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:Lapsus Linguae reported by User:Headbomb (Result: Page protected for three days)

Page: Beall's List (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162567794 by JayBeeEll (talk) You've reverted three times now, and (it appears) you're an admin! I've responded to your message on my talk page, which is where you should have started. But I'm going out now. Catch you in a few hours."
2. 22:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162561190 by JayBeeEll (talk) You're very "assholish", to quote yourself. In answer to your question, have you checked my edit history? Your next revert will be 3RR."
3. 20:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162535248 by JayBeeEll (talk) How is the "actual edit ridiculous"?! It's a factual edit. Prove me wrong."
4. 13:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Legal threats */ Add note that points out that a *Canadian* publisher uses an *American* spelling for a word in its name."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:53, 29 June 2023 (UTC) on User talk:Lapsus Linguae "Warning: Edit warring on Beall's List."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

LL was quite clear about their intent to pursue the edit war, despite being warned against doing so. And true to their word, rather than engage because they felt they were personally attack when an edit was called ridiculous, again reverted. There's also civility concerns here (nowhere did JayBeeEll call LL an asshole or anything remotly close to that). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I find it ironic that I'm the one who was reported when the person who reported me broke the 3RR rule before I did. I wouldn't call my statements to which you linked any kind of clear intent to edit war; I was just dealing with someone who refused to actually explain his unprovoked characterisation of my good-faith edit as "ridiculous" and who didn't seem to be aware of the 3RR rule. I did actually quote JBL who called another editor an "asshole", so he seems to have quite a reputation for picking fights.

He finally posted to my talk page, as well as reporting me here, so now I have two places where I have to defend myself. If I actually thought my edit would have been controversial I would have posted to the article's talk page (as I've done in other circumstances), but really, that's where JBL should have taken it first rather than making an ad hominem attack on my good-faith edit. But I will take it there now and open yet a third front on which I will have to waste my time.

--Craig (t|c) 07:44, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Page protected by Randykitty for three days. Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:2600:4040:2836:6200:4049:7164:3363:4bfc reported by User:Linkin Prankster (Result: /64 blocked for a week)

Page: List of programs broadcast by The CW (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2600:4040:2836:6200:4049:7164:3363:4bfc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [1]
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [4]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [5]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [6]

Comments:

An IP editor with IPv6 starting with 2600 keeps restoring his edits despite being reverted by multiple editors on List of programs broadcast by The CW, they've been asked not to many times in edit summaries. Since it's a dynamically shifting IP, attempts to contact it seem to be pointless. Regardless I've warned them on their talk page as required.

I previously requested protection for the page and the IP range was blocked from anonymous editing for a week [7]. However, they've returned to repeating the same behaviour after the block expired. I ask that they be blocked from anonymous editing or the page be protected for a long while, so the editor might be forced to discuss their changes and seek a consensus first. Linkin Prankster (talk) 08:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week I have extended it to the /64, which should blunt the effect of the dynamic IP (assuming, of course, that it is one user with an account with the provider, used at the same location). Daniel Case (talk) 17:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:122.171.23.163 reported by User:EEng (Result: Nominator blocked from article for 24 hours; 122.171.16.0/21 blocked for six months)

Page: Harvard College (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 122.171.23.163 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162632573 by EEng (talk) + The argument is already made on Talk Page. The verdict is not from your dad, but from Supreme Court of the United States. Harvard follows the law or they jo to jail The USA is built on laws if you dont know that. + President elect has already announced on website and video, that Harvard will follow the court or she will be in contempt of court and will go to jail."
2. Consecutive edits made from 08:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC) to 08:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 08:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162628675 by EEng (talk) + It isn't disputed. The verdict is from the Supreme Court of the USA and the loser in this case is Harvard College."
   2. 08:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Cases */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 08:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Admissions case */ new section"
2. 08:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Admissions case */ +"

Comments: Sorry, I lost count and made 4 reverts myself. IP doesn't seem to understand how we decide what to include and not include in articles. Couldn't figure out how to get Twinkle to leave an editwarring warning. Also, he's IP hopping as User:122.171.19.134 as well. EEng 08:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Both editors blocked EEng is blocked from the article for 24 hours because, while he usually doesn't edit war (to my knowledge) and did apologize, a fourth revert not justified under 3RRNO cannot be let go. 122.171.16.0/21 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)), on the other hand, just got off a month block apparently connected to socking, so they are blocked for six months now. Daniel Case (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Yasincansahin reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [8]
2. [9]
3. [10]
4. [11]
5. [12]
6. [13]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [14]

Comments:

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:08, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:187.255.222.128 reported by User:Barry Wom (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: Netflix Animation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 187.255.222.128 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [15]
2. [16]
3. [17]
4. [18]
5. [19]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [20]

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [21]

Comments:

Persistently adding the same unsourced information both to this page and also List of Warner Bros. Animation productions, Skull Island (TV series) and List of Legendary Television programs. This has been ongoing for some time. Barry Wom (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Tvx1 reported by User:192.76.8.65 (Result: No violation)

Page: List of inventors killed by their own invention (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Tvx1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [22] 24th June, Tvx1's 1st attempt at removing stockton Rush from the article

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [23] 25th June, 2nd attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list
2. [24] 25th June, 3rd attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list
3. [25] 29th June, 4th attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list
4. [26] 30th June, 5th attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [27] Section on their talk page, where they are warned about 3RR and asked to use the talk page rather than edit warring.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [28] [29] Ongoing talk page discussions about Stokton Rush specifically, and broadening the scope of the article more generally, both of which have a significant number of editors supporting inclusion.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [30]

Comments:

• No violation. I don't see 4 reverts in a 24 hours period, and whilst the edit-warring is not optimal, at least two other editors have reverted more than three times in the same time period. I will keep an eye on the article and will protect it if edit-warring continues. Black Kite (talk) 19:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Delpl257 reported by User:TheClubSilencio (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: S. Epatha Merkerson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Delpl257 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [31]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [36]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [37]

Comments:
This user insists on removing any mention of Merkerson's birth name, even when such information is properly sourced. TheClubSilencio (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• The user, who claims to be the subject of the article, has been editing the article disruptively for years. I've therefore indefinitely blocked her. TheClubSilencio, please do not shout in edit summaries.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:58, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Wasn't trying to shout. Just trying to emphasize my point. The lack of boldface or italic options tied my hands, but I can see why it might come across as shouting. Regardless, was I really talking to S. Epatha Merkerson? I just have a hard time believing that she'd care so much about her own Wikipedia article. Perhaps it was a rabid fan? TheClubSilencio (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
    • You should almost never use allcaps in edit summaries. Once in a great while, I will capitalize one word for emphasis, e.g., NOT, but, otherwise, it's not good practice. No way of knowing for sure, but my guess is that she is the subject. I don't find it surprising that she "cares" so much about her article. Unfortunately, I've seen this phenomenon repeatedly.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Kuia34 reported by User:Kate the mochii (Result: reporter warned)

Page: Multiplicity (subculture) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Kuia34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [38]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [39]
2. [40]
3. [41]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [42]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [43]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [44]

Comments: I have warned them of the three revert already on the main article's talk page. Also, they were reverting my changes on another article I contributed in recently: [45].Kate the mochii (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Looks like I did not read 3 revert correctly. I missed the part that all the reverts needed to be on the same page... Kate the mochii (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I take full accountability. However when it comes to the edits they made on different articles that I changed I didn't know that they were to ones that made the edits and i wasn't editing with the intetion of starting an edit war with them on any other pages they have been editing. It should also be noted that *I* was the first person to make a dif of attempt to resolve. here : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_%28subculture%29&diff=1162656320&oldid=1162612901

My edit note said : "I removed the stuff relating to iatrogenic effects as that is better suited to the D.I.D page. Also the vice article you sourced didn't mention any multiplicity tiktok communities? We can talk about it on the talk page"

Yet they continued to revert the edit Kuia34 (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Declined + Warned nominating editor...

@Kate the mochii:: Reporting someone here typically implies you fully understand the underlying policies (edit warring and the three-revert rule, among others). To reiterate, the three-revert rule isn't an allowance, but even if it were an allowance, you exceeded yours:

1. [46]
2. [47]
3. [48]
4. [49]

Please consider this a warning that any continued edit warring—whether or not it violates the 3RR—can result in anyone being blocked, including someone that files a report here. The safest (and most effective) thing you can do is seek dispute resolution options, including simply using the article's talk page to establish consensus instead of repeatedly reinserting contested material.

--slakr^\ talk / 02:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

User:100.36.106.199 reported by User:Evrik (Result: Stale)

Page: Talk:Wood Badge (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 100.36.106.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [50]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [51]
2. [52]
3. [53]
4. [54]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [55]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See below

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [56]

Comments:
I want to start with two admissions. First, when @100.36.106.199: made their first change, I saw this block made by @Bbb23: and figured I was dealing with a vandal and didn't make a lot of effort to resolve this. Second, I made four reverts today. That said ... the user seems to be on a mission to modify "aggressive archiving". The user is driving an edit war, and to quote our ip friend, "why don't you report me and see how it goes?" I am making this report. --evrik ^(talk) 03:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• Note Because of the IP's pblock, they cannot comment here. Bbb23 (talk) 13:21, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  IP blocked for one year by ToBeFree.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  nah, give me a moment please ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  I have undone that and restored your original block settings. Looking at what led to the current partial block and why we're now here on this noticeboard made me jump to the conclusion that 100.36.106.199 primarily disruptively pushes unnecessary meta contributions against others' concerns. That's not the case, though. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:36, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Evrik, this is something rarely discussed on the edit warring noticeboard because in 99% of the cases, the administrative position is "edit warring is disruptive even if you're right" and just blocking those engaging in it independently of their arguments. If I applied that principle here, you both would now be partially blocked from... editing a talk page... to prevent further edit warring about its archival settings.

Do we really need that? Could what 100.36.106.199 wrote perhaps simply be correct? Why did you revert at all? The new archival settings are close to the default provided by Help:Archiving_a_talk_page#Sequentially_numbered_archives; is there a specific reason why you want different ones? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I looked at the history of edits made by the IP, and the block, and surmised that the person behind the edits was acting in a disruptive manner. Also, the editor is being rather aggressive with their edit summaries. All in all, I care less about the changes made then there’s somebody hiding behind the IP, and being disruptive. --evrik ^(talk) 02:10, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Evrik, "hiding behind the IP" is an oxymoron or at least a meaningless statement, not something you can genuinely complain about with such a static IP address that stays the same even through a namespace-wide block. If you suspect sockpuppetry, create an investigation at WP:SPI with your evidence.

I specifically find it confusing that you chose to keep reverting in response to Special:Diff/1162674117 without providing a reason for your preferred revision and – if I understand your message correctly – without even preferring your preferred revision. (?!)

Will you stop, provide a proper reason or need a block? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:43, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

(That talk page aside, the best place to seek a community consensus about someone's general behavior being disruptive is WP:ANI, but opening an ANI thread without evidence of actual issues doesn't work either. If the archive parameter changes were an actual issue, you should be able to explain where in Special:Diff/1162674117 that issue could be found.) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:11, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I guess I'll close this as stale with the expectation that Evrik won't continue reverting without even providing a reason. I understand the general idea behind the report – the quickly-undone block might illustrate similar thoughts – but my position has changed since. Yours can too. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

• Stale ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Kicktheball10 reported by User:FlightTime (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: Machine Head (album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Kicktheball10 (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 20:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC) to 20:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
   1. 20:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "/* Original vinyl release */"
   2. 20:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC) ""
   3. 20:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC) ""
   4. 20:08, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "/* 40th anniversary edition */"
   5. 20:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "/* 40th anniversary edition */"
2. 19:54, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "/* 40th anniversary edition */"
3. 19:46, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 19:56, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Disruption 3."
2. 20:28, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Machine Head (album)."
3. 20:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "+ Section header"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:30, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Proedit9 reported by User:Deauthorized (Result: Indeffed as sock)

Page: Flat Earth (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Proedit9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:38, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162931459 by Vsmith (talk)"
2. 23:33, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162930850 by Vsmith (talk)"
3. 23:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162930207 by Proedit9 (talk)"
4. 23:25, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162929804 by McSly (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 23:34, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Flat Earth."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Repeated unsourced changes without consensus that said user is constantly restoring. Deauthorized. ^(talk) 23:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely by Drmies as sock Daniel Case (talk) 01:14, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Chamaemelum seeking guidance regarding User:Zefr (Result: Page full-protected for three days)

Page: Aspartame (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User possibly reverting too much: Zefr (talk · contribs) (I would not like to make a "report".) Previous version reverted to: [57]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. here,
2. here,
3. here,
4. here,
5. here/here

Each of these removes the information that the WHO is potentially reclassifying aspartame into a different hazard category, i.e., possibly carcinogenic. The second edit has been erased, but I read it before that time and it stated that the WHO was in the process of considering reclassifying aspartame, mentioning the committees involved.

Less relevant is that there are also other reverts, many of much I strongly support or do not seem to be edit warring, that have the same theme of removing references to aspartame causing cancer:

1. here,
2. here,
3. here,
4. here/here (definitely warranted),
5. here

or other potential negative effects of aspartame:

1. here
2. here
3. here
4. here
5. here
6. here
7. here

I don't have a problem with these edits/agree with most of them, but they are useful for context.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [58]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:here or here (Also here)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: I don't think there was a violation so I didn't post it. I can if needed.

Comments:

Three of the first five reverts in "Diffs of the user's reverts" occurred within a ~12-hour time period. I tried to start a conversation on the talk page/user page instead of bringing this here. I would like guidance on what to do and how to proceed from here. I searched the archive and it looks like Zefr has a tendency to revert content even after other editors repeatedly include it, and has had troubles with edit warring. Because of this, I believe that if I, or another user, happen to add the WHO information, Zefr will likely revert it which might then break a rule. To avoid this, I'm preemptively asking what to do. In the meantime, I will restore the POV tag added by a previous editor and/or the other significant viewpoints tag.

Let me know if there is a different noticeboard or page that is better suited for this, or if I've made a mistake in my own editing. Chamaemelum (talk) 03:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Page protected in full by DMacks for three days. Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Chamaemelum (talk) 20:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Yokubjon Juraev reported by User:Qiushufang (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: Mirza Muhammad Haidar Dughlat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Yokubjon Juraev (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [59]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [60]
2. [61]
3. [62]
4. [63]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [64] [65]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [66]

Comments: User adding unreferenced content and WP:OR. No response to any warnings in talk page or edit summaries and persisted on reverting without comment. Qiushufang (talk) 05:36, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Note that in the below comments by the user, they do not address the fact that none of their additions are backed up by sources. Nor did they respond to any of the previous warning on their talk page prior to this report, including edit warring, unconstructive editing, copyviolations, and unsourced content. I see now that this is not the first time and they habitually add unsourced content and OR but they usually let it go when reverted. ex. [67] [68] [69] [70]. Reverts at Yakuts adding unsourced content without comment: [71] [72] [73] Qiushufang (talk) 07:21, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

This is not the user's first encounter with requests for sources. See Talk:Turkic_languages#Tatar_in_Romania, where source attribution was explained to them. Here they explained that they kept reverting because the other side did not explain why they were reverted. Yet at Mirza Muhammad Haidar Dughlat, I explicitly stated content not found in source multiple times ([74] [75]) without comment from the user in each of their following reverts. Qiushufang (talk) 07:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

You are accusing me of two very different cases: 1. With regard to Romanian Tatars, that was a wholly different issue which was settled constructively, so no need to cherry-pick from past cases. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 07:59, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

2. With regard to sources, I was only correcting erroneous information and/or expanding on some very briefly related historical facts. All of those expansions are taken from those same sources indicated in the references. I would have added references if I were taking my info from different sources not indicated in the References/Sources. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 08:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Wiki policy on WP:CITE and WP:VERIFY requires inline citations for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged. I could not find the additions in the pre-existing sources here. The WP:BURDEN is on the user (you) adding the material to provide inline citations that directly support the added material. Multiple users have reverted you based on this policy and no adequate response, in the form of a source, page number, or quotation has ever been provided. Qiushufang (talk) 09:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I understood you. I will add the corresponding reference. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 11:55, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I think I have added all the necessary sources to Mirza Muhammad Haidar Dughlat page. All other fixes are related to typos. Let me know if something is missing. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 14:44, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

The only source added so far has been from a primary source. According to WP:PTS, Wikipedia should be based primarily on secondary sources as I have described here, the part about rarefied air seems to be WP:OR. The entire section here you added to has no citations at all and the parts added about East Turkistan seem particularly dubious considering the name was not used until the 19th century. Qiushufang (talk) 14:53, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I am very much appalled by user @Qiushufang’s bahaviour. I have corrected several typos and historically erroneous material in Yarkent Khanate and Mirza Muhammad Haidar Dughlat pages. These two pages include serious mistakes. Whenever I correct them @Qiushufang is reverting them under the pretext of unsourced material. The user is persisting in his/her behavior. For example, in Yarkent Khanate page, the above mentioned user is erasing the native Uyghur name (Sai’diyya, transliterated from Arabic script) of the khanate and moving to upper position the chinese variant. Moreover, after my adding of translated material from Arabic script and adding proper links, that material and the links are also being reverted unreasonably. It appears that @Qiushufang doesn’t research the topics before deciding whether to revert. Furthermore in another page (Xiongnu), that user has reverted my addition commenting that that is unnecessary addition. I wonder how the user decides upon unnecessity of an entry. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 05:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

In short, Whenever I correct errors @Qiushufang accuses me of unsourced addition Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 06:23, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

The claim by Yokubjon Juraev that they are merely expanding by adding information that is already in the references is false. I took me a while to find the right page (the citation in the article is incorrect and the article text already takes liberties with the source), but this edit, that information is not found in the source. Drmies (talk) 14:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I have rolled back your edits: you are indeed edit warring, and the information you are adding is unsourced. If you revert again, you may find yourself blocked--possibly indefinitely, since you seem to have a history of edit warring and/or adding unverified info. Drmies (talk) 14:55, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

I have included all the sources for the part. Take a closer look. That was from a primary source. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 14:57, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Nonsense. There are no "climactic condition" in Bell's book, or dying horses, or whatever. I don't know what you mean with primary sources, and at any rate that would be inappropriate. The stuff you added is supposed to be verified by Bell, because that is how footnotes work; there comes a time when you can perhaps choose whether WP:CIR or WP:EW applies. Drmies (talk) 15:05, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Well you are also engaging in nonsense, you have reverted my typo fixes. Regarding the death of horses and other weather/climactic conditions, I see that you haven’t read the source. Yokubjon Juraev (talk) 15:14, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours And again, as the above discussion demonstrates, resorting to the talk page (unused in two years) might have averted this outcome. Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

User:Aryan330 reported by User:Capitals00 (Result: PBlocked)

Page: Mughal–Maratha Wars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Aryan330 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:03, 2 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1163008596 by Fowler&fowler (talk) we couldn't rely on only one source which itself banned by government.The information I had provided has taken from books of renowned historians including J.L mehta"
2. 05:02, 2 July 2023 (UTC) "This time no grammatical mistakes as whole paragraph taken from Sambhaji's Wikipedia page & marked some sources also.i will add more information and more sources on this topic soon.if anybody had problem he can challenge me on talk page I will give every answer with full proof sources."
3. 10:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162834353 by Capitals00 (talk)WP:EDITWARWP:DISRUPTSIGN as you are continuously doing this thing I am going to compliant against you to Administrator"
4. 10:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162828683 by Dympies (talk) Provide sources man"
5. 09:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162821382 by Capitals00 (talk) Wikipedia is not granted for anyone, everybody should provide references to prove anything they edit discuss o talk page and don't make edit war"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:[76]

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 09:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "/* Proposal for Infobox result parameter */"

Comments:

Made more than 6 reverts in last 72 hours. This user is already going through a huge report on ANI.[77] Capitals00 (talk) 16:41, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

• Yeah, enough - partially blocked indefinitely from Mughal–Maratha Wars. Black Kite (talk) 16:56, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

User:2601:447:4100:1BE0:20D2:2CEA:E3DF:3916 reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: )

Page: Cops (TV program) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2601:447:4100:1BE0:20D2:2CEA:E3DF:3916 (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 00:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC) to 00:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
   1. 00:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1163042416 by FlightTime (talk)You are sending people to make up nonsense."
   2. 00:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC) "A website referencing the episodes and 2 specials"
2. Consecutive edits made from 12:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC) to 13:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
   1. 12:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1161900764 by FlightTime (talk) FlightTime will be reported if the vandalism continues"
   2. 13:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC) "Please don't make up any more "poorly sourced" excuses to erase the edit which is backed by not only Fox Nation, but also Google search"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:13, 3 July 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Cops (TV program)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 00:12, 3 July 2023 (UTC) "/* User FlightTime's Persistent Vandalism Of The Episode Count Is Not Cool */ Reply"

Comments:

This ip has made 6 edits to this page in a 24 hr period. Untamed1910 (talk) 00:15, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

I have now provided a source noting the episodes which are being erased.[78].2601:447:4100:1BE0:20D2:2CEA:E3DF:3916 (talk) 00:17, 3 July 2023 (UTC)