Misplaced Pages

:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Elliskev (talk | contribs) at 01:09, 12 August 2008 (→User:Elliskev reported by User:Jim Furtado (Result: warned)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 01:09, 12 August 2008 by Elliskev (talk | contribs) (→User:Elliskev reported by User:Jim Furtado (Result: warned))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Template:Moveprotected

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

    This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule.

    You must notify any user you have reported.

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

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

    Additional notes
    • When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.
    • The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from.
    • Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection.
    • Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed.
    Definition of edit warring
    Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring.
    Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)
    An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions.

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

    Twinkle's ARV can be used on the user's page to more easily report their behavior, including automatic handling of diffs.
    Click here to create a new report
    Noticeboard archives
    Administrators' (archives, search)
    349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358
    359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368
    Incidents (archives, search)
    1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165
    1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175
    Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
    472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481
    482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491
    Arbitration enforcement (archives)
    328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337
    338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347
    Other links


    Violations

    Please place new reports at the BOTTOM. If you do not see your report, you can search the archives for it.


    User:The Thunderer reported by User:BigDunc (Result: Declined)

    Time reported: 13:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    He will revert almost any changes from his version, reverting any attempt to bring the article in line with policy. BigDunc 13:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    Declined In spite of the turmoil, the article seems to be moving forward. It is hard to identify specific edits as reverts since so much development is happening. I hope that more neutral editors will become interested in working on the article, though I do see good faith effort by both of the partisans who are involved in this 3RR report. EdJohnston (talk) 18:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Txbad1 reported by User:Karanacs (Result:24 h)

    Txbad1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 17:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


    I tried to discuss the changes on the user's talk page and on the article talk page. User's only response . I've been attempting a wholesale cleanup/expansion, of the article but have stopped for now as user is unwilling to allow changes to certain sections. Karanacs (talk) 17:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    and now a legal threat from this user . Karanacs (talk) 17:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Blocked 24 hours. However, Karanacs, please keep in mind that being stubborn and argumentative is not considered vandalism and therefore you were not exempt from 3RR when reverting his edits. If need be, seek dispute resolution in cases like these instead of contributing to the edit war. Kafziel 18:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    I (finally) realized that, which is why I stepped away from the article. Thank you for the reminder. Karanacs (talk) 18:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Adoniscik reported by User:Vitilsky (Result: Reporting user blocked for 24 hours, reported user warned)

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

    Time reported: 22:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


    User:Adoniscik does not provide valid sources for the article adding revisionist information and reverting my edits, without any explanation of them. He made that reverts and at same time changed all the article without any verifiable source, just non-sense links. --Vitilsky (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 24 hours Both parties have edited warred but Vitilsky issued a warning on his own talk page, and then promptly reverted again himself. Adoniscik has not reverted since the warning and, because it was on Vitilsky's talk page, there is no proof that he has seen it. I have posted a warning at Adoniscik's talk page instead. TigerShark (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Frank Pais reported by User:Thivierr (Result: 24 hours)

    Frank Pais (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 23:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

    Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Edit warring over several days. TigerShark (talk) 05:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:88.109.195.218reported by User:Garycompugeek (Result: 24 hours)

    User:88.109.195.21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 03:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:

    Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Slightly malformed request but was warned before latest reverts. TigerShark (talk) 05:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC) Sorry, first time I have reported someone and was a bit tipsy to boot. Garycompugeek (talk) 16:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


    User:Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog reported by User:Alexander Widefield (Result: 24 hours)

    Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 10:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    Note: User:Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog permanently reverts a box in the right of article.


    User:Baku87 reported by User:Pocopocopocopoco (Result: 12 hours )

    Baku87 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 15:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


    You also might want to consider whether these reverts fall under the restrictions of WP:ARBAA2. --Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 15:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Pietervhuis reported by User:Miyokan (Result: 1 week)

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

    Time reported: 15:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    Check block log - just came off a 10 day block for breaking the 3RR rule for the fifth time.--Miyokan (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    75.82.59.206 reported by 72.225.227.83 (Result:Reporting user blocked 48 hours)

    Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 48 hours Page also semi-protected due to edit war involving multiple IPs. Okiefromokla 17:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Icealien33 reported by User:RobJ1981 (Result: User warned)


    Many people have told him the character list isn't notable, but he refuses to listen and doesn't want to discuss the issue very much either. RobJ1981 (talk) 18:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    user:Shevashalosh reported by user:ceedjee (Result: Pages move-protected)

    This editor had disrupted article Deir Yassin massacre he wanted to rename Deir Yassin Battle and he has also created an article that could be considered a pov fork : Blood Libel at Deir Yassin (but that is about a book). Ceedjee (talk) 22:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    Page protected from moves — there appears to be a content dispute on the page. Consider dispute resolution. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Ctjf83 reported by User:Vandalismdestroyer33 (Result: not granted)

    Ctjf83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 03:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)11:16pm August 9 2008


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:
    • 5th revert:
    • 6th revert:
    Ya, I was reverting vandalism and unsourced edits...the page has been protected to prevent the sock puppet user that reported me from editing this page Ctjf83Talk 07:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

    Please follow the format as outlined in the Example section below: you're missing a link to the 3rr warning as well as the time & date reverts). El_C 07:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

    Note The reporter has been blocked as an evident SPA sockpuppet. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Well, that's that, then. El_C 07:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Presumptive reported by User:VegitaU (Result: 12 hours)

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

    Time reported: 06:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


    This is a bad faith report because I simply was doing housekeeping to use the version that was a result of a 13 day talk page discussion. The accusing user and his friend keeps reverting it to a non-consensus version that has opposition, WP:LEAD violations, and bad prose problems. I have ceased editing it and let them have their own way but I have asked an administrator to help resolve this. I am for discussion and compromise but the accuser unfortunately is not. Maybe this admin will help us (but he is going to sleep now).

    Also note that there was no warning. The warning reported is just a generic one that is old. Presumptive (talk) 06:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

    You have been warned in the past. You know about 3RR violations. Your "adopter" even warned you about it. Instead, you decided to muscle your revisions through no matter the group of editors that disagreed with you. While I have tried to engage in discussion about your changes, you continue to trumpet your one-man consensus revisions in the face of everyone else. -- Veggy (talk) 06:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    You reverted without discussion so if you are calling for punishment, you should receive it, VegitaU. What are you complaining about because I have let you win and let you have your way even though the 13-14 day discussion of the 7 lead sentence versions have few comments from you. If you and IceColdBeer are complaining, you should have discussed it. Even now, you fail to discuss and compromise, just nag until others let you have your way. Please join me in discussion and compromise. I have already let you have your way and let the matter go for now. Presumptive (talk) 07:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    My adopter has said that I am right. I even let you have your way even though your reverts have no consensus. Presumptive (talk) 07:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    As I said, I have tried to engage in discussion. Please, Presumptive, click on the links of my reply above. You can't claim that I am failing to engage in discussion when there is undeniable evidence that I have been. -- Veggy (talk) 07:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Addendum: Edit summaries like this really invite discussion. -- Veggy (talk) 07:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


    • Not really. It doesn't matter to me who the users in question are. I'm commenting because I was about to remove an AIV report before but someone else beat me to it. Enigma 07:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    I'm not sure if this helps, but another user posted the same 3RR complaint but removed it because it was a duplicate of this one. Also, I edit-conflicted with Veggy's report while trying to post my own report. Ice Cold Beer (talk) 07:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
    Sorry about that, Aude. -- Veggy (talk) 07:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

    12 hours. El_C 07:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:InuYoshi reported by User:Bignole (Result: 12 hour block/quickly unblocked as user has reverted edits.)

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

    Original version

    User has participated in discussions on the talk page, but continues to revert whenever another editor disagrees and changes the page back, ignoring consensus debates.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


    User:Elliskev reported by User:Jim Furtado (Result: warned)

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

    Time reported: 01:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • 3rd and 4th are clear reverts he just pressed the undo button


    This is a complex matter since there are some edits in between his reverts, he has continued after the 24 H period to revert back to his version as can be seen HERE Jim Furtado (talk) 01:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    User was clearly aware of 3RR, but none of the reverts are massively obnoxious. I'll let him off with a warning, as it's all rather complicated and he may not have been aware he was near 3RR. Moreschi (talk) (debate)
    Repsonse

    This is a bad report. The talk page consensus was to keep a table in the article. My edits were restorations of continued removal by User:Jim Furtado after the discussion. I'll probably have more after going through the diffs provided. This user is not acting in good faith. He is being dishonest with the facts. He has accused me of vandalism, sock-puppetry, and racism. --Elliskev 12:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    The "consensus" were mostly of newly created acounts and an ip adress and they all just happen to agree with him and they all just happen to post imediately after he had posted on the discussion page, so most likely they are sock puppets of someone, and the graph in it self is by deafult racist. And I never for one second called him a racist, only the graph it is User:Elliskev that is dishonest as always with the facts Jim Furtado (talk) 00:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    I interpreted your claim that the graph is "racist" as an implication that I was supporting a "racist" graph, and by extension, that you were implying that I am a racist. I will accept you at your word that it wasn't your intent. --Elliskev 00:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    Follow-up after reviewing diffs
    This is an article with lots and lots of changes happening very quickly.
    The first pair of diffs... I don't know what those are. They aren't my edits.
    In the second grouping of diffs provided:
      • The first diff was a removal of text supported by this discussion.
      • The second diff provided was restoring the table referenced above (the first time).
      • The third diff provided is not presented correctly. That wasn't my edit. it is two consecutive edits, one by me and another by another editor. – this edit and my edit which is clearly undoing vandalism.
      • Finally, the fourth diff was my second restoring of the table. This was immediately followed-up with my taking the issue to the talk page (the discussion referenced above) in which I specifically said I would not restore it again. Someone else restored it after there was adequate discussion.
    Since then User:Jim Furtado has continued to try to remove if with dishonest edit summaries claiming that the discussion supported removal or that restoration was "sneaky vandalism". I left him a message on his talk, which he deleted. I have since brought the discussion back to the article talk page. I think I have done everything to act in good faith. I have been patient with Jim Furtado in his unfounded accusations, but this is just going to far. --Elliskev 13:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
    User:Elliskev was aware that he had broken the 3rr rule, and was warned but continues to ignore the fact and has now has made an illegally edit, trying to change the the outcome of the response. Obviously he has no respect for wikipedia rules, since he most likely created several sock puppet accounts that just happen to agree with him and were created as soon as he had posted on the discussion page. And I never for one second claimed it was supported on the discussion page all I wrote was look on the discussion page. And I have been EXTREMLY patient with

    User:Krzyzowiec reported by User:M0RD00R (Result: 1 week )

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

    Time reported: 09:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    M0RD00R (talk) 09:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Blocked for a week. Moreschi (talk) (debate) 09:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


    User:Y2kcrazyjoker4 reported by User:Scarian (Result: 12 hours)

    Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 10:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:
    • Diff of 3RR warning: Has been block for edit warring in the past, albeit, back in 2006, but still. He knows what's wrong and what's right.
    • Blocked – for a period of 12 hours Stifle (talk) 10:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Deathmagnetic08 reported by User:Undead_warrior (Result:Declined)

    Deathmagnetic08 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 13:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


    • 1st revert:
    • 2nd revert:
    • 3rd revert:
    • 4th revert:
    • 5th revert:
    • Diff of 3RR warning:

    We have warned him on his talk page, the talk page of the article, and the talk page of Horna. Undeath (talk) 13:19, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • No 3RR warning; diff warns about WP:OWN but does not explain edit warring or 3RR policy. Please provide corrected diff or warn properly and return if edit warring continues. Kafziel 15:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:3rdAlcove reported by User:Larno Man (Result: Page protected)

    3rdAlcove (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 01:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


    Different users are participating in a discussion on a proposed draft and trying to get consensus. However, this user reverts the current version, keep deleting disputed contents. This is the second time that 3rdAlcove violates 3rr on Cyrus Cylinder. Last time she/he was blocked for violation of 3rr on this article, edit warring in various places and posting incivil edit summaries Larno Man

    No, my reverts were 3 (ie 2, 3 and 4), the first series of edits introduced a completely NEW version. As for the POV-pushing and stalling going on in that article...I guess it's quite off-topic here. Nice how you managed to dress this up, though. 3rdAlcove (talk) 10:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


    No you reverted the same paragraph (the quote from Britannica) 4 times:

    At the first revert, you removed the Britannica quote first then you restored the older version. You had also reverted this quote and the rest of the section several times previously.]]]--Larno Man (talk) 15:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Warned the user, page protected. The edit warring took place nearly a day ago; at this point, the block would only be punitive, not preventative. I've decided to fully protect the page. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Gun Powder Ma reported by User:Anpersonalaccount (Result: both blocked)

    Gun Powder Ma (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 15:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Previous version reverted to:


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

    Would someone help me out? Gun Powder Ma had made an executive revert over the article, which he failed to discuss with others. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Not only that, he had also removed huge matarial from Rudder recently ! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    There is no breach of the 3RR rule. The only one who are breaching the rule in spirit are you, your anonymous socket puppet friend and the main contributor to the article who have changed for days now every single sourced addition I made to the article. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 15:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Yes there are, all 4th of them, you're removing PI under the article, just like what you did to Rudder! I did not changed anything to the article at all, I had only reformatted the citations! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    It is not necessary for 3 reverts to breach 3RR rule. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Help, there is an edit war going-on over the article, please help! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Gun Powder Ma blocked 48 hours, Anpersonalaccount blocked 24 hours. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 15:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


    User:Thunderbird2 reported by User:Fnagaton (Result: 24 hours)

    Thunderbird2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 16:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Diff of 3RR warning: The user is aware of 3RR.
    Blocked – for a period of 24 hours EdJohnston (talk) 21:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    Constitution of Ireland (Result: warned)

    Please see this. Two editors User:Pureditor and User:Mooretwin, have blantantly engaged in edit warings. Please don't tell me to fill out a special form or submit a complaint in a specific format when its so obvious. Djegan (talk) 22:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

    • Warned – they haven't edited since the warning, hence the reason why it's generally easier for us when we have a normal 3RR report to reference. For future reference, this tool should help. --slakr 00:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:On.Elpeleg reported by User:George (Result: 31 hours)

    On.Elpeleg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 00:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

    User:Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog reported by User:92.9.72.131 (Result: )

    Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 00:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

    Also,

    • Abusing other editors - "retarded" , "can't you read" , "WHERE THE FUCK do you see"... , "are you biased or uninformed?"
    • Brute force editing - see all edits on 2008 South_Ossetia war
    • Lack of edit summary on a majority of major edits

    Example

    == ] reported by 
] (Result: ) ==
*] violation on {{Article|<!-- Place name of Article here -->}}. 
{{3RRV|<!--Place Name of 3RR "violator" here-->}} 
Time reported: ~~~~~
*Previous version reverted to:  <!-- This is MANDATORY. -->
<!--For more complex reverts it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert
and/or the actual words (in bold) that are being reverted or reverted to. 
The previous version reverted to must be from BEFORE all the reverting started. -->
<!-- In the below section, use diffs and NOT previous versions. 
See Help:Diff or Misplaced Pages:Simplest_diff_guide if you do not know what a diff is. -->
*1st revert: 
*2nd revert: 
*3rd revert: 
*4th revert: 
*Diff of 3RR warning:

    See also

    Categories: