Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ohconfucius (talk | contribs) at 07:15, 15 April 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
    Shortcuts
    Update this page

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

    You must notify any user you have reported.

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

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

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

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

    Click here to create a new report


    User:124.150.51.210 reported by Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) (Result:Already blocked)

    Page: Mike Skinner (musician) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 124.150.51.210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 17:34, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

    Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

    1. 19:28, 11 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Early life */")
    2. 15:05, 12 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Early life */")
    3. 15:28, 12 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Early life */")
    4. 15:34, 12 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Early life */")
    5. 00:52, 13 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Early life */")
    6. 01:10, 13 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Early life */")
    7. 17:22, 13 April 2011 (edit summary: "")
    • Diff of warning: here

    —Alan the Roving Ambassador (talk) 17:34, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Dicklyon reported by User:Enric Naval (Result: )

    Page: List of U.S. Army, Navy and Volunteer units in the Mexican–American War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Dicklyon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


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


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

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Two consecutive Requests for Move over two month, first one: move from dash to hyphen, second one: no consensus to revert the first move.

    Comments:

    Violation of MOS:STABILITY, which cites three arbitration cases that condemn edit warring over stylistic issues. The article was created with a space separated name. One editor changed it to fit the new title of its main article, then Kwamikagami changed it to a dash despite the result of the two move requests[4]. I reverted him because it was against the result of the move requests[5] and because this article had never carried a dash before, and then I warned him[6]. Now Dickylon, who knows of the existence of the RMs because he commented in the second one, has continued the edit-warring by reverting back again to a dash [7]. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:01, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Hardly edit warring as it was the first time I looked at that article; sorry I didn't look close enough at the history or I would have taken it back to the space, the stable version there. If stability is what you're after, realize that Mexican–American War was stable with the en dash since the middle of 2008, and your campaign to reverse it (like here about the "damned dash" and the threats) is very disruptive. Dicklyon (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You say that the article was improperly moved[8] but you have provided absolutely no proof of such a thing. If you are worried about that, then raise the issue at WP:AN, but don't take the matter in your own hands by edit-warring the page moves. That will only land you a block. --Enric Naval (talk) 01:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I haven't been edit warring. The evidence of the lack of consensus for the move is at the discussion you linked above: first one: move from dash to hyphen; subsequent discussion confirms the lack of consensus. And if PMAnderson hadn't snuck his anti-dash campaign in here without me noticing, there would have been even more opposition. As to whether the admin who closed it acted improperly as an involved party, I haven't studied that allegation enough to take an opinion on it. Dicklyon (talk) 03:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    The closer of the first RM said "Consensus here is to move, but with vocal opposition", the second RM was closed as "no consensus to move" (aka, no consensus to undo the first RM). I don't think that the lack of consensus for your edits can be spelled out clearer than that.
    The attempts to move the page were advertised in WT:MOS the very same day that the first RM was started here, watchers of the Manual of Style had ample warning and time to participate in any of the two RMs.
    The impropriety of the RMs was raised at WP:AN here. The closer of the second RM was probably an uninvolved admin that had spotted the AN thread.
    Given all of the above, I don't see much ground for claiming that RMs were improper. Also, the proper thing was to challenge the RM, not to start reverting people who were trying to implement the result of the RM. --Enric Naval (talk) 08:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    You're taking the result of this vocally contested move as a mandate to change a bunch of other articles? That's objectionable. And I was not aware of the mess at WT:MOS until Noetica notified me; are you the one who objected to that as canvassing, or was that PMAnderson? Dicklyon (talk) 06:39, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Noetica reported by User:Enric Naval (Result: )

    Page: Mexican-American War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Noetica (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


    Previous version reverted to: [9] (the page with a dash, right before the closure of the first RM)


    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [13]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Two consecutive Requests for Move over two month, first one: move from dash to hyphen, second one: no consensus to revert the first move.

    Comments:

    Keeps refusing to accept the closures of the move requests, and keeps edit-warring over stylistic issues after very clear warnings that he was violating MOS:STABILITY [14][15] and in the article's talk page [16].

    And he is just picking up the edit war started by Tony1[17][18] after I warned Tony1 about reverting again[19]. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Why do you keep pushing away from the stable version, citing WP:STABILITY, and whining when people revert your changes made while the issue is still under discussion? Dicklyon (talk) 00:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    How is it still under discussion? There are no open move requests. –CWenger (talk) 01:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Talk:Mexican-American War is showing several dozen edits per day recently, including today. Is that not discussion? Dicklyon (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, discussion maybe, I'll give you that, but that is always the case. Certainly nothing is actively being proposed right now. –CWenger (talk) 18:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • My impression of Enric's actions is that he's getting a little too personally invested in this hyphen versus dash war. Its ultimately a silly dispute, and its even made it onto the Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars page. But yet most of the editors are still being pretty civil and willing to go round and round. But hey, whatever! -- Avanu (talk) 00:53, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:KTDizzle90 reported by User:Gruselfratze (Result: already blocked)

    Page: List of Bob's Burgers episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: KTDizzle90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


    Previous version reverted to: [20]


    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [26]


    Comments:

    Already blocked T. Canens (talk) 17:43, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Uriel227 reported by User:AussieLegend (Result: indef)

    Page: Dylan and Cole Sprouse (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Uriel227 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Time reported: 09:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

    Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

    Previous version reverted to: 04:36, 13 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Filmography */")

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: here

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: here

    Comments:
    Uriel227 added a list of episodes to a table in Dylan and Cole Sprouse, which also resulted in a minor table error, here. Since the list was excessively long and unnecessary for the table I replaced the list with "Seven episodes" and corrected the table error, simply noting in the edit summary, "Too precise".[27] I later returned to the article to discover that Uriel227 had been edit-warring with two other editors, so I reverted his last edit and warned him on his talk page.[28] After doing so, I added an explanation and an invitation to discuss the edits,[29] even though he had actually made 4 reverts by then. I did not report him here at that time because his first revert did not restore the table error,[30] and I assumed he may not have understood that the list simply was not necessary. However, 15 minutes after I had left the invitation to discuss on his talk page, and 33 minutes after the 3RR warning was left, he chose to make another revert,[31] so he has now clearly breached 3RR.

    --AussieLegend (talk) 09:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    After the Uriel228 sockpuppet appeared, I raised an SPI case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Uriel227. Checkuser appears to indicate that both of these accounst are socks of another user, who appears to be User:אֶפְרָתָה. --AussieLegend (talk) 15:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked indefinitely Or soon will be, per SPI. T. Canens (talk) 17:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Borchica reported by Dougweller (talk) (Result: 48h)

    Page: Bosnian pyramids (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Time reported: 17:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

    Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

    1. 10:24, 14 April 2011 (edit summary: "unreliable links, dead links, primary sources")
    2. 12:07, 14 April 2011 (edit summary: "personal interpretation of scientists claims - I just rephrased his statements")
    3. 12:34, 14 April 2011 (edit summary: "/* Scientific explanations */")
    4. 12:41, 14 April 2011 (edit summary: "dead links removed")
    5. 15:38, 14 April 2011 (edit summary: "[dead link] added - pls help find relevant other source")
    6. 16:39, 14 April 2011 (edit summary: "you cite sth swelim never said...POV")
    • Diff of warning: here

    I also warned him a bit later - [35] but he removed my warning. —Dougweller (talk) 17:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    I note that his last revert removed a quotation from the source claiming that the source hadn't said it, but I just did copy and paste from the source. Dougweller (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Just for edit warring. I don't really care if he technically hit the 4-revert line or not. Edit warring is blockable independent of 3RR. T. Canens (talk) 17:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Andrewedwardjudd reported by User:BigK HeX (Result: 72h)

    Page: Fractional-reserve banking (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Andrewedwardjudd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


    Previous version reverted to: [36]


    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [37]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [38]

    Comments:

    Excessive reverts over the past few hours. Multiple editors have been trying to appeal to User:Andrewedwardjudd to no avail. BigK HeX (talk) 17:59, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    User:K22UFC reported by User:Dachknanddarice (Result: )

    Page: Nate Marquardt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Michael Bisping (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Anderson Silva (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: K22UFC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


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


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

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Wikipedia_talk:MMA#Disruptive_edits_by_User:K22UFC

    Comments:
    Despite the fact that we've explained to this user that MOS:FLAG guidelines ask us to remove flag icons from BLPs regarding MMA fighters, this editor has decided that he won't accept that answer and has now gotten into an edit war with me (yes, I am guilty of this too) and has been reverting my removal of the flag icons more than three times on three different pages already. His disruptive edits have been talked about on the WT:MMA page already as I linked earlier. He's simply just trying to force his perception of what he deems looks better despite the consensus of how things should look. An ANI on him is soon to follow, I'm sure, but I'm also willing to accept a block on my account for 3RR. Please take a look at the histories of all three pages I listed to see that we've been edit warring for the past 10 minutes regarding this. Again, I'm happy to accept a block along with K22UFC because I refuse to let his distruptive edits against MoS consensus go unchecked. Dachknanddarice (T‖C) 01:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


    User:Waikiki lwt reported by User:Ohconfucius (Result: )

    Page: 2011 Chinese protests (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Waikiki lwt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


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


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

    Comments:
    Unusually aggressive and tendentious editor, whose tone on the article talk page was already very belligerent and uncollegiate. --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=424160834"