Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
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.
Click here to create a new report

User:173.68.66.176 reported by User:Jcc (Result: Page protected)

Page

James Altucher (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

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

Previous version reverted to

NOTE: I have not warred at all. I noticed there was no mention of Altucher's podcast on his wikipedia page. Upon research I noticed quite a few inappropriate edit and did further research. I am not a wikipedia editor and am just a fan. There is a COI between David Gerard and James Altucher. David Gerard has repeatedly written about Altucher on his (David's) blog and should not be allowed to edit the "James Altucher" Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.68.66.176 (talk) 03:34, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

This is not what a WP:COI is - David Gerard (talk) 09:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 23:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 871713117 by Jcc (talk)"
2. 23:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 871696526 by David Gerard (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. Note 1RR is in effect, warning placed by David Gerard here
2. 23:46, 2 December 2018 (UTC) "Only warning: Using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion on James Altucher. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

General sanctions for pages related to the blockchain and cryptocurrencies is in place, IP was warned. jcc (tea and biscuits) 23:48, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

The Altucher article gets occasional IPs filling it with puffery, this is the latest and should be treated accordingly. The refs are also unacceptable non-RSes for a BLP - David Gerard (talk) 09:44, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

IP's still at it, with personal attacks - could someone uninvolved please have a glance at this one? - David Gerard (talk) 14:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• Page protected I've semi-protected James Altucher due to the poor sourcing and general puffery concerns for three months. Courcelles (talk) 15:03, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I've also blocked this specific IP for 48 hours. Courcelles (talk) 15:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

User:HershieimerHertz reported by User:ElKevbo (Result: Semi)

Page: Law school rankings in the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: HershieimerHertz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [2]
2. [3]
3. [4]
4. [5]
5. [6]

3RR warning: User talk:HershieimerHertz

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7]

Comments:
An unregistered editor using multiple IP addresses (e.g., 73.52.3.159, 2601:281:c503:6612:45ce:7bee:e9d6:6302) has been the other participant in this edit war. The article was semi-protected for a week last month but the edit war resumed after the semi-protection expired. ElKevbo (talk) 00:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• Result: Page semiprotected three months. Please use the talk page to work out the remaining issues. Report again if turns out that there are registered editors who continue to revert without discussing. EdJohnston (talk) 00:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

User:NorthBySouthBaranof reported by User:Wumbolo (Result: Warned)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [8] and [9]
2. [10] and [11]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [12]

Comments: Editor is aware of the 1RR on the article, as I've posted on his talk page, but he refused to self-revert. wumbolo ^^^ 10:56, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

First diffs (under '1') appear to be same revert. Second diffs appear to be reverting inclusion of pretty contentious material - linking subject of article to terrorist groups based on 'The Daily Caller', which is not a very reliable source. I think a BLP exception is more than reasonable. PeterTheFourth (talk) 11:58, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

The last diff definitely doesn't have an obvious BLP justification. The diff you're talking about is arguably justifiable, even though it was discussed on the talk page. However, if we ignore that one, we're still left with two separate reverts which have no justification to ignore 1RR. wumbolo ^^^ 12:28, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• The reporting user is aware that their edit I reverted is either an inadvertent or an intentional misrepresentation of the reliable sources, and that misrepresentation is a clear violation of WP:BLP. Their edit changes the well-sourced factual statement that Sarsour was violently threatened on social media into a claim by Sarsour which clearly is intended to cast doubt upon Sarsour's victimization, in violation of our fundamental responsibility to get the facts right. As discussed by Black Kite, Wumbolo failed to properly reflect the sources in a way which directly impugns the biographical subject. Now having had their error or misrepresentation of the source corrected, Wumbolo has not thanked me for correcting their error or apologized for their misrepresentation — no, they have come running to ANEW and crying "1RR!" This seems entirely upside down and backwards. As Black Kite notes, Wumbolo's edit was factually false and in being false, it violated several policies and directly harmed the article subject. My edit merely replaced the status quo which was policy-compliant, supported by the sources and non-harmful. I told them this on my talk page, yet still they come running here. Wumbolo apparently desperately wants me to be blocked for fixing his biographical-subject-damaging fuckup merely because I fixed several other fuckups that day?
• Is there to be any punishment for Wumbolo, who either can't read sources (and thus shouldn't be editing biographies) or intentionally misrepresented the content of the sources in their edit (and thus shouldn't be editing Sarsour's biography)? NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 13:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
• Comment

• The first two diffs are two consecutive edits. Yes, they are reverting two consecutive edits by Icewhiz, but it could have been done in one edit. I think blocking for this would be harsh, frankly.
• The third is a revert on BLP grounds, and I think it has merit. Whilst the Daily Caller is not a great source, it actually casts doubt on the material added - "While it is unclear if Salah and Linda are related (though they share the same surname)..." and the GMBDW source admits they cannot substantiate it either (look at the URL), which means that even the NYP source may be flaky. It's something that needs to be discussed on the talkpage, and per BLP should be removed until there is consensus to include, which I suspect would need better sourcing.
• Which leaves us with this. Is it a revert? Yes. Is it a correct edit? Yes, because the sources clearly say she was attacked on social media, not that she claimed she was. Despite being correct, it is still a second revert inside 24h, and therefore technically blockable.

• I would invite further comment from other admins. Black Kite (talk) 12:32, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  • My analysis lines up with Black Kite's, in that this case is technically actionable, but I am disinclined to block for it, and instead warn NorthBySouthBaranof to please be more careful in the future. Courcelles (talk) 15:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
• @Black Kite: To avoid any confusion, NorthBySouthBaranof's version of the article with regards to harassment is supported by only one sentence in only one reliable source. As I have noted on his talk page [13], both Washington Post articles attribute all other harassment claims to Sarsour, including death threats and doxxing, and so do the New York Times, which are cited by WaPo. I do not regret reporting him, because of WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior both above and on his talk page, in the form of WP:IDHT, including proposing multiple sanctions against me. If I was in a WP:BATTLEGROUND mood, I would propose a topic ban and a one-way IBAN, but I'm never in that mood, so I only care about 1RR being respected. And no, I don't simply violate BLP, especially WP:AVOIDVICTIM, but I'm not going to act as if I was offended by NBSB. wumbolo ^^^ 15:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• You screwed up. Stop attacking the editor who corrected you and just own it. --Calton | Talk 16:08, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• Probably meant to say this to NBSB. wumbolo ^^^ 16:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

• Two admins who commented above state that this case is technically actionable. User:NorthBySouthBaranof was taking some liberties and was risking a block, but I would close this with no action for now. He seems to be overstating what he can do in defence of BLP, at least under the limitations of WP:3RRNO. EdJohnston (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Result: User:NorthBySouthBaranof is warned that his reverts on this article may not be protected by the BLP exception. One of the reverts in question was this one. The fact that you disagree with others about the exact description of the harrassment she suffered does not give you license to keep reverting in a case where actual defamation is not present. Interpreting sources correctly is a job for editor consensus, unless we are talking about unsourced defamation. For example, there are occasionally some bad edits that are so blatant that they qualify for instant removal by any editor. It does not defame Sarsour when Wikipedia says that she *reported* she was harrassed online, even when a thorough study of the sources might justify a stronger statement. The stronger statement can be worked out through normal editor consensus and does not call for unilateral reverting. EdJohnston (talk) 00:50, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Arup1234 reported by User:MPFitz1968 (Result: )

Page

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

User being reported

Arup1234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 10:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Other platforms */"
2. 10:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Other platforms */"
3. Consecutive edits made from 09:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC) to 10:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
   1. 09:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Other platforms */"
   2. 10:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Other platforms */"
4. 09:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Other platforms */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 10:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Skype. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

No discussion from editor after two other editors and myself have reverted their addition (one of the reverting editors indicating that the updated source the editor is using to replace a dead link source is not reliable). MPFitz1968 (talk) 10:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• User:Arup1234 has already been WP:INDEFed by Admin Luk from looks of it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:53, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Rathfelder reported by User:Alexbrn (Result: Agreement)

Page

Aseem Malhotra (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

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

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. [14] (removing 'fad diet' from lede)
2. [15] (removing 'fad diet' from lede)
3. [16] (removing 'fad diet' from lede)
4. [17] (reverting removal of Tom Watson's support for the diet)

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 12:33, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Aseem Malhotra. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

I am still working on the article. Malhotra is a controversial figure. I am endeavouring to produce a balanced article. Rathfelder (talk) 13:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Result: No block, since the user agreed (on their own talk page) to wait for a prior talk page consensus before editing the article again. EdJohnston (talk) 18:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

User:BoogieFreeman reported by User:Miki Filigranski (Result: Protected)

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

Previous version reverted to: [18]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [19]
2. [20]
3. [21]
4. [22]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [23], [24]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [25]

Comments: The editor is constantly removing the content from the lead which is reliably sourced in the Luka Modrić#2018–19 season (as well Messi–Ronaldo rivalry) section. He is constantly denying at both the article and user talk page to be removing any sourced content, he did not provide any (valid) reason for the removal, and is accusing another editor for some agenda (WP:PERSONAL). He simultaneously opened a discussion, per my initiative in the edit summary ([26]), and violated the 3RR, hence did not even follow basic reasoning and discussion process. Please stop this and revert to previous revision [27]. Note: There's a strange duplicate inclusion of already existing +3,000 bytes of infobox information in his last three reverts, it is not the disputed content, but seems like a server error or something else.--Miki Filigranski (talk) 15:30, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Page protected - 3 days. Though the two editors are constantly reverting one another and there is some mention of a dispute on the talk page, neither party has obtained a consensus there to support their changes. (There is only an exchange of criticism). Consider following the steps of WP:Dispute resolution. It is hard for an outsider to have any idea of what this dispute is about, so a better explanation on Talk would be good. EdJohnston (talk) 22:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

User:109.153.226.234 reported by User:Davey2010 (Result: IP blocked for 7 days)

Page

Katie Griffiths (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

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

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 18:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 872001461 by Davey2010 (talk)"
2. 17:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 871995856 by Davey2010 (talk)"
3. 16:17, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 871987540 by Davey2010 (talk)"
4. 16:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 757431177 by Davey2010 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 17:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Katie Griffiths. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

I originally removed unsourced content (her date of birth and schools attended), This IP has repeatedly reverted without any sort of explanation,

Whilst technically my edit is "disputed" I don't believe BRD applies here as I'm simply removing unsourced content (and those reinserting it should include a source)),

The IP is also now following me on another article where I reverted a completely different IP[28][29], Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:11, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Went to AIV due to the constant removal of this report where they've now been blocked for 7 days by Widr. –Davey2010^Talk 19:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Qashto reported by User:Bradv (Result: Blocked 24 hours)

Page

Stefan Molyneux (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

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

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 20:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "This is a vandalism warning, do not undo my changes again. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Undid revision 872033712 by Bradv (talk)"
2. 20:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "You have been flagged for violating Wikipedia's community guidelines. Undid revision 872033335 by Seraphim System (talk)"
3. 20:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "I will not debate whether or not Stefan is a white supremacist. It is obvious. Stop undoing my revision to this page or I will flag you. Undid revision 872032500 by Bradv (talk)"
4. 20:22, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Fixed by citing a reputable source, The Southern Poverty Law Center, a group of civil rights lawyers responsible for expert analysis of hate groups, who identify Stefan as a white supremacist."
5. 19:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Updated bio to include white supremacy to the topics Stefan discusses, referenced a recent tweet in which he claims the white race as the superior race. "Over thousands of years, they (White Europeans) became smarter and wiser through suffering. They made the modern world." Stefan considers the white race smarter than other races and this blatant racism should be the first thing people read about on his wiki page."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 20:32, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "General note: Addition of defamatory content on Stefan Molyneux. (TW)"
2. 20:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Stefan Molyneux. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

BLP violation; edit warring after final warning. Bradv🍁 20:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

I was about to report this but Brad beat me to it, I agree that this is a BLP violation and reverting has continued past the 3RR warning. Seraphim System ^(talk) 20:43, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

User qashto here. I have been given no reason other than defamation as to why my edits should not stand. I cited the Southern Poverty Law Center a reputable source written by civil rights lawyers. Stefan Molyneux is a white supremacist. He is open about his view that the white race is superior. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qashto (talk • contribs) 21:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours TonyBallioni (talk) 21:07, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Coltsfan reported by User:Cleatcoma1 (Result: Filer blocked)

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

Previous version reverted to: [30]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [31]
2. [32]
3. [33]
4. [34]
5. [35]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: protected page (his admin friends are helping him)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• [36]
• [[37]]

Comments:
Coltsfan is not respecting the status quo of the article, which has been stated for years that Patriot is a conservative/right-wing party, going as far as ignoring WP:BRD and removing reliable sources in order to cherry-pick a primary source with a subjective embedded YouTube video. Later on he added a few more sources but completely disregarded what others say. He acts as if he is the owner of the page and his denialism and disruptive behaviour shows that he's clearly WP:NOTHERE.
As per WP:DR, the fact that one party is a sock does not give him free reign to break the rules himself. Before getting into an edit war, he should follow WP:DR - which may include requesting page protection. However, he usually take things into his own hands.
Please note that Coltsfan has a long-term history of disruptive behavior and edit warring: [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45]
-- Cleatcoma1 (talk) 23:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

• Get a load of this: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SacredGeometry333/Archive. Coltsfan (talk) 23:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
• Cleatcoma1 has been blocked per WP:SOCK and reverting/undoing edits made by sock puppets used to WP:EVADE are considered to be an exception to 3RR per item 3 of WP:NOT3RR. Moreover, Cleatcoma1's comment about Coltsfan being helped by his admin friends fails to mention the reason why Patriota as well as some other articles have been protected: extensive sock puppetry and block evasion. This is not the first AN3 filed against Coltsfan by one of these socks; see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive379#User:Coltsfan reported by User:49.180.99.171 (Result: Filer blocked) for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

And the boomerang said, "BOOM!"-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 12:17, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Typ932 reported by User:FF9600 (Result: )

Pages:

• Alfa Romeo GT (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Alfa Romeo Brera and Spider (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Typ932 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• Alfa Romeo GT: [46]
• Alfa Romeo Brera and Spider: [47]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

• Alfa Romeo GT:
  1. [48]
  2. [49]
  3. [50]
• Alfa Romeo Brera and Spider:
  1. [51]
  2. [52]
  3. [53]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [54]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• Asking user Stepho-wrs for assistance
• Alfa Romeo GT Talkpage discussing the issue

Comments:
I know that technically Typ932 is not completely in violation of 3RR, but it comes to the point, I feel, of abuse. Typ932 is now reverting any changes I make to ANY Alfa Romero article if it relates to a table (additional examples not reported above [55], [56], [57]). User refuses to accept class="wikitable", MOS:COLOR, or MOS:FONTSIZE standards, ignoring any further discussion, and just harassing me at this point.  #FF9600  talk 04:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

User:FreeSpeechGuy reported by User:Masebrock (Result: )

Page: United States free speech exceptions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: FreeSpeechGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [58]
2. [59]
3. [60]
4. [61]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [62]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [63]

Comments:

A back-and-forth has been going on for days, I tried to move it to the Talk Page, but the editor repeatedly reverts to his proposed changes without any consensus reached. I need to some serious dispute resolution, but first it would be good to put a halt to all the reverting. The editor is new and seems generally unfamiliar with Wikipedia policies.--Masebrock (talk) 05:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

This is intentionally misleading. It is Masebrock who has the proposed changes. He was first asked to stop making his unilateral changes. He's being sneaky.FreeSpeechGuy (talk) 10:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

User:223.24.20.21 reported by User:Krimuk2.0 (Result: )

Page

Emily Blunt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

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

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 06:58, 5 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 872115214 by Krimuk2.0 (talk)You didn’t explain anything in the first page. You just edited it for personal reasons to how you like it. Now You need to expian How Titles are not necessary for such Notable Famous People here"
2. 06:52, 5 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 872114942 by Krimuk2.0 (talk)I want evidences that you own this page"
3. 06:51, 5 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 872015520 by Krimuk2.0 (talk)you don’t own the page Can Not Edit to how you like"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 06:55, 5 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Titles */ new section"

Comments:

Repeatedly passing personal commentary and edit-warring without posting on talk page, where I started a discussion. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

User:CBG17 reported by User:Charlesdrakew (Result: Blocked)

Page

Sofia Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

CBG17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 23:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 872055892 by Charlesdrakew (talk) no consensus to remove your own personal choice"
2. 23:05, 4 December 2018 (UTC) ""
3. 21:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 871998051 by Charlesdrakew (talk) Re added the routes you removed with no real explanation, if you're going to remove future routes remove them all not half instead of contradicting yourself all the time, you're doing it to annoy editors who actually want to improve the page and keep it up to date"
4. 12:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "/* Airlines and destinations */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 23:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on Sofia Airport. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Resumption of warring over same content on unblocking. Repeatedly removes text and references arrived at by talkpage consensus without joining the discussion. Charles (talk) 09:50, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Blocked – Indefinite. Long term edit warring at Sofia Airport and no effort to negotiate. The last block of CBG17 was due to an earlier report here. The Sofia Airport page has been fully protected six times in 2018. Any admin may lift this block if they become persuaded that CBG17 will follow Wikipedia policy in the future. EdJohnston (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/115.133.122.243 and Special:Contributions/115.133.122.140 reported by User:Abelmoschus Esculentus (Result: Semi)

Page: Maroon 5 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 115.133.122.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) 115.133.122.140 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maroon_5&diff=872121273&oldid=872116664

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/872138808
2. Special:Diff/872138564
3. Special:Diff/872126071
4. Special:Diff/872125406

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/872148759

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: None

Comments:

• The two IPs are the same person for sure. TheRedundancy125 is engaged as well (Special:Diff/872139605). Their edits are reverted by a few users, mainly because of section blanking. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 13:17, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

• Result: Page semiprotected one week by User:Ymblanter. I'm also considering some IP blocks. Blocked Special:Contributions/115.133.122.0/24 for a week. There is a large set of articles related to the Maroon 5 band and it would be tedious to have to semiprotect all of them. EdJohnston (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2018 (UTC)