Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bbb23 (talk | contribs) at 22:58, 29 July 2024 (→User:HouseplantHobbyist reported by User:NebY (Result: ): Blocked one week (using responseHelper)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

• 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:Be Jain reported by User:ParvatPrakash (Result: No violation)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
This user (alongwith myself) were banned from editing Rishabhanatha for edit warring. The said user is constantly changing images (and engaging in edit wars) without discussing. Other pages where this user has possibly engaged in edit wars are Ajitnatha and Sumatinatha. I stopped engaging in edit wars after learning about the 3RR, but I see this user engaging in edit wars with other users constantly on some specific pages. ParvatPrakash (talk) 23:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

• No violation. Bbb23 (talk) 00:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

  The said user keeps undoing edits by other users. They were warned and blocked from an article just a few days ago. They are continuing to edit war on Abhinandananatha. I thought 3RR was the only rule. Does there exist a policy I'm unaware of? ParvatPrakash (talk) 01:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

  ParvatPrakash, Bbb23 is likely referring to the three-reverts-per-24-hours rule, also known as "3RR". However, independently of that rule, the policy against edit warring prohibits more than just exceeding three reverts in 24 hours. Continuing to edit war after an edit warring block, for example, is clearly an issue. I have blocked Be Jain and Rahulpalawat indefinitely for now. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

  Oh ok, I understand that now. Thank you very much for explaining the policy. I'll keep that in mind in future. ParvatPrakash (talk) 01:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

User:216.15.48.236 reported by User:LilianaUwU (Result: Blocked 72 hours)

Page: Killing of Sonya Massey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 216.15.48.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC) ""
2. 00:49, 28 July 2024 (UTC) ""
3. 00:33, 28 July 2024 (UTC) ""
4. 21:35, 27 July 2024 (UTC) ""
5. 20:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Repeatedly trying to insert a video (that is seemingly fake per an edit summary?) in the page. I'm not trying to assume anything, but this seems like someone who's trying to justify a police killing. LilianaUwU 00:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Reverted again as I wrote this, making this even more of a clear cut 3RR violation. LilianaUwU 00:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

And they've said that they are going to keep changing it back. LilianaUwU 01:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

And they are indeed continuing. I think it's up to something around 10RR now. Meters (talk) 01:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. LilianaUwU, some of your comments on the IP's Talk page are completely inappropriate. Bbb23 (talk) 01:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I was directed here by my notification bell. That's not even my IP address. I have only edited from my own username, yet I received a message directing me to the talk page of an IP address I don't own. ExistentialBliss (talk) 02:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Fred.jp reported by User:Silver seren (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Yasuke (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Fred.jp (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: N/A

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

Comments: Editor has been edit warring in a controversy section in a historical biography with very blatant POV statements being made in their edit summaries (which probably also violate WP:BLP for the history professor they're talking about) and have been reverted by multiple editors (including myself). They were given a 3RR warning and reverted again ten minutes later, as shown in the final diff given above, with their edit summary threatening that they will take the warring to other parts of the article if they keep getting reverted. Silverseren 02:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Bluerules reported by User:Locke Cole (Result: No violation)

Page: Deadpool & Wolverine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bluerules (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 2024-07-25T09:30:42

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 2024-07-27T23:44:49
2. 2024-07-28T00:37:24
3. 2024-07-28T00:54:49
4. 2024-07-28T01:29:31

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Warning from May 2024, I also warned them after their 4th revert in this discussion where they insist they only reverted three times.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: I haven't actually reverted them at all, and after their 4th revert, they finally started a discussion on the talk page.

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

Comments: Worth noting that Bluerules has previously been blocked for 3RR, but it has been over a decade apparently. I wouldn't have reported it given they state no intention to continue, but they deny violating 3RR, so here we are. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:49, 28 July 2024 (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. As is often the case here, "making an edit and then reverting to it three times in 24 hours" has been conflated with "making the same revert four times in 24 hours". If they continue this behavior, that might be different, but they have not yet and say they will not further revert. (I'd also note that the "previous version" you linked to when warning them they had violated 3RR (which they couldn't have with that edit as it was two days before that first one) was by another editor). Daniel Case (talk) 05:32, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I will be adding a CTOPS notice per WP:CT/CID to the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 05:38, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@Daniel Case The previous version had the infobox contents as Bluerules reverted it back to. I was not stating any other editor had reverted it, only that this was how the infobox had appeared just two days ago, so all four edits by Bluerules provided as diffs above are, in fact, "reverts" per WP:3RR: The term "revert" is defined as any edit ... that reverses or undoes the actions of other editors, in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material, and whether performed using undo, rollback, or done so completely manually. In this case, the first revert was a "manual" revert (in part), while subsequent reverts utilized Undo. The edit he was reverting/undoing was this edit (2024-07-25T09:32:21). The only temporal requirement of 3RR is the reverts themselves, and all four occurred within a 24 hour span. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

The previous version did not have the same infobox contents as my first edit. The previous version has a note in the starring parameter that reads, "Per credits billing order on the theatrical poster. Do not change until it can be changed to the film's actual credits order." In my edit, the note in the starring parameter reads, "Per billing block." The previous version does not identify the location of the David H. Koch Theater in the starring parameter. In my edit, the starring parameter identifies the David H. Koch Theater as being in NYC. The gross parameter is empty in the previous version. In my edit, the gross parameter contains information about how much money the film has made at the box office so far. And there's a minor punctuation difference in the note about 20th Century Studios not being a production company or a distributor. These differences make it clear that my edit was not how the infobox appeared just two days ago. Help:Reverting defines a partial reversion as "restoring one part of the page to a previous version" and my edit did not restore the starring parameter to a previous version, let alone the entire infobox. Bluerules (talk) 14:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Bluerules, this is not about help page wording; Locke Cole, this shouldn't be about technicalities.

Yes, Special:Diff/1237062304 is arguably a revert of Special:Diff/1236553654. No, the 3.5 reverts didn't lead to a block. Bluerules was edit warring, which is not limited to violations of the three-revert rule, and the main reason why I dislike even evaluating whether there has been a 3RR violation is that people start arguing about completely unnecessary details in such discussions. Bluerules has stopped edit warring, removing the preventative need for a block. If it continues, that would be different. It doesn't matter whether it continues within 24 hours.

This is closed and can be archived; content discussion is currently active at Talk:Deadpool & Wolverine § The starring parameter of the infobox. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Oleg Yunakov reported by User:RAN1 (Result: )

User:Lovely dolphin reported by User:JayBeeEll (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: Widest path problem (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "The rule is "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, ...", https://github.com/mike-liuliu/Algorithm_4 is the official code of Algorithm 4. So it is an acceptable external link. Undid revision 1237223434 by XOR'easter (talk)"
2. 17:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Python code of Algorithm 4 can be found at https://github.com/mike-liuliu/Algorithm_4. It is the fastest algorithm for solving the all points path distance (APPD) matrix by far. If you know a faster or earlier O(n^2) time algorithm for calculating the APPD matrix than Algorithm 4, please provide the URL of the code implementation of the algorithm. Undid revision 1237199479 by David Eppstein (talk)"
3. 12:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Please show the URL of the code so that people can verify your claim. Undid revision 1237130479 by David Eppstein (talk)"
4. 01:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Really? "Talk is cheap. Show me the code." Undid revision 1237075058 by David Eppstein (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Comments: Another one since this report was filed: 19:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC). --JBL (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

User:65.94.124.30 reported by User:Trailblazer101 (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: Creature Commandos (TV series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 65.94.124.30 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1237217873 by Trailblazer101 (talk)"
2. 17:51, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1237192417 by Trailblazer101 (talk)"
3. 10:37, 27 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1236926221 by Trailblazer101 (talk) it was revealed in the teaser trailer"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Final warning: Vandalism on Creature Commandos (TV series)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Repeatedly reverting to reinstate their own edits after it was explained how they were incorrect or not a standard. Has a history of disruptive editing across these comic book adaptation articles. Trailblazer101 (talk) 22:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

The IP has continued to persist in restoring their preferred version without providing any explanation for their reverts, and continues to despite violating the WP:3RR. Trailblazer101 (talk) 00:50, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Daniel Case (talk) 03:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

User:HouseplantHobbyist reported by User:NebY (Result: Blocked one week)

Page: Lucy Letby (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:19, 29 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1237439917 by Gumlau (talk) Due weight and quotes have already been given to that Guardian article"
2. Consecutive edits made from 19:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC) to 19:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
   1. 19:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC) "Removed from intro per Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not a newspaper. This gives recent news reports, which themselves are disputed, far too much prominence in the intro"
   2. 19:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC) "Range of issues here that need to be addressed, some of these things are already undergoing on an ongoing discussion on talk. Some other problems with POV commentary and lack of sources for parts"
   3. 19:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC) "No this is still under disupte and discussion at Talk:Lucy Letby#RSEDITORIAL. It may be that it is restored but not yet"
   4. 19:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC) "Removed from intro per Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not a newspaper. This gives recent news reports, which themselves are disputed, far too much prominence in the intro"
3. 07:44, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1237127569 by PerSeAnd (talk) Please see WP:BLPRESTORE and WP:ONUS. Continued reversions will also mean you are in breach of WP:3RR, which I have already warned you about. There is also an ongoing talk page discussion already, so there can be no excuse for more"
4. 07:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1237125147 by PerSeAnd (talk) Yes it is, look again"
5. 06:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC) "See talk page discussion in which this content is currently in dispute"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User was warned about edit-warring on 27 May 2024 and 19 July 2024, both times about this article (the only one Houseplant Hobbyist has edited in the last 6 months). They were reported on 20 July 2024 and the article protected for 2 days. They have continued to discuss at Talk:Lucy Letby, where they are in dispute with several editors, none of whom are in agreement with HouseplantHobbyist. They have made five reverts, of different material by various editors, in about two hours. They justified two of them in edit summaries as "undergoing an ongoing discussion" and "still under dispute and discussion", but this looks more like claiming to have a veto so long as they keep posting on the talk page. NebY (talk) 22:24, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

User:NebY, whilst you were making this report I had just updated the article to attempt to incorporate a large amount of the content that editors wanted in, just in a more appropriate and NPOV way: . If you had just waited a minute, you could have worked with my reinstation of some form of the content I removed in those reversions. previous reversions. If I hadn't already done this big edit which involved multiple self-reversions, I would self-revert my own edits. But as you can see, a lot of that stuff that I reverted before I have now restored in what seems to me to be a much more NPOV way. Let me demonstrate how some of those reversions have now been restored by myself:

1. 1 "See talk page discussion in which this content is currently in dispute" - that content has now been restored in a slightly reduced way with the most recent edit:
2. 2 "Undid revision 1237125147 by PerSeAnd (talk) Yes it is, look again" - see above
3. 3 "Undid revision 1237127569 by PerSeAnd (talk) Please see WP:BLPRESTORE and WP:ONUS. Continued reversions will also mean you are in breach of WP:3RR, which I have already warned you about. There is also an ongoing talk page discussion already, so there can be no excuse for more" - see above
4. 4 "No this is still under disupte and discussion at Talk:Lucy Letby#RSEDITORIAL. It may be that it is restored but not yet" - see above
5. 5 "Range of issues here that need to be addressed, some of these things are already undergoing on an ongoing discussion on talk. Some other problems with POV commentary and lack of sources for parts" - My most recent edit re-incorporated some of that content, e.g. the Dr Hammond part in Private Eye, which I specifically went out to find a separate secondary source for to back up and this time added back in with that
6. 6 These two - and Removed from intro per Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not a newspaper. This gives recent news reports, which themselves are disputed, far too much prominence in the intro - are actually just one revert, I just had to repeat it because it got lost in the temporary rollbacking I did here: .

In short, most of those reverts I did I then self-reverted as part of one big edit here: that attempted to incorporate much of what those reverted edit's had expressed, but in what I thought was a much more NPOV and balanced way, with appropriate sourcing and wording. Yes I have probably done a few too many reversions, but I've also not partially self-reverted in doing that big edit incorporating a lot of the previously reverted content. HouseplantHobbyist (talk) 22:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Yesterday, 28 July 2024, you gave a 3RR warning to another editor. You should read it. NebY (talk) 22:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring