Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: Difference between revisions
Ivanvector (talk | contribs) Reverted 1 edit by 73.150.18.233 (talk): Rv IP-hopping harassment |
|||
Line 414: | Line 414: | ||
Please revert it to either RoyalCream's entry or my latest revision, or as it suits Wiki standards. Please forgive me for any mistakes I've made, I'm not quite familiar with Wiki formatting yet. |
Please revert it to either RoyalCream's entry or my latest revision, or as it suits Wiki standards. Please forgive me for any mistakes I've made, I'm not quite familiar with Wiki formatting yet. |
||
== [[User:<!-- Place the name of the user you are reporting here -->]] reported by [[User:Wikaviani]] (Result: ) == |
|||
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Almond}} <br /> |
|||
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Zefr}} |
|||
'''Previous version reverted to:''' [diff preferred, link permitted] |
|||
'''Diffs of the user's reverts:''' |
|||
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Almond&diff=1233043932&oldid=1233042724] |
|||
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Almond&diff=next&oldid=1233044445] |
|||
# [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Almond&diff=next&oldid=1233045421] |
|||
'''Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:''' [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AZefr&diff=1233047930&oldid=1233046150] |
|||
'''Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:''' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Almond#Iran-focused_editing] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Almond#New_sources_and_expanded_text] |
|||
'''Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page:''' [diff] |
|||
<u>'''Comments:'''</u> <br /> |
|||
The reported user refuses to engage properly in a discussion on the talk page, where an IP and me both disagreed with their edits. Also, another editor also [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Almond&diff=1231232146&oldid=1231184418 reverted] a similar edit few days ago. Despite the disagreement of 3 editors, the reported user keeps editing the article on shaky ground and refuses to follow [[WP:CON]], [[WP:BRD]] and [[WP:WEIGHT]].<b><span style="color:orange">---Wikaviani </span></b><sup><small><b>[[User_talk:Wikaviani|<span style="color:blue">(talk)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Wikaviani|<span style="color:black">(contribs)</span>]]</b></small></sup> 00:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:39, 7 July 2024
Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard | ||
---|---|---|
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
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.
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.
| ||
User:Thebestforever210 reported by User:Nswix (Result: Blocked indefinitely)
Page: Jon Jones (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Thebestforever210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 20:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Sources state he is 'the greatest mma fighter of all time' and is ranked so. Now stop changing and reverting changes that have cites and sources or I'll ask for you to have a mark."
- 20:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232453329 by Nswix (talk)"
- 20:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "The sources cite him as the greatest. Leaving it as the greatest. Not 'one of' every outlet calls him the greatest."
- 16:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Every Source lists him as the greatest MMA artist of all time, no reason to not give him that same credit here."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 20:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Jon Jones."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
All his edits are changing pages from 'one of the greatest' to the much more subjective 'greatest ever'. Nswix (talk) 20:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
SEE! Now he's lying, I wrote 'Jon Jones is regarded as the greatest of all time' I didn't write 'Greatest ever'. Also, I provided sources, so now I changed it to 'Widely regarded as the greatest of all time' which is true, now I provided sources and This guy keeps changing what is stated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebestforever210 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Continuing to edit war after responding to a noticeboard report about it is... unusual. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Newpicarchive reported by User:TheWikiholic (Result: Warned user(s))
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Page: List of best-selling music artists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Newpicarchive (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [1]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: # [7]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [9]
Comments:
This user is continuing to restore his version even though it was reverted by two different users.— TheWikiholic (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi TheWikiholic, why are you filing a report 7 hours after your warning and 15 hours after the user's latest edit? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- It was late night here, and I couldn't file a report while he was engaged in edit warring. The user has already made four reverts of edits from two different editors within 5 to 6 hours. I'm sure he would have continued if the article didn't reflect his version. TheWikiholic (talk) 00:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the clarification. Newpicarchive, thoughts? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I only updated Beyoncé's total certification worldwide on List of best-selling music artists. Yes, there's an error regarding U.S. certification and it has been fixed but user TheWikiholic kept reverting my contribution back to the outdated version. He also accusing Beyoncé's record label faking her numbers without a proof/source-- It seems like there is a personal vendetta against the artist, doesn't it? WP:NPOV Furthermore, they were adamant about referencing a chart blog such as Chartmasters(dot)org in their argument, despite the fact that this particular chart blog is not considered a credible source on Wikipedia because the blog's methodology does not provide any indication of the source of the figures per WP:BADCHARTSAVOID. Unexpectedly, they started to gaslight me on my talk page about the edit-war warning that they were the ones who had caused. Newpicarchive (talk) 09:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have already updated the UK certifications of all the 120 artists on the list on May 17, 2024. Since then BPI has only updated certifications equal to 140,000 units[10]. But this editor has added certifications equal to 11M units. BPI only awarded certifications equal to 33M units to Beyonce as of May 17, 2024 since her debut as a solo artists in the mid 2000's, but this user has added one third of her total to this tally. When we pointed out this he was refusing to get the point and showing a link to German Wikipedia as a source. Sony Music is the record label of Beyonce. Record labels are known to inflating record sales to promote their artist and there is a consensus to not use labels as source, and we are not using the record labels as a source for any artists on that list. TheWikiholic (talk) 18:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Newpicarchive, accusations of a "personal vendetta" or even "vandalism" are inappropriate and likely incorrect. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources without directly accusing any primary source of lying; over 20 years of encyclopedia/community experience have shown that secondary sources are generally more reliable than primary ones about most subjects. Relying on reputable interpretations from secondary sources with editorial oversight avoids misinterpretation of primary sources by individual Wikipedia users.
- In any case, edit warring is disruptive even if you are right. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- because your negative claim has no source/proof, then what it is?? I don't even mentioned the word "Vandalism" at all here but You're the one that brought it up here and playing a victim. If the shoe fits, wear it. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I only updated Beyoncé's total certification worldwide on List of best-selling music artists. Yes, there's an error regarding U.S. certification and it has been fixed but user TheWikiholic kept reverting my contribution back to the outdated version. He also accusing Beyoncé's record label faking her numbers without a proof/source-- It seems like there is a personal vendetta against the artist, doesn't it? WP:NPOV Furthermore, they were adamant about referencing a chart blog such as Chartmasters(dot)org in their argument, despite the fact that this particular chart blog is not considered a credible source on Wikipedia because the blog's methodology does not provide any indication of the source of the figures per WP:BADCHARTSAVOID. Unexpectedly, they started to gaslight me on my talk page about the edit-war warning that they were the ones who had caused. Newpicarchive (talk) 09:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the clarification. Newpicarchive, thoughts? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- It was late night here, and I couldn't file a report while he was engaged in edit warring. The user has already made four reverts of edits from two different editors within 5 to 6 hours. I'm sure he would have continued if the article didn't reflect his version. TheWikiholic (talk) 00:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Warned ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why you keeps reverting my edit TheWikiholic?? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232680476&oldid=1232532865&markasread=319012718&markasreadwiki=enwiki&title=List_of_best-selling_music_artists the update for Beyoncé's total certifications worldwide is already correct! You're the one who should be reported here because you keep vandalizing the page just because it doesn't fit your bias/narrative. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Newpicarchive: TheWikiholic's edits are very obviously not vandalism. If you continue to label them that way, you'll be blocked for personal attacks. Keep using the talk page; if your edits are so good that you consider reversions vandalistic, it should be easy to convince other editors and build consensus. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- LLet's take a look at Brazil certification (Pro-Música Brasil for instance, source: https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=Beyonce&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano=
- International
- Gold: 30,000
- Platinum: 60,000
- Diamond: 250,000
- She has sold a total amount of 7,7M certifications in Brazil, the same amount of what I have updated. Additionally, that source (Irish Independent) stating 160m sold is dated April 15th, 2016, which is actually pre-Lemonade. Lemonade was released on April 23rd, 2016. Considering she released 3 studio albums, 1 soundtrack album, live album and another album with the Carters and various singles since that article was published, i would argue the article is outdated and not particularly relevant as a source. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Newpicarchive: TheWikiholic's edits are very obviously not vandalism. If you continue to label them that way, you'll be blocked for personal attacks. Keep using the talk page; if your edits are so good that you consider reversions vandalistic, it should be easy to convince other editors and build consensus. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why you keeps reverting my edit TheWikiholic?? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232680476&oldid=1232532865&markasread=319012718&markasreadwiki=enwiki&title=List_of_best-selling_music_artists the update for Beyoncé's total certifications worldwide is already correct! You're the one who should be reported here because you keep vandalizing the page just because it doesn't fit your bias/narrative. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Karkafs Desiderium reported by User:Aintabli (Result: Page protected)
Page: Mount Ararat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Karkafs Desiderium (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 06:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "undid 4 edits by "24.133.65.44". This article doesnt claim Kurdistan is a state. You did not "fix grammer" you deleted the Kurdish name, clear vandalism. Go to the Talk page on Mentioning Kurdistan here if you want to lay out your counter-arguments."
- 03:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232507963 by CodeTalker (talk) I have opend a section in the Talk page on mentioning Kurdistan in this article."
- 02:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232505801 by Yerevantsi (talk) How are these three different sources not reliable? Kurdistan or Greater Kurdistan is according to its own Wikipedia article; "[A] Region of West Asia with a historical Kurdish presence", and Nothern Kurdistan or Turkish Kurdistan is according to its own article; "[The] Kurdish inhabited area of Turkey". Please tell me how I missused these terms. Thx."
- 17:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid vandalism, the Kurdish name was removed from the top section with all mention of Kurdistan and the Armenian Highland being removed aswell. I guess a turkish nationalist?"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 02:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Mount Ararat."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
Long-term edit-warring is not limited to this page but also Lake Van and others. Let me know if I should add those diffs as well, but they are easily visible through the revision history of these pages. Aintabli (talk) 07:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I attempted to resolve the dispute on the articles talk page:
- 03:02, 4 July 2024 - Opened discussion on mentioning Kurdistan Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 15:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Sol505000 reported by User:SchroCat (Result:48 hours)
Page: Richard D'Oyly Carte (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Sol505000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [11]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [12] (subsequently deleted)
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Richard D'Oyly Carte#Americanisation of pronunciation
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [13]
Comments:
This is no edit warring, at least not on my part - the editor has been repeatedly notified of an already existing, well-established consensus at MOS:DIAPHONEMIC and Help:IPA/English. Therefore, their behavior is a deliberate choice. It is on them to try to change the already-existing consensus on the appropriate talk pages. Sol505000 (talk) 21:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Of course you’ve edit warred! See WP:3RRNO, which are the only allowed exemptions for breaking 3RR. Blindly claiming you’re in the right isn’t among the list. There is a talk page where things should be discussed: you have ignored it and tried to issue diktats in edit summary, which is a poor way of communicating. The MOS is a flexible set of guidelines, not the Ten Commandments to be slavishly followed, particularly when there is good reason. Arrogantly stamping your preferred choice and then edit warring to retain it is sub standard. - SchroCat (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC) (addendum: Just as a note to admins: I am aware that I have also edit warred, although I stopped at 3 reversions and do not intend to breach 3RR. - SchroCat (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC))
Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Clear 3RR violation in a content dispute.-- Ponyobons mots 21:32, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Adelbeighou, User:2A02:8071:64D0:7900:3965:A375:34BD:A3C0 (also known by other IPs) reported by User:AntiDionysius (Result: User behind 2a00:20:d005:c3bb::/64 blocked for 1 year)
Page: Sport in Albania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Adelbeighou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [14]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
(Some of the edit summaries also indicate there may be a broader CTop issue at play)
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [24]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [25]
Comments:
This is a messy one. It is a two-sided edit war, the other side being a multi-IP user who is, based on their edit summaries, clearly well aware of the rules against this behaviour. There are far too many reverts by them to link to comprehensively, but a quick scroll through the article revision history makes it obvious which anon edits are by this user - they revert Adelbeighou's edits, and have a consistent tone of edit summary. A few examples: [26] [27] [28] [29]
This anon user did make some attempt to discuss the issue on both the article talk page and Adelbeighou's talk page, but in those two venues and in their edit summaries they have engaged in repeated personal attacks - and they kept reverting despite their knowledge of the rule.
Adelbeighou has claimed in some edit summaries that this IP user is evading an existing ban, but I have not found where this is meant to have taken place, nor did Adelbeighou seek outside intervention at any point (even after receiving an edit warring warning containing explanation on how to do so).
--AntiDionysius (talk) 21:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- This may be about [30] and possibly more blocks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ahh, it being a rangeblock was probably what tripped me up when I was looking for it. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, these are tricky to find. Took me a while to find that block, and there may have been more. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ahh, it being a rangeblock was probably what tripped me up when I was looking for it. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- The user behind 2a00:20:d005:c3bb::/64 is
Blocked – for a period of 1 year to prevent further harassment. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Michalis1994 reported by User:D.S. Lioness (Result: Nominator blocked 24 hours, reportee warned)
Page: Niki (Greek political party) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Michalis1994 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [31]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff] no, is experienced user
Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 24 hours. DSL breached 3RR and has previously been warned about edit warring. M1994 is still new enough that they should have gotten a warning, which I'll deliver soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
User: Belomaad reported by User:Albertatiran (Result: Stale)
Page: Umm Kulthum bint Ali (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Belomaad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [37]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [45]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [46]
Comments:
Recent edits by Belomaad are, in their entirety, drawn from partisan and polemical sources that do not meet the WP:RELIABILITY criteria for Wikipedia articles, especially for articles about the history of Islam. In particular, none of the books cited by Belomaad are published by publishers known for fact-checking. These sources include alsersj.net and Mir'at ul-oqul by the Shia jurist Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1699).
As a result, the content added by Belomaad repeatedly violates the principles of WP:NEUTRALITY and WP:VERIFIABILITY. In addition, there does not seem to be a WP:CONSENSUS for his/her edits and Belomaad has refused to investigate whether there is one.
All these issues were brought to Belomaad's attention on several occasions; see Talk:Umm Kulthum bint Ali#Marriage to Umar and the recent edit history of the article. Another editor, Iskandar323, even shared academic sources, currently unused in the article, that could replace the unreliable ones introduced by Belomaad. All these have been to no avail as Belomaad seems only interested in forcefully and repeatedly inserting his/her sectarian POV into the article, over and over, ignoring other editors' advice. Please see the recent edit history for the developments. Separately, Iskandar323 and Doug Weller have raised some concerns about Belomaad's integrity in Talk:Umm Kulthum bint Ali#Marriage to Umar and his/her responses suggest a flagrant ignorance about the mission of WP:WikiProject Islam. For instance, in one of his/her responses, Belomaad suggests that the article should largely reflect the the polemics of the majority rather than the academic findings of historians and Islamicists. (There is still room in the article for sectarian views when they are clearly labeled as such, e.g., a separate section about Shia views.) Albertatiran (talk) 13:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Stale Bbb23 (talk) 13:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Vraxxthelord reported by User:Fylindfotberserk (Result: Blocked indefinitely)
Page: Prabhas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Vraxxthelord (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 17:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC) ""
- 17:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "reduced bias, as brief period of decline cannot be used to describe only 2 films performance. neutral viewpoint"
- 16:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "Reduced bias, cleaned up content"
- 02:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "Reduced bias, cleaned up content. fixed grammer as "went on to play a dual role". listed Saaho as a notable film due to its profitability"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 17:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Prabhas."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
Keeps edit warring, apparently "reducing bias", while introducing bias and puffery. Doesn't abide by WP:BRD, has a histpry of edit-warring and got blocked multiple times. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Blocked indefinitely.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Put CTOPS notice on article talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 20:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Charliehdb reported by User:The Herald (Result: Blocked one week)
Page: List of highest-grossing Indian films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Charliehdb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 17:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "rm source from FP Staff, per WP:ICTFSOURCES and WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Also Variety gives 7 days bo only, see the date published. Updated with latest source"
- 14:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Jayanthkumar123 (talk): The source may not say, but its the collection given makers"
- 13:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Jayanthkumar123 (talk): Rm collection from makers"
- 13:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "/* Highest-grossing films */ fix"
- 12:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "/* Highest-grossing films */ rm collection from makers"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 14:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on List of highest-grossing Indian films."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
- 14:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC) on User talk:Jayanthkumar123 "Warning: Edit warring on List of highest-grossing Indian films."
Comments:
Editwarring and reverts after warnings and discussions. Cherry picking the desired source and not willing to add other reliable source that describe the box office collections. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also edit warring at List of highest-grossing Telugu films.
— The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
User: Vif12vf reported by User:Brikcity (Result: Both blocked)
Page: Template:Albanians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) User being reported: Vif12vf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [47]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [52][53]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [54]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [55]
Comments:
This user has been repeatedly warned about edit warring and continues to do so on various different articles and templates. They have been a user for quite a while so their blatant disregard for the rules is quite alarming. They have been reverting my contributions without cause or explanation, and it is clear that it is consistent behavior. I warned the user to stop twice and they deleted the warning message from their talk page
- Both blocked by Vanjagenije, Vif12vf for 3 months and Brikcity for 31 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:21, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have also added a CTOPS notice to the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 20:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
User:58.97.224.20 reported by User:Ae245 (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)
Page: Preap Sovath (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 58.97.224.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 19:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232976845 by Ae245 (talk)"
- 16:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232975794 by Mean as custard (talk)"
- 13:42, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232932871 by Mean as custard (talk)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
- 16:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Preap Sovath."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
Comments:
Constant addition of promotional material. Ae245 (talk) 19:19, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
User:Hbzbmb reported by User:Sportsfan 1234 (Result: )
Page: India at the 2024 Summer Olympics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Hbzbmb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- Consecutive edits made from 20:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC) to 20:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- 20:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232998393 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"
- 20:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232998294 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"
- 20:45, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232998245 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"
- 20:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232998337 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"
- 20:46, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232998083 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"
- 20:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid destructive amendments to remove Quotas. Medals decided per Quotas and not Athletes."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:
- 20:18, 29 June 2024 (UTC) on Talk:India at the 2024 Summer Olympics "/* Competitors */ new section"
Comments:
User was warned one week ago here [56]. I brought it to this noticeboard here [57]. The user was asked to revert their edits and contribute to the discussion on the talk page. Its been a week since, and there was no contribution on the talk page by Hbzbmb. I have since made those edits to the article, which now have since been reverted again without any discussion by Hbzbmb. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 21:12, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think it would help if you engaged in a civilised manner without making false and misleading assertions. Your previous complaint was declined.
- Declined per discussion above. Daniel Case (talk) 04:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is after User:Red-tailed_hawk had explained to you:
- "In general, multiple consecutive edits that are uninterrupted by anyone (i.e. a series of consecutive edits) are considered to be one edit for the purpose of WP:3RR. For that reason, I don't see a 3RR violation per se, but I do see what appears to a form of plain edit warring."
- I had provided the following explanation: "Thank you. I have replied to your message on the talk page, explaining the issue. I agree with the value of discussion when edits are contested. In this case, User:Sportsfan 1234 removed useful information that added value to the page and which was added by another user. This removal was done without any explanation. Therefore, I restored the useful information (added by a third user) explaining that it was useful and that it was being removed by User:Sportsfan 1234 without any discussion. User:Sportsfan 1234's response (from the very post) was not to engage in any discussion but to tell me that my editing rights might be removed. Hbzbmb (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)"
- You are the one who then reverted the constructive edits by a third-party user to revert them. You need to be more constructive and collaborative on this site. But more importantly, perhaps, if you wish to raise an objection, at least do it through proper arguments rather than through falsehoods. Hbzbmb (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
User:37.220.113.172 reported by User:142.189.149.94 (Result: )
Page: Ney (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 37.220.113.172 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [58]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- Revision as of 20:34, 6 July 2024
- Revision as of 18:41, 6 July 2024
- Revision as of 17:19, 5 July 2024
- Revision as of 20:01, 3 July 2024
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [59]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [60]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [61]
Comments:
He makes changes without commenting and without giving any reason why. His changes are ethnocentric, he wipes out Persian, Turkish, and Jewish identities that use the Ney, which is ridiculous with anyone familiar with regions musical traditions. There is no etymological evidence of the Ney being anything other than Iranian/Persian. His own comments were at the beginning claiming that the page was "Citing sources, correcting and retracting the sabotages that occurred in the article". The source he cites is a blog with no citations of its own, while a quick google search even has the MET referring to it as an Iranian instrument. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/504821
Please revert it to either RoyalCream's entry or my latest revision, or as it suits Wiki standards. Please forgive me for any mistakes I've made, I'm not quite familiar with Wiki formatting yet.
[[User:]] reported by User:Wikaviani (Result: )
Page: Almond (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Zefr (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:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [65]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [66] [67]
Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff]
Comments:
The reported user refuses to engage properly in a discussion on the talk page, where an IP and me both disagreed with their edits. Also, another editor also reverted a similar edit few days ago. Despite the disagreement of 3 editors, the reported user keeps editing the article on shaky ground and refuses to follow WP:CON, WP:BRD and WP:WEIGHT.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 00:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)