Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:40, 13 February 2015

• WP:AN/3
• WP:AN3
• WP:AN/EW
• WP:ANEW
• WP:AN/3RR

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

Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)

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.

User:Prince Silversaddle reported by User:AdamDeanHall

Page: List of programs broadcast by Discovery Family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Prince Silversaddle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

For some reason this user added a nonexistent program Outrageous Kid Parties to the List of programs broadcast by Discovery Family; this program didn't air on that channel. AdamDeanHall (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

@AdamDeanHall: Nonexistent? You can't be serious. I Googled the show, and yes, it does exist. Here's proof:

• Exhibit A
• Exhibit B
• Exhibit C

I just wanted to set the record straight. ElectricBurst_(Zaps) 20:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Gamaliel reported by User:TBSchemer (Result: No violation)

Page

MSNBC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Gamaliel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 18:15, 10 February 2015 (UTC) "Reverted to revision 646480013 by Wikidemon (talk): One short blog post is not intro material. (TW)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

Prior reversions by User:Wikidemon to remove the same content:

Attempt by User:TBSchemer to resolve the problem with an alternate edit:

Reversions by User:TBSchemer to the last stable version with pleas to discuss the issue on the talk page: — Preceding unsigned comment added by TBSchemer (talk • contribs) 23:18, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

User:Wikidemon has attempted to implement a change to this article 3 times, and has been reverted 3 times, with repeated pleas to leave the page at the last stable version while we discuss the proposed change on the talk page. After I reached the last reversion I am allowed under 3RR, User:Gamaliel jumped in with a revert to "win" the edit war. TBSchemer (talk) 23:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

• Additionally, neither User:Wikidemon nor User:Gamaliel has made any attempt to discuss the issue on the talk page, preferring to try to "win" through edit warring instead. TBSchemer (talk) 23:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

This article has been on my watchlist for a long time. Frequently I see inappropriate material appear in the intro of this article, and frequently I revert it without discussing each of those reverts on talk. If the dispute persists, at that point I will bring the matter to talk. I have no knowledge of any conflict or discussion involving Wikidemon and I have not seen the talk page today. No one should be revert warring to introduce contentious material into the introduction of an article before a consensus has developed for inclusion. Gamaliel (talk) 23:13, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

I want to add that this is the first I'm hearing of any of this about an edit conflict between TBSchemer and Wikidemon. I only looked at the most recent edit. If TBSchemer had simply told me to join the talk discussion, if there is one, I would have. Gamaliel (talk) 23:29, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

• No violation.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

(after finding of no violation) For context, (1) as far as I can tell the long term stable version of the article does not contain the claim that MSNBC "has long been accused of left-wing bias" that TBSchemer is trying to wedge into the lede, so BRD suggests that the burden is on them to establish consensus for it, (2) As TBSchemer admits, they themselves have reverted three times to try to introduce the disputed content, (3) I did in fact raise the issue on the talk page half a day before TBSchemer made this report, and so far I am the only one discussing there, and (4) I have made no further reversions and do not intend to do so in the near term, after TBSchemer made an edit warring report threat and tit-for-tat appeal to BRD in their edit summary (while reverting themselves). Not to beat a dead horse, but I'd like to establish that for the record and urge people to come to the talk page before trying to add stuff like this. - Wikidemon (talk) 00:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

User talk:109.79.152.132 reported by User:Mishae (Result: no vio)

Page

The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

109.79.152.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. diff1 "Strange removal of archived url. huffington post link can be archived, it clearly was archived."
2. diff2 "archiveurls"
3. diff3 "Replied on talk page. I am not experiencing the redirect to a dead page but if you say there is a problem with it, then okay, remove the ArchiveUrl but other changes should not have been removed."
4. diff4 "restore spaces to infobox (and restore minor strict formatting of quote marks) feel free to call an admin if you are seriously going to object to this. it only restore the article to the way it has been almost forever."

Comments

I was busy writing an article, when out of a sudden I was greeted with 2 reverts from this user. He was concerned about my removal of archiveurl which as I claimed to him later on the article talkpage was sending to a redirect which is dead (you need to wait 5 minutes in order to see it). I edited the article and removed the material and answered to him on the talkpage with the reason behind it. He responded with a revert of my restoration and added back some pointless stuff. I told him of 3RR rule on the talkpage and politely told him to stop reverting. On that, he reverted again in which he said restore spaces to infobox (and restore minor strict formatting of quote marks feel free to call an admin if you are seriously going to object to this. it only restore the article to the way it has been almost forever. On that I had no other option other then to come here because I think a block is necessary because the anonymous user uses revert button instead of quietly editing it, and to me, its quite disruptive, because I get a notification of a revert every time he does it.

As a separate note, I need to point out that in his second revert, he didn't only did archiveurl, but he also did something else which he didn't mentioned in the edit summary.

This article has been on my watchlist for a long time. In my opinion, no one should be revert warring, and do pointless editing both of which are bordering with Disruption of the project.--Mishae (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

• Note. The IP has reverted only three times, not four. Diff #2 is a consecutive edit and doesn't count separately. Also, it doesn't help that you called the IP a vandal on their talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:24, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, perhaps I shouldn't have called him that, but an IP that reverts I view as such. I see more vandalic IPs then I see constructive ones.--Mishae (talk) 06:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. --slakr 04:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Jeh reported by User:216.230.226.43 (Result: protected)

Page: Physical Address Extension (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: User-multi error: no username detected (help).

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:

Comments: Jeh plays as an article master, who never let useful and important corrections into the articles which he might involve in. The difference 1 listed above is a good example, see his comment about his undo, please!

• Undid revision 646590359 by 103.249.84.179 (talk) rv pointless changes

I bold the phrase pointless changes. Is that really pointless changes, please take a look at diff no.2 listed above. Another famous wikipeidan Guy Harris, only made some minor changes to that pointless changes, then this article read much more comprehensive than Jeh's revision. This is only one example, and also many other similar situations found involved with Jeh.

User Jeh is an important wikipedian without doubt, but no matter how powerful he is, he is only one man, Misplaced Pages.org needs more useful contributions and potential contributions from all over the world. His behavior like this is just setting blocks to deny those valuable contributions. He also use puppet sock policy to prevent someone against with him on some point, or figure out his mistakes. Take look at the associated talk page, we could find something important to prove it.

And what's more, I also doubt if a real editor on contributions, why is he always interested in reporting others as puppet socket? Please also check his contribution history, more time was paid on reverting and reporting, few useful article we could find within months.

So for this very obvious reason, I report this user, or wish a proper warning to him to help him find a proper seat for him to sit. 216.230.226.43 (talk) 13:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Reply by the accused: The SINGLE revert of mine reported here was of an edit made by what is clearly yet another IP sockpuppet (reported) of indef-blocked Janagewen (talk · contribs), who seems to have a fetish about making his mark on the PAE article, claiming that in its existing form it is somehow "misleading" - his favorite accusation. And, given the wording here and his apparent obsession with me, I have no doubt that the IP that created this bogus EW report is yet another SP (reported). ("Bogus" because one revert does not an edit-war make.) He's tried this before. I suppose my edit comment should have been "Pointless changes by sock of blocked editor". And, yes, I do think the changes were "pointless", Guy Harris's compromise edits notwithstanding.

Regarding the charge of general obstructionism, vague though that is, I will respond: Janagewen knows full well that changes and suggestions by him have been accepted, by me as well as by others.

Ironically (given that he is complaining about reverts on this article), the current version of talk:Physical Address Extension shows this: Complaint here was agreed to within the hour here, and fixed in the article (after I'd said "I don't have to be the one to fix it," and waited to give him or someone else a chance) here.

Then, after his indef block, his sock "Najagewinnen" says that that was not really the problem; this edit and subsequent exchanges show that (now, at least) he's really objecting to the word "extension", "extended", etc., in connection with x64's long mode. This apparently on the theory that since it's the only address translation mode under long mode, it's not really an "extension". Pointing out that the AMD documentation uses exactly this term ("PAE") to describe address translation while in long mode, and that we can't go against our sources, fell on deaf ears. I did however find that Intel does not use the term PAE for long mode address translation, and I reported that in the talk page discussion, and added that to the article. And in response, I'm accused yet again of being "misleading", I suppose since he hasn't gotten absolutely everything he wants, which is apparently (for now) complete removal of anything related to the term "extension" in this context.

Frankly, after his indefinite block, the behavior that led up to it, and his behavior since (which has hardly improved), it is only to be expected that everything he writes is scrutinized very carefully before being given any serious consideration. That is on his own head: Blocked users aren't allowed to edit no matter how many IPs they manage to use, so we'd be perfectly within bounds to revert everything he posts on sight and not consider it at all. (I suppose he's going to say that the above is "misleading" again!) Jeh (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Another serious thing I should also mentioned about Jeh and his fellows. In this link the following words has been removed by Claw of Slime, yeah one of his claws.

"You do not answer the question above, and mislead a lot! I would email to AMD Corporation, whether your explanation is misleading or not, I wish they would answer by emails! Stop IP-inspection! Frankly, I am using software, Hide My IP, because your fellows blocked my IPs already! What a shame! Just want to shut my month up, then block and lock all my user accounts and IPs! And someone portrayed as Chinese in Zh.Misplaced Pages.org to hook me up! What such a shameless behaviour! I just talk about x86, x86-64, PAE and IA-32. But your people just treat me like what?"

It is a complaint and also a fact to be told. And in this link, the following words could also prove that he also hires someone from zh.wikipedia.org to inspect one's IP address to report IP sock puppet. And you see what such a newer Misplaced Pages user, less than a month, but so familiar to assist Jeh to make so many reports successfully.

"This ip seems to be a proxy, for its TCP port 80 is accessible"

Through the words above, we can not deny Antigng is another claw of Jeh.

This is only one example, and many and many other examples do really exist. Through the talk page history of Jeh, we could also find many other Misplaced Pages users made complaints. They might make useful contributions, but denied by Jeh, and blocked by him indirectly too. I believe those other users could lose their passion continuing to pay time on Misplaced Pages.org, so the quality of some articles could never be improved. Through Jeh's words on the talk page of PAE, we also could find he might has the trend to make advertisements through the article he has involved. That might be another reason why he has been passion for reporting all the time. But we should respect him as most of his useful contributions to Misplaced Pages.org. So we should have manage something to improve Misplaced Pages.org. 103.25.56.68 (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The above would be funny if it wasn't so sad. Jeh (talk) 23:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• Page protected by another admin due to socking. --slakr 05:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Sayoon3 and User:Inkyhack reported by User:Paul 012 (Result: Blocks)

Page: Webster University Thailand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Sayoon3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Diffs of the user's reverts:

User being reported: Inkyhack (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Diffs of the user's reverts:

Comments:

• Sayoon3 claims Inkyhack is spamming, while Inkyhack claims Sayoon3 is engaging in vandalism. What is obvious is that both are very strongly pushing their POV in the article. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
• I appreciate you looking into this. My intention was to try correct errors on the page. I attempted to address some of Sayoon3's concerns by adding a line clarifying Ratish Thakur's role at the University (he was listed as president), correcting the name of the president of Webster with a citation and adding a section on accreditation (he had claimed in the talk page that the University was not accredited). Instead, the page has been repeatedly reverted back to the incorrect state. Please note that one of the incorrect pieces put on the page is that the University is "Indian managed." Ratish Thakur is Indian, but the University is managed by an American non-profit and has numerous Americans, Europeans and Asians on staff. To specifically change this to "Indian managed" strikes me as somewhat racist. Inkyhack (talk) 17:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• Result: The two reported users were both blocked 24 hours by User:Callanecc. EdJohnston (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:71.212.60.198 reported by User:Bsuorangecrush (result: no vio)

User:71.212.60.198 has began removing MWN from the tv section on 2013–14 Boise State Broncos men's basketball team and 2014–15 Boise State Broncos men's basketball team. There has been no reason given on the edit summary or on the talk pages as to why it was removed. There have been other users remove it that have also never given any reason. The discussion was taken to the college basketball project talk page and decided it can stay yet it continues to be removed. I do not want to just continue to revert these edits and possibly get banned for edit warring. What can I do to stop this from happening?Bsuorangecrush (talk) 18:14, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. --slakr 05:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

That's because I was trying to avoid the three revert rule to keep from getting banned. The fact that it continues to happen yet nobody ever says anything on the talk pages and completely ignores my warnings hasn't worked. Is their anything I can to to revert it over 3 times yet not get banned?Bsuorangecrush (talk) 07:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) reported by User:143.176.62.228 (Result: Protected)

Page: Age disparity in sexual relationships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Looking at the history of the article Age disparity in sexual relationships, I see "Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )" reverting only three (, , ) times (not four), but 143.176.62.228 reverting at least three times (, , , ; considering the first edit today is an attempt to restore previously reverted edits), behavior they were previously blocked for. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

For now, I have semi-protected the article. The alternative would have been to block the IP due to their violation of 3RR - but I thought it better for now to permit discussion on the article talk page. If they resume edit warring on this article or elsewhere, a block may be needed. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Bumped to full article protection; after viewing the content dispute, it's best to encourage both sides to use the talk page. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:40, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Eatprayswimm reported by User:Arjayay (Result: Semi)

Page: Taylor Lianne Chandler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Eatprayswimm (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
Situation was explained - and ignored - at the teahouse here Several more minor reverts if you look at the page history - Arjayay (talk) 19:25, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Situation has not been Ignored, I have addressed both you and the teahouse. Please do not post false information in your request for a ban. I have addressed the issues and provided resolution. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

All Edits were reverts from other users. The content added and removed was done so according to Wiki policy and was not a violation. It has become a wiki-edit war and I will not participate in the lunacy that is happening with the page. I would hope that all references are properly cited and erroneous links and unverified information is removed. Please refer to all Edits with the page, and all usernames. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:34, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Please note Misplaced Pages guidelines for Biographies of Living Person: (reference BLP circumstances

Biographies of living persons are considered to be the most fragile part of Misplaced Pages today. The potential for libelous materials to enter into an article about a living or recently deceased person and cause a great deal of damage for Misplaced Pages and the Wikimedia Foundation is omnipresent. Therefore, it is paramount for administrators to take this policy into account when dealing with 3RR reports.

For example, if two users are edit warring over a BLP, one is removing a potentially libelous statement and the other is entering it, then the user removing it may be given the benefit of the doubt. Essentially, if the user, who is removing the potentially damaging statement(s), violates 3RR, then their violation may be exempt from any action taken. Unfortunately, this can be very subjective and any 3RR report on a BLP should be scrutinised with the utmost care and attention to WP:AGF.

If there is any confusion at all for the admin closing the report then they should post a message on WP:AN and/or WP:ANI to get wider input from the community. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The information contained on Taylor Lianne Chandler's page is in multiple violations of this Circumstance and the edits have pointed out all of the violations Ms. Chandler has committed. If there is an issue with the references pointed out, please advise. Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

@Eatprayswimm: The article's talk page hasn't even been created. Use it to point out specific factual errors with specific reasons why they're incorrect. Blanking almost the entire article stating "falsified information" won't get you anywhere. --NeilN 19:45, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• Result: Article semiprotected for 10 days by User:Callanecc. EdJohnston (talk) 15:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Cantonhonhun reported by User:eatprayswimm (Result: Semi)

Page: Taylor Lianne Chandler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Cantonhonhun (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
Several more minor reverts if you look at the page history Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• Obviously a retaliation to the report above. User:Cantonhonhun has been reverting User:eatprayswimm's repeated removal of sourced material. And the 4 reverts listed in this spurious report are all by the reporter, not by the editor about whom the report purports to be. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:55, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

David Biddulph, changes have been made multiple times by both parties, including the report below. Who is in the wrong? Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The report below is as spurious as this one. You ask who is in the wrong; the answer is that you are. You have violated the bright line of WP:3RR and you have made no effort to discuss the problem on the article's talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

@DavidBiddulph - There is not article talk page. Kind Regards, Eatprayswimm (talk) 22:16, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

The talk page is here Talk:Taylor Lianne Chandler Theroadislong (talk) 22:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• Result: Semiprotected by another admin. EdJohnston (talk) 15:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User: Taychatlc reported by User:Eatprayswimm (Result: Semi)

Page: Taylor Lianne Chandler (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Taychatlc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

5. Also undid NielN revisions: Undid revision 646671248 by NeilN (talk) Removed citations without merit adding duplicate info) ( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatprayswimm (talk • contribs) 20:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:56, 11 February 2015 (UTC) Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
Several more minor reverts if you look at the page history Eatprayswimm (talk) 19:56, 11 February 2015 (UTC) Please note Misplaced Pages guidelines for Biographies of Living Person: (reference) BLP circumstances

Biographies of living persons are considered to be the most fragile part of Misplaced Pages today. The potential for libelous materials to enter into an article about a living or recently deceased person and cause a great deal of damage for Misplaced Pages and the Wikimedia Foundation is omnipresent. Therefore, it is paramount for administrators to take this policy into account when dealing with 3RR reports.

For example, if two users are edit warring over a BLP, one is removing a potentially libelous statement and the other is entering it, then the user removing it may be given the benefit of the doubt. Essentially, if the user, who is removing the potentially damaging statement(s), violates 3RR, then their violation may be exempt from any action taken. Unfortunately, this can be very subjective and any 3RR report on a BLP should be scrutinised with the utmost care and attention to WP:AGF.

• As in the report above, the 4 diffs given are all to reverts by the reporter User:eatprayswimm, thus demonstrating that 3RR has been violated by the reporter. No evidence has been given of edit-warring by User: Taychatlc. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Revisions edited, copied previous versions of wrong persona, these revisions belong to TLC Eatprayswimm (talk) 20:09, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

• Result: Article semiprotected by another admin. EdJohnston (talk) 15:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Tsavage reported by User:Mark Marathon (Result: Both warned)

Page: Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Tsavage (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This editor clearly has no intention of respecting WP:BRD or waiting for consensus to be reached on the article talk page, to the poinht of reverting my edits twoce whiel i was composing yet anther contribution to the talk page.Mark Marathon (talk) 01:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Please examine the whole history sequence. Mark Marathon made substantial edits to one paragraph of a section and posted a note to that effect on the Talk page. Rather than revert those edits, which I found to be POV and poorly sourced, I entered into discussion, and continued to make incremental edits.

Mark Marathon completely reverted three times. The last reversion deleted the entire section. At that point, I reverted back to the version just prior to his edits, started a clean thread on the Talk page. Publicity section paragraph rewrite for local consensus to directly work on the paragraph, and have no intention of editing that material in the article as made clear in the edit summary and Talk page. --Tsavage (talk) 01:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Result: User:Tsavage and User:Mark Marathon are both warned. Each of you has made at least four edits in 24 hours and, depending on whether a rewrite can be considered a revert, it seems that both of you broke WP:3RR. Each of you must know what it takes to get a talk page consensus. Further reverts that aren't based on a talk page agreement may lead to a block. EdJohnston (talk) 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Winkelvi reported by User: LDS_FLDS (talk · contribs) (Result: Socks indeffed)

Page: Bobbi Kristina Brown (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Winkelvi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. I am unfamiliar with how to show a user's reverts. One can see from the page history and talk page that User:Winkelvi has been combative and very unproductive, reverting much sourced content and making ambiguous demands. On the talk page, Winkelvi has issues with at least three separate editors, with one stating, "Winkelvi was NOT helpful in this process with cryptic edits and escalating to reporting me for attempting to comply with his/her ambiguous comments". Can this user be banned from this page? It's getting out of control. --LDS FLDS (talk) 04:34, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• It's not clear how Winkelvi has behaved disruptively, nor is it clear how you are involved in whatever dispute may exist since you have never edited the article or its talkpage. Are you operating more than one editor account? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

It's not clear to me, either, Roscelese. I've never heard of this editor, have no idea what they are referring to, and have to wonder if it's a sockpuppet of a disgruntled editor that, for some reason, sees me as an enemy. Weird. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 04:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: Because this report made no sense to me (being filed by a brand-new account and a user I had never heard of previously), I did some investigation. Subsequently, I have filed an SPI here: . -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 06:40, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Comment:And then moved to attacking other articles written under Kbabej, which is the exact reason this account was created to report your reconstructive edits. Stop wikihounding me! --Kbabej (talk) 14:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Update: Kbabej has admitted socking at SPI here: ]. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 14:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Update': Winkelvi continues to Wikihound me. Can something please be done about this user? Out of 4,000,000,000+ articles, he just happens to find other articles of mine to suddenly start focusing on after I opened a legitimate complaint against him that I wanted researched? And I did it under a new username for this exact reason, so I wouldn't be targeted, which is happening. See here. --Kbabej (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
• Blocked filer (puppet) and Kbabej (master) indefinitely.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Cmpunksdiva reported by User:Philip J Fry (Result: Declined)

Page

Until the End of Time (telenovela) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Cmpunksdiva (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. Consecutive edits made from 07:00, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) to 07:01, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC)
   1. 07:00, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) ""
   2. 07:01, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) ""
2. 06:55, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) ""
3. 02:04, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) "Fix the name Hasta El Fin Del Mundo means Until The End of the World"
4. Consecutive edits made from 06:33, 11 febrero 2015 (UTC) to 06:35, 11 febrero 2015 (UTC)
   1. 06:33, 11 febrero 2015 (UTC) ""
   2. 06:35, 11 febrero 2015 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 07:17, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) "←Created page with '== Until the End of Time == Please I come to ask you to stop your edits, since this translation is unofficial, not even beam chosen to add references to what you...'"
2. 07:17, 12 febrero 2015 (UTC) "/* Until the End of Time */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

I've left a message on their discussion, but it is seen that this user is not interested in understanding anything. This user tries to change the title of the article without making any reference, and the title you want to place is not the official title of the telenovela. Also request a verification of accounts. Since this user seems to be a puppet of Unitele12 José 07:22, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Declined. There were only two reverts by the new user as on the last set of edits, they self-reverted. I'm also not convinced that this account is related to the other, but I will comment more about that at SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:09, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Dilan chamara reported by User:Crystallizedcarbon (Result: Blocked)

Page: The Para Namal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Dilan chamara (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Disruptive single purpose new user, created promotional page repeatedly added Facebook links as references and repeatedly removed AfD tags.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 11:25, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Blocked – 31 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 14:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Accesskele reported by User:Jamie Tubers (Result: Blocked)

Page

Ramsey Nouah (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Accesskele (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 14:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 06:04, 12 February 2015 (UTC) to 13:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
   1. 06:04, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 646721720 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
   2. 13:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Early life */ Please, refrain from adding information you don't know about a person."
3. 13:36, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Editted info about his place of birth. Actor was born, raised and have lived in Lagos his entire life"
4. 14:32, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 646799853 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
5. 15:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 646800674 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 14:35, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Ramsey Nouah */ new section"
2. 15:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Ramsey Nouah */ reply"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

This User has been edit warring on the article of Ramsey Nouah for sometime. He changes figures, removes information which are cited and replaces them with contentious information which can't be found in any reliable source. There seems to be conflict of interest here, cos the user stated that he said he is "a member of Ramsey Nouah team". I have given a warning on his talkpage, and two other users have also previously given warnings on his talkpage....also because of his edits on the page of the same subject. This user is becoming disruptive, as he doesn't want to discuss, neither is he willing to provide sources for his controversial edits, as suggested to him. Jamie Tubers (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:6675548 reported by User:Lerdthenerd (Result: Blocked)

Page

Guri (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

6675548 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 16:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 646810405 by Dlsqor (talk)"
2. 16:00, 12 February 2015 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 15:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC) to 15:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
   1. 15:46, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 646808500 by Dlsqor (talk)"
   2. 15:48, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "←Blanked the page"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 16:05, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Guri. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 16:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* redirect war, Disqor and 667 use the talk page! */ new section"

Comments:

users arguing over what the page should be called Lerdthenerd wiki defender 16:17, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Dlsqor reported by User:Lerdthenerd (Result: Blocked)

Page

Guri (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Dlsqor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 16:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 646810254 by 6675548 (talk)"
2. 15:56, 12 February 2015 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC) to 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
   1. 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Dlsqor moved page Guri-si, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea to Guri over redirect"
   2. 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "←Redirected page to Guri, Gyeonggi-do"
   3. 15:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "←Redirected page to Guri"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 16:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "General note: Removal of content, blanking on Guri article South korea. (TW)"
2. 16:02, 12 February 2015 (UTC) ""
3. 16:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC) ""

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 16:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* redirect war, Disqor and 667 use the talk page! */ new section"

Comments:

See above for 667, and can someone merge these two together--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 16:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Safehaven86 reported by User:HughD (Result: Referred to ANI)

Page: Illinois Policy Institute (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Safehaven86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: this version is at the end of several edits of incremental improvements immediately prior to the first edit below

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:01, 11 February 2015 -1,821 edit blanks a contribution of a previous editor including several references
2. 19:13, 11 February 2015 -224 edit overwrites a previous editor's incremental improvement contribution; Safehaven86 includes additional detail from a source Safehaven86 reported to WP:RSN as not RS
3. 19:51, 11 February 2015 -218 edit overwrites a previous editor's incremental improvement contribution; Safehaven86 includes additional detail from a source Safehaven86 reported to WP:RSN as not RS
4. 20:30, 11 February 2015 -218 edit overwrites a previous editor's incremental improvement contribution; Safehaven86 includes additional detail from a source Safehaven86 reported to WP:RSN as not RS
5. 15:55, 12 February 2015 -38 deletes a previous editor's contribution in part

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 23:00, 11 February 2015 1st warning
2. 23:26, 11 February 2015 2nd warning

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

See also WP:RSN#Progress_Illinois. User reported some sources to WP:RSN, then returned to the article to edit war to increase the level of detail drawn from those very sources, among other reverts.

19:52, 12 February 2015 Today another example of including additional detail from a source, while at the same time actively arguing that the very source is not RS on the talk page Talk:illinois Policy Institute and at WP:RSN. Seems like either the article space or the talk space/noticebaord behaviour may not be in good faith. Hugh (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Please see WP:FORUMSHOP. The OP has opened a thread here as well Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Safehaven86 (talk) 23:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Result: No action. The submitter has already taken this to ANI and there is no need to discuss the same thing in multiple venues. So far it appears that ANI is not impressed. EdJohnston (talk) 04:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:122.164.23.187 reported by User:Barek (Result: Block and semi)

Page: Chennai (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 122.164.23.187 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Initial edits posted earlier today by:

• 122.164.12.193 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)
• Monkreal (talk · contribs)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:39, 12 February 2015‎ People with no connection to the city, please do not make any corrections. The script is native language of the city and it should be included.
2. 22:45, 12 February 2015 Undid revision 646861780 by Abecedare
3. 22:51, 12 February 2015‎ Undid revision 646862375 by Barek
4. 22:59, 12 February 2015‎ Undid revision 646862791 by Barek
5. 23:04, 12 February 2015‎ Undid revision 646864260 by Barek

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

• 23:02, 12 February 2015‎

Link to discussion with the user:

• User talk:Barek#Hi,

Comments:
User refuses to take the disputed content to article talk page, despite multiple requests and being reverted by multiple editors. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:21, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

• Note. I indeffed Monkreal and semi-protected the article for one week. If the IPs act up on other pages and you don't feel comfortable blocking them on your own, Barek, let me know or point another administrator to my comment if I'm not around.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:31, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Wasp-1992 reported by User:Flat Out (Result: )

Page

List of AC/DC band members (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Wasp-1992 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. Consecutive edits made from 00:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC) to 02:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
   1. 00:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Current members */Flat Out can change the page but it will not change the fact that CHRIS SLADE is the drummer of the band"
   2. 00:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Former members */"
   3. 00:14, 12 February 2015 (UTC) ""
   4. 02:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Current members */"
2. 22:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Former members */"
3. Consecutive edits made from 02:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC) to 02:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
   1. 02:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Former members */Chris Slade is not just a live member he is a real band member."
   2. 02:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Current members */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 03:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on List of AC/DC band members. (TW)"
2. 03:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on AC/DC. (TW)"
3. 03:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC) "/* February 2015 */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 22:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC) "/* Phil Rudd/Chris Slade */ consenus editing"

Comments:

Persistent edit warring on this article and also at AC/DC despite warning and attempts to engage in discussion. Edits reflect opinion and is not here. Flat Out let's discuss it 01:50, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Ritsaiph reported by User:Kudzu1 (Result: )

Page: War in Donbass (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ritsaiph (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: This isn't a WP:3RR complaint, but it's a very clear case of WP:EDITWAR behavior, and in the last case, a very disruptive WP:POINT violation. User:Ritsaiph has also behaved very unpleasantly on Talk:War in Donbass, as you can see in this thread (including a poorly disguised link to hardcore pornography). Under the circumstances, as an uninvolved editor (who is sick of seeing this come up over and over on my Watchlist, natch) I think a short timeout is warranted. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I think more than a "short timeout" is warranted. See the AN/I thread I opened. RGloucester — ☎ 04:28, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, the image link the user placed on a talkpage needs oversight. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

The disruptive link has been removed, but for posterity, it's here: -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:38, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Still needs to be revdeleted... RGloucester — ☎ 04:40, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Although I don't see a 3RR violation I do see a couple of other things that are unacceptable. That said, the editor in question seems to have retired. If they come back, any repeat of this behavior will warrant appropriate action. In the meantime I've revdelled the Talk:War in Donbass edit.  Philg88  05:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring