and told that these has been discussed on talk page. No such discussion happened on talk page.{{unsigned\|Khadimnaby}}
	:All the changes had been discussed on the talk page before I reverted. The reporting editor, and an anonymous IP, did not engaged the talk page however, while continually leaving edit summaries claiming that there was nothing on the talk page. In the 4th diff above I also made a mistake. I did not notice that I was reverting the Hajj comment, I only thought I was reverting the CIA factbook tidbit. For that I appologize.] 15:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	:Please note that none of these reversions are back to the same version of the article. --]
	15:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)



	===] reported by User:Jobjörn (Result: 24h)===

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Swedish Anarcho-syndicalist Youth Federation}}. {{3RRV\|Itake}}:

	* Previous version reverted to:

	* 1st revert:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:

	Time report made: 15:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	24h ] 17:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	;'''Comments:'''I must say, at least he actually argued his point, instead of reverting without explanation. It should have been discussed more thoroughly on the talk page however, rather than arguing in the edit summaries.--] 22:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Market_Square_Arena}}. {{3RRV\|Chadbryant}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 21:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|World Wide Fund for Nature}}. {{3RRV\|Chadbryant}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->
	User was warned: ]

	Time report made: 22:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	User made four reversions within 45 minutes on December 5, his 41st through 44th on the page in recent months. Has been reverted by multiple users. Has already absorbed one 3RR block for his previous actions on the same page.

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Jonestown (disambiguation)}}. {{3RRV\|ChrisGriswold}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* Previous version reverted to: ; see also
	<!-- 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. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: 23:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	This violation took place within a disagreement over whether a certain lately-published book, entitled ''Jonestown: .'', should appear in the disambiguation article concerned. As of yet, the book has never had an article on it in Misplaced Pages. ChrisGriswold (CG) reverted my earlier deletion (3 Nov; see article talk page for deletion's rationale) of the book's earlier entry on disambiguation page, re-adding the entry with but slight difference -- over-long for a disambiguation entry, promotional in tone and initially including an external link. (CG's edit-summary was also a rather rude command that the entry remain). When I deleted the entry again, on the same grounds as before, he reverted me three more times. Please read the article talk page, too. (There's more -- isn't there always? -- but brevity is the rule here, most understandably.)

	====Response from ChrisGriswold====
	The first "revert" is actually my adding a combination of some information that two other editors had added a month ago. This user refused to let these editors add the link, saying that it wasn't important, but obviously it was: One even included a reference to show its notability. I did not take my first edit to be a revert because I combined the work of the two other editors, and if a 3-RR violation was a concern of Lonewolf's, he might have warned me in advance as I had him. It really is to bad that such a minor thing as this disambig page would come to this; these editors genuinely believed this book to be a worthwhile addition to the page, and after reading the information online, I agree. --] (<big>]]</big>) 00:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	] violation on
	{{Article\|The Legend of Zelda (series)}}. {{3RRV\|A Link to the Past}}:

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:

	Time report made: 23:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


	''' Comments:'''<br>
	This user is insisting on an edit war because of a referenced website that he does not like, as he admits. These reverts were about a video-reference; of all references the best reliable, and he clearly states he does not care about the reference being correct, just the source he hates. He reverted edits by 4 different users -3 registered and one ip.
	:I don't see any problem with the source for this particular bit of information. It actually provides a ''recording'' of the show in question. I don't see how you can get more verifiable than that.--] 23:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
	::The site has an Alexa rank lower than 2.5 million. 17,000 hits on Google. Has not been shown to be a reliable source. The fact that we know the information is truthful does not make it a good source. If it were a Geocities site, would it be a good source? - ] ] 01:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	::Also, an IP seems to have reverted my edits as well. An IP which has made only two edits - two reverts, to be exact. JackSparrow, may I know your IP?
	::And I like how you portray my intentions as removing a site because I dislike it. I also hate IGN, which I said in the same sentence. And yes, considering policy says that a site's verifiability is more important than its truthfulness, I take verifiability over whether or not they're lying. - ] ] 01:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::Sure ] 01:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	::::Here you go ] 01:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::::Though of course that has nothing to do with two other registered users reverting you, and Vercalos agreeing here.
	:::::Anyway, how long are you going to keep twisting words like that? ''Verifiable information'' must come from ''reliable sources''. Not in some twisted other way around, most certainly not by using error-sensitive sites like Alexia.
	:::::Anyway, this is not the place for your rediculous discussion. ] 01:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	::::::A sixth revert has been made -in just 22 hours. It's been added above. ] 01:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::::::Yes, it does. I would love your explanation as to why a an IP would just come to Misplaced Pages literally for the sole reason of reverting my edits. Additionally, I think you typoed - see, you and Hyrule are the only ones who want LotL on Misplaced Pages. In all debates, you were the only two who fought for its usage. But then again, Hyrule OWNS the site, and you are in the same country as Hyrule. I doubt it's a coincidence that you're from the same country, that you are fighting for its inclusion. Can you verify that it's reliable? If you can, the site would be verifiable. If not, it cannot be. - ] ] 01:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	::::::::Someone with your edit count should know that sometimes when people visit a page, they involve themselves in editting. This is too stupid to even considere a normal response...
	::::::::I fight for what I believe is just, and I believe excluding reliable sources that contribute information, for the sole reason that you hate them (you only clean up lotl links, not a lot of other references that by your argument would fail) is not just. Whether it is lotl or any other site that has proven itself, I don't care.
	::::::::And don't complain to me about me not showing anything, while you keep acting like I haven't tried to reason with you, and show you -while it is all there on your talk page. You just blabber on like it's not there. ] 01:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
	:::::::::Ahahaha. You showed me a couple of instances where it disagreed with what main sites said. You have not shown that any major company, web site, or magazine acknowledges it as reliable. Verify that it is acknowledged as such.
	::::::::::Nag nag nag. This discussion doesn't belong here to start with.
	::::::::::I'm not going into an endless discussion with someone to hard-headed to accept facts. ] 02:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	===] reported by User:] (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|Free Republic}}. {{3RRV\|151.2.169.27}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	* 5th revert:
	* 6th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->


	- 3RR warning place on user talk , continued to revert.

	Time report made: 01:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

	=== Sample violation report to copy ===

	<pre>

	===] reported by User:~~~ (Result:)===
	<!-- If your signature has additional fonts, please enter only your username manually -->

	] violation on
	{{Article\|ARTICLE_NAME}}. {{3RRV\|VIOLATOR_USERNAME}}:
	<!-- USE UNDERSCORE INSTEAD OF SPACE! -->

	* 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:
	* 2nd revert:
	* 3rd revert:
	* 4th revert:
	<!-- These MUST be DIFFS, not OLDIDs. Look up ] if you do not know what a diff is. -->

	<!--
	- * 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.
	-->

	Time report made: ~~~~~


	''' Comments:''' <!-- Optional -->
	</pre>

	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
	* We need to know that there are 4 reverts. If you can list 5 obvious reverts, then do so: in this case the "Previous version reverted to" is not needed. If you can find 4 obvious reverts, then list them, and replace <nowiki>http://VersionLink</nowiki> with a link to the version that the first revert reverted to. If the reverts are sutble or different, then please provide an explanation of why they are all reverts.
	* Warnings are a good idea but not obligatory

Latest revision as of 01:46, 24 January 2025

Noticeboard for edit warring

v t e 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	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
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.

See this guide for instructions on creating diffs for this report.
If you see that a user may be about to violate the three-revert rule, consider warning them by placing {{subst:uw-3rr}} on their user talk page.

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)
1158	1159	1160	1161	1162	1163	1164	1165	1166	1167
1168	1169	1170	1171	1172	1173	1174	1175	1176	1177
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)
328	329	330	331	332	333	334	335	336	337
338	339	340	341	342	343	344	345	346	347
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

User:Xuangzadoo reported by User:Ratnahastin (Result: Page protected indef)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

19:29, 17 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270059834 by 25 Cents FC (rv, none of that contradicts my edits. There are no sources which call "pajeet" a religious slur directed at Hindus. It's only a religious slur for sikhs. There are no sources which call Chuhras Christians or Hindus, they are muslims. There are no sources which mention "cow piss drinker" originating in the US, it's from South Asia. None of my edits contradict what the talk page says.)"
16:57, 17 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270040967 by Ratnahastin (The articles specifically mention "pajeet" as a religious slur directed at sikhs and/or as a racial slur directed at other south asians. There is no mention of "pajeet" being directed as a religious slur at Hindus.)"
16:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Hindus */ not a religious slur targeted at Hindus, removed"
01:28 15 January 2025 "The two sources added for "Pajeet" specifically mention that it's directed at Sikhs or at south asians racially, not at Hindus religiously, removed. "Sanghi" does not have a separate mention for Kashmir in any of its sources, removed. Added disambiguating link to Bengali Hindus. Corrected origin of "cow-piss drinker" to the correct country of origin as mentioned in the source. Added further information for "Dothead"."
11:55, 14 January 2025 11:55 "Undid revision 1269326532 by Sumanuil"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

16:58, 17 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on List of religious slurs."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

16:52, 17 January 2025 (UTC) "/* 'Anti-Christian slurs' */ cmt"
17:18, 17 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Kanglu */ add"

Comments:

All these reverts yet not a single response at the talkpage. - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

I am replying here as I'm not sure what you want from me.

Every edit I made is fairly accurate and doesn't contradict or vandalize any of wikipedia's rules.

Xuangzadoo (talk) 07:29, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

You are still edit warring without posting at the talkpage. - Ratnahastin (talk) 16:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

More reverts , can someone do something? - Ratnahastin (talk) 01:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Page protected I also note the user has been alerted to CTOPS, which I protected the page under, so there will be no room for argument if this behavior continues. Daniel Case (talk) 23:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Kelvintjy reported by User:Raoul mishima (Result: Stale)

Page: Political dissidence in the Empire of Japan
User being reported: Kelvintjy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan&oldid=1217491179

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: See July 24th 2024 https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Kelvintjy

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See "Biased" https://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Political_dissidence_in_the_Empire_of_Japan

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Kelvintjy

Comments:

Hello the user Kelvintjy has been engaged in another war last summer and was banned from the Soka Gakkai page. He's been pursuing an edit war on the Dissidence page too without daring give explanations on the talk page though he was invited to do it many times. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raoul mishima (talk • contribs) 19:58, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Stale Bbb23 (talk) 20:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
@Bbb23 you blocked this user from the page Soka Gakkai in Aug. 2024 for the same reasons. Raoul mishima (talk) 12:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

You also block Raoul but later unblocked him after he made his appeal. Kelvintjy (talk) 00:37, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't understand the user always keep targeting me. I am more of a silence contributor. I had seen how the complainant had argue with other contributor in other talk page and after a while the complainant stay silent and not touching certain topic and instead keep making edit on articles related to Soka Gakkai or Daisaku Ikeda. Now, he is making a lot of edit on Soka Gakkai International. Kelvintjy (talk) 05:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Ergzay reported by User:CommunityNotesContributor (Result: 1RR imposed on article)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

18:31, 21 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270884092 by RodRabelo7 (talk) Reverting for user specifying basically WP:IDONTLIKETHIS as their reasoning"
18:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270880207 by EF5 (talk) I believe you have reverted this edit in error so I am adding it back. Rando tweet from a random organization? The Anti-defamation league is cited elsewhere in this article and this tweet was in the article previously. I simply copy pasted it from a previous edit. ADL is a trusted source in the perennial source list WP:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Anti-Defamation_League"
17:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270877579 by EF5 (talk) Removing misinformation"
17:30, 21 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270854942 by Citing (talk) Discussion ongoing and it's incorrect as well"
23:07, 20 January 2025 (UTC) "Revert, this is not the purpose of the short description"
22:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1270715109 by Fakescientist8000 (talk) Elon is not a multinational"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

17:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Elon Musk." (edit: corrected diff)

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

18:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC) "stop edit warring now or it all goes to ANI" (edit: added diff, fix date)

Comments:

Breach of WP:3RR (added comment after 18:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC) comment added below). CNC (talk) 18:52, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

User:CommunityNotesContributor seems to be making a mistake here as several of those edits were of different content. You can't just list every single revert and call it edit warring. And the brief edit warring that did happen stopped as I realized I was reverting the wrong thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Elon_Musk&diff=prev&oldid=1270879523 Ergzay (talk) 18:49, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Read the bright read box at WP:3RR (. O3000, Ret. (talk) 18:54, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Objective3000 So let me get this straight, you're saying making unrelated reverts of unrelated content in a 24 hour period hits 3RR? You sure you got that right? As people violate that one all the darn time. Never bothered to report people as it's completely innocent. If you're heavily involved on a page and reverting stuff you'll hit that quick and fast for a rapidly updated page. Ergzay (talk) 18:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:3RR: An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page—whether involving the same or different material—within a 24-hour period. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:01, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Well TIL on that one as that's the first time I've ever heard of that use case and I've been on this site for 15+ years. 3RR in every use I've ever seen it is about back and forth reverting of the _same content_ within a short period of time. It's a severe rule break where people are clearly edit warring the same content back and forth. Reverting unrelated content on the page (edits that are often clearly vandalism-like edits, like the first two listed) would never violate 3RR in my experience. Ergzay (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

I'd honestly love an explanation on that rule as I can't figure out why it makes sense. You don't want to limit people's ability to fix vandalism on a fast moving page. Ergzay (talk) 19:08, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:3RR: There are certain exemptions to the three-revert rule, such as reverting vandalism or clear violations of the policy on biographies of living persons. – RodRabelo7 (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

No I mean even in the wider sense. Like why does it make sense to limit the ability to revert unrelated content on the same page? I can't figure out why that would make sense. The 3RR page doesn't explain that. Ergzay (talk) 19:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Vandalism is an exemption. But vandalism has a narrow definition. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Should be added, that I was in the process of reverting my own edit after the above linked comment, but someone reverted it before I could get to it.

The 18:12 edit was me undoing what was presumed to be a mistaken change by EF5 that I explained in my edit comment as they seemed to think that "some random twitter account" was being used as a source. That revert was not reverted. The 18:31 edit was a revert of an "i don't like it" edit that someone else made, it was not a revert of a revert of my own change. Ergzay (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Frankly, I thought your characterization of IDONTLIKEIT in your edit summary was improper and was thinking of reverting you, but didn't want to be a part of what I thought was your edit war. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

We can agree to disagree, but the reasons I called it IDONTLIKEIT was because the person who was reverted described the ADL, who is on the perennial sources list as being reliable, in their first edit description with the wording "LMAO, this is as trustworthy as Fox News" followed by "cannot see the pertinence of this" after another editor restored the content with a different source, which is the edit I reverted. Ergzay (talk) 19:34, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Looks like you have seven reverts in two days in a CTOP. I've even seen admins ask someone else to revert instead of violating a revert rule themselves. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

What is a CTOP? Ergzay (talk) 19:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

A CTOP is a WP:CTOP. RodRabelo7 (talk) 19:59, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

In Ergzay's defense some of these reverts do seem to be covered under BLP, but many do not and I am concerned about the battleground attitude that Ergzay is taking. The edit summaries "Discussion ongoing and it's incorrect as well" and "Removing misinformation" also seems to be getting into righting great wrongs territory as the coverage happened whether you agree with the analysis or not. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back Thanks but at this point things are too heated and people are so confident Musk is some kind of Nazi now nothing I say is gonna change anything. It's not worth the mental exhaustion I spent over the last few hours. So I probably won't be touching the page or talk page again for several days at least unless I get pinged. The truth will come out eventually, just like the last several tempest in a teapots on the Elon Musk page that eventually got corrected. Misplaced Pages is gonna be Misplaced Pages. Ergzay (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is gonna be Misplaced Pages. If your argument is that Misplaced Pages is wrong about things and you have to come in periodically to fix it; that’s not an argument that works very well on an administrative noticeboard -- and certainly not a good argument here at AN3. O3000, Ret. (talk) 22:27, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry all too much about it, 1rr for the article will slow things down and is a positive outcome all things considered. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 03:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

This is an incorrect characterization of the discussion. The people you were edit warring with said, correctly, that he was accused of having made what looks like the Nazi salute. As you know from the video and the sources provided, this is objectively correct. You just don't like the fact that reliable sources said this about him. Nobody is trying to put "Elon Musk is a Nazi" in the article. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 23:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Based on the comment in response to the notification for this discussion, "I've been brought to ANI many times in the past. Never been punished for it", I was quite surprised to see that the editor didn't acquire an understanding of 3RR when previously warned for edit warring in 2020. That's sometime ago granted, but additionally a lack of awareness of CTOP, when there is an edit notice at Musk's page regarding BLP policy, is highly suggestive of WP:NOTGETTINGIT. This in addition to the 3RR warning that was ignored, followed by continuing to revert other editors, and eventually arguing that it must be because I am wrong. If there is an essay based on "Everyone else must be wrong because I'm always right" I'd very much like to read it. As for this report, I primarily wanted to nip the edit war in the bud which appears to have worked for now, given the talk page warning failed to achieve anything. I otherwise remain concerned about the general WP:NOTHERE based indicators; disruptive editing, battleground attitude, and lack of willingness to collaborate with other editors in a civil manner. CNC (talk) 23:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

I have decided, under CTOPS and mindful of the current situation regarding the article subject, a situation that I think we can agree is unlikely to change anytime soon and is just going to attract more contentious editing, that the best resolution here, given that some of Ergzay's reverts are concededly justified on BLP grounds and that he genuinely seems ignorant of the provision in 3RR that covers all edits (a provision that, since he still wants to know, is in response to certain battleground editors in the past who would keep reverting different material within the same 24 hours so as to comply with the letter, but not the spirit, of 3RR (In other words, another case of why we can't have nice things)) is to put the article under 1RR. It will be duly logged at CTOPS. Daniel Case (talk) 00:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

We are likely to see Ergzay at ANI at some point. But as I was thinking of asking for 1RR early today; I'm fine with that decision. O3000, Ret. (talk) 00:25, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Good decision. I otherwise think a final warning for edit warring is appropriate, given the 3RR violation even excluding BLPREMOVE reverts (first 4 diffs to be specific). There's nothing else to drag out here given Ergzay intends to take a step back from the Musk article, and per above, there is always the ANI route for any future incidents. CNC (talk) 00:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

@CommunityNotesContributor My statement that you quoted there is because I'm a divisive person and people often don't like how I act on Misplaced Pages and the edits I make. People have dragged me to this place several times in the past over the years and I've always found it reasonably fair against people who are emotionally involved against dragging me down. That is why I said what I did. And as to the previous warning that you claim was me "not getting it", that was 3 reverts of the same material, and with a name 3RR the association is automatic. Edit: And I'll additionally add, I'm most certainly interested in building an accurate encyclopedia. Misplaced Pages at some point in the past lost its mind and has determined that truth seeking is not the ultimate goal, but simply regurgitating sources. I'm still very happy to use sources that exist and they should be used whenever possible, but in this modern day and age of heavily politicized and biased media, editors more than ever need to have wide open eyes and use rational thinking. Ergzay (talk) 09:16, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

"Misplaced Pages at some point in the past lost its mind and has determined that truth seeking is not the ultimate goal, but simply regurgitating sources" See WP:VNT. Daniel Case (talk) 19:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

And WP:KNOW, while you're at it. Daniel Case (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

"Use wide open eyes and use rational thinking (as defined by me)" seems to implicate Misplaced Pages:No original research, as well. MilesVorkosigan (talk) 23:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

User:203.115.14.139 reported by User:Flat Out (Result: Semi-protected one week; IP range blocked two weeks)

User being reported: 203.115.14.139 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

06:50, 22 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Three revert rule */ new section"
07:01, 22 January 2025 (UTC) "Notifying about edit warring noticeboard discussion."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This is straight-up vandalism. BusterD semi-protected the article for one week, and I've blocked Special:contributions/203.115.14.0/24 for two weeks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

User:68.150.205.46 reported by User:Closed Limelike Curves (Result: Reported user had self-reverted before the report was made)

User being reported: 68.150.205.46 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Consecutive edits made from 08:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC) to 08:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
1. 08:11, 22 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1271015371 by 68.150.205.46 (talk)"
2. 08:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1271015536 by 68.150.205.46 (talk)"
3. 08:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1271014641 by 68.150.205.46 (talk)"
07:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC) "there is no consensus in talk. there is no government election today that uses your exact Droop. it is not what Droop says his quota was"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

22:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ reply to Quantling"
22:01, 20 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ edit reply to Quantling"
22:04, 20 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ addition"
22:05, 20 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Inclusion of plus-one in Droop quota */ edit addition"

Comments:

User has been edit-warring for the past 9 months to try and reinsert incorrect information into the article, despite repeatedly having had this mistake corrected, and a consensus of 5 separate editors against these changes. Request page ban from Droop quota, Hare quota, electoral quota, and single transferable vote. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 22:18, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Closed Limelike Curves, the user appears to have self-reverted less than an hour after their last edit warring continuation, and 14 hours before your report. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:41, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, I missed that (I didn't notice the last edit was a self-revert). – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 00:51, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

68.150.205.46, thanks for self-reverting. Can you agree not to re-add the same material until a real consensus is found? An RfC could help. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:42, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Farshwal reported by User:AP 499D25 (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Previous version reverted to: diff

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: diff

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: diff (from User:Farshwal themselves)

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

Comments:

Hi, I'm just an uninvolved third-party editor who came across this 3RR violation involving the change of "Parmar Rajputs" to "Jats" in the article lead sentence. The editor themself has made a post on the talk page as seen in the diff above, but they continued to edit-war without getting a consensus first at that talk page discussion. Also worth noting the editor had received a prior 7-day block in Sep 2024 for similar disruption, such as this, where they also made an edit changing something to "Jats". — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment: In Special:Diff/1271043038 , they are using a slur against the Rajput caste by calling it "R***put" meaning "Son of Wh***", which is also the caste they are deliberately removing from the article. That in itself merits an indef.ArvindPalaskar (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Blocked indefinitely.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

User:DoctorWhoFan91 reported by User:Tested account (Result: OP indeffed)

Page: Bhanot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Comment:Now what should I say, this reckless person has crossed all limits for three revert rule and spamming on user talk with thrustful comments , and he keeps bothering me repeatedly with the same fabricated nonsense. He keeps giving those mocking statements against me for commissioning an report and is persistently stuck on the same matter over and over again. I want him to be punished for his vile actions, and for the offensive things he has said in his statements, which had a bad influence on people. He is going to everyone’s talk pages

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:

I suspect a WP:BOOMERANG is coming here, but for now I'll say to OP, don't make personal attacks as you did here. Bafflingly, you linked to the NPA policy in the same edit summary. — Czello 11:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The OP account has been reported to AIV by User:Ratnahastin with the suspicion that it's yet another sockpuppet account of User:Truthfindervert: diff. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, kinda funny isn't it, a sockpuppet accusing others of edit-warring after move-vandalising. OP has been reported to AIV and SPI btw, so this will just led to them being blocked faster lol. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Could somone move the page back after OP is blocked, they have done it again. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:18, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah let's give the bots that fix the double-redirects a break and stop move-warring the page until the account is blocked. It's only gonna clutter the page histories and logs more and more, and the title the person is trying to move the page to isn't an unconstructive title anyway. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, I got carried away trying to stop the bot. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:24, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Sock, not bot, sorry. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I will now direct any visiting mods to Tested account clearly edit warring, so yes, this should be a WP:BOOMERANG. I do not know this user but there are multiple accusations of this being an LTA sock. — Czello 11:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The account is a suspected sock of Truthfindervert, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Summerbreakcooldown. Pinging @Ivanvector, Zzuuzz, and Izno:. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I had said this before as well—you are the same people @Czello@DoctorWhoFan91 who want to manipulate the article in your own way and keep editing it to portray it in the same context of that past misunderstanding and conflict. So, I have nothing for you. You just keep putting in your efforts, but the consequences of your violative actions will come to you eventually. I have no answers for that, but when you are found guilty, you will have to deal with them on your own.

This is my last reply, requesting administrative intervention as the accuser under the three-revert rule. Tested account (talk) 11:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I have indefinitely blocked User:Tested account; almost certainly a sock but even if they aren't, they're being wildly disruptive and attacking others. Black Kite (talk) 11:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The page has also been move-protected for 2 days following a request for move protection I made at RPP/I. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Wamalotpark reported by User:Ponyo (Result: Warned )

Previous version reverted to: First edit to change the capitalization

Diffs of the user's reverts:

First revert, using their IP, which is very obviously the same editor
Second revert
Third revert
Fourth revert

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: warning

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

Wamalotpark is edit warring with multiple editors across multiple articles, and are making the same edits while logged out.-- Ponyo 00:13, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
The charge is obviously correct. User:Wamalotpark, I reverted you because no advantage should go to the edit warrior. If you revert again you will be blocked. The logged-out editing is another matter, a more serious matter, and as it happens I can see just how much of it you have been doing. You should stop doing that esp. if, as you did here, you seem to be doing it to avoid scrutiny, because it's abusive and you are going to get blocked for it. Drmies (talk) 00:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Augmented Seventh reported by User:Recyclethispizzabox (Result: No violation)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271389468&oldid=1269162140

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271427280&oldid=1271423082

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271423082&oldid=1271392849

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271428457&oldid=1271428288

Comments:

The article in question presents one-sided information, and that too sometimes using unsourced and questionable sources. The language Urdu is part of the Pakistani identity, and this article does not engage with the perspectives of Pakistanis who argue that the language Urdu has its own identity, distinct from Hindi. It's culturally insensitive to dismiss the cultural identity of another community and dismiss their perspecitives entirely to push one-sided claims that only serve to undermine their identity.

No violation Bbb23 (talk) 01:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Left CTOPS notice on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 01:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Categories: