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 Beautyfrisco (talk | contribs) at 19:57, 2 February 2014. 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

    Muslim/Zionist category tag warring reported by User:Psychonaut (Result: No action)

    Users involved:

    The above users are engaged in edit warring related to articles on persecution of or terrorism by Muslims or Zionists. The activity involves repeated addition or removal of category tags from a large number of articles. Some users are leaving highly charged or disparaging comments towards the others in edit summaries. Please refer to contributions.

    The matter was previous brought up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive826#Do we give IPs discretionary sanction warnings? though no action was taken. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psychonaut (talk • contribs) 14:52, 23 January, 2014 (UTC)

    User:Nfomamdoalfrlpsa reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: 1 month)

    Page
    Arms Industry (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 07:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593245969 by Jim1138 (talk) stop Rv We've had this discussion"
    2. 07:35, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 592162772 by Bevo74 (talk) We've had this discussion"
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


    Comments:

    Started again after he got a 72 hour block for exactly the same reason. Please see comment by Kuru a week ago: [1]. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 07:47, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


    We've had this discussion"

    the source doesn't provide evidence to substantiate its claims and is also riddled with inaccuracies and contradictions. If you would like to release source or evidence to substantiate its claims please do--Nfomamdoalfrlpsa (talk) 07:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Kishok Nazriya reported by User:Kailash29792 (Result: Warned)

    Page
    Nazriya Nazim (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    Kishok Nazriya (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 07:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC) to 07:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
      1. 07:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC) ""
      2. 07:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC) ""
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


    Comments:

    Continuously tries to showcase illicit images of Nazriya Nazim, removing the legally used ones. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    I got tipped off by the word "illicit", but maybe "poorly sourced" and "properly licensed" would be better terms here? ViperSnake151  Talk  22:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Warned. Not really an edit war issue but a copyright issue, as well as probable communication problems and promotional issues. I've warned the user on their talk page about the copyright violations.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:The sun2013 reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: Warned)

    Page
    Vevo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    The sun2013 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 20:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Vandalism page vevo free encyclopedia in English, This page needs to be protected from the clowns that erases information or enter false data to generate controversy among the fans of the artists."
    2. 20:39, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Vandalism page vevo free encyclopedia in English"
    3. 19:01, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593317551 by ViperSnake151 (talk) WTF WHO THE PEOPLE?"
    4. 18:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC) ""
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 22:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Vevo. (TW)"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
    1. 18:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "/* Do not restore the "Certified" list. */ new section"
    Comments:

    Constantly restores content that was removed as a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE; editing pattern and conduct seems to imply "ownership" behaviour ViperSnake151  Talk  22:21, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz and user:5.69.238.72 reported by User:Andy Dingley (Result: IP blocked)

    Page: Morph (franchise) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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

    Brightline 3+RR on both sides. Not a major change, just trolling from the IP. I reverted once to a previous stable version, then was reverted in minutes by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz who now alleges that I'm a sock of the IP! Andy Dingley (talk) 01:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Jakandsig reported by User:TheTimesAreAChanging (Result: Blocked)

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


    Previous version reverted to: [2]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7], [8]

    Comments:
    Jackandsiq, who has been previously blocked for and aroused community ire by edit warring, reverted four times in less than an hour. In addition to the material he actually disagreed with, he started removing thousands of bytes worth of content that I added to make a WP:POINT, but he was reverting to a virtually identical version each time. I reverted him twice; three other editors reverted him once each.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

     Checking... Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:50.30.49.20 reported by User:EvergreenFir (Result: Blocked)

    Page
    P. J. Patterson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    50.30.49.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 05:20, 30 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593018561 by Sven Manguard (talk) Source was given(SIPT). They are currently prosecuting Misick (ex-Premier (chief minister of the Turks and Caicos Islands))."
    2. 16:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593018561 by Sven Manguard (talk) The source is verified. Who wrote that it was a crime?"
    3. 16:47, 30 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593137059 by EricSerge (talk) The Official source. Multiple governments has put this team is place."
    4. 18:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593152871 by EvergreenFir (talk) Who wrote that a crime was committed. There is a confiscation Order(conviction)."
    5. 22:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593323261 by EvergreenFir (talk) Court Order"
    6. 03:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593349543 by EvergreenFir (talk) Queen Bestowed an Award"
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 22:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on P. J. Patterson. (TW)"
    2. 22:40, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "/* Edit warring warning */ new section"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
    1. 22:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "/* Recent edits about court order */ new section"
    Comments:

    User just got off ban for edit warring today and proceeded to edit war on the same article. WP:NOTHERE EvergreenFir (talk) 04:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:1houstonian reported by User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (Result: Blocked for 24 hours)

    Page
    Steve Stockman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    1houstonian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 03:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* Current tenure (District 36) */ revert with citations please do not vandalise"
    2. 04:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593385121 by GabrielF (talk)"
    3. 04:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593387454 by Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk)"
    4. 05:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* Current tenure (District 36) */ please do not remove sourced material showing the persons positions"
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 04:55, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* Please stop reverting and talk */ sure"
    2. 05:10, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* writing on a talk page */ new section"
    3. 05:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Steve Stockman. (TW)"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
    1. 04:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* Hearsay? */ new section"
    2. 05:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* Public Figure */ r"
    Comments:

    The editor won't engage constructively on talk page and has at least four reverts in the last couple hours despite both invitations to discuss and warnings. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:28, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:TheDude36 reported by User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (Result: 24 hours)

    Page
    Rick Joyner (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    TheDude36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 16:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593446788 by Geraldo Perez (talk)"
    2. 16:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593448197 by Sean.hoyland (talk) VANDALISM VANDALISM"
    3. 16:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593449443 by Alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) I CREATED THIS PAGE! YOU ARE POSTING FALSE INFORMATION!"
    4. 16:56, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593449873 by Geraldo Perez (talk)"
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 16:50, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Removal of content, blanking on Rick Joyner. (TW)"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


    Comments:

    See talk page for additional warnings. See edit summaries for assertions of ownership. The editor won't stop reverting and discuss anything on the talk page. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Caprimanali reported by User:Dougweller (Result: Blocked)

    Page
    Lurs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    Caprimanali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 18:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC) ""
    2. 17:27, 1 February 2014 (UTC) ""
    3. 17:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC) ""
    4. 16:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC) ""
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 17:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "General note: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Lurs. (TW)"
    2. 17:05, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* February 2014 */ don't change quotations, use edit summaries"
    3. 17:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Caution: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Hamadan Province. (TW)"
    4. 18:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Lurs. (TW)"
    5. 18:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Adding unreferenced controversial information about living persons on Tofy Mussivand. (TW)"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
    Comments:

    POV edits across a range of articles. Probably a BLP violation at Tofy Mussivand[9] as no sources say the subject is Kurdish. Basically nationalist editing - as you can see I warned him for changing a quotation (to add Kurdish to it). Removed sourced text which didn't support a Kurdish pov. Dougweller (talk) 19:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Info:

    The user has done the same type of edits on svwiki and is now blocked there. -- Tegel (talk) 21:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Dicklyon reported by User:Jmh649 (Result: Voluntary break)

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

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [10]
    2. [11]
    3. [12]
    4. [13]

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

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [15]

    Comments:
    User in question is reverting multiple different editors. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Characterizing these as reverts and blaming me for edit warring is a rather biased picture (the first revert was by Doc James, Jmh649 after I tried to implement the result of a talk-page discussion; he not only removed my attempt but restored a version that everyone had agreed was wrong). But I will refrain from touching it more as I said on the talk page. Dicklyon (talk) 19:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Here are the recent Dicklyon edits after removing consecutive edits by the same person, using the 3RR helper tool:
    1. 17:14, 30 January 2014 (edit summary: "/* Cardiovascular disease */ OK to mention and reference both sides in a topic with competing POVs")
    2. 17:59, 30 January 2014 (edit summary: "don't censor alternative points of view")
    3. 20:34, 30 January 2014 (edit summary: "Reverted 1 edit by Jmh649 (talk): Restore ref to recent (2008, 2010) results. (TW)")
    4. 04:38, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Cancer */ clarify what small effects were reported")
    5. 04:43, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Bone health */ clarify what they were looking at here")
    6. 04:59, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Bone health */ why do people misrepresent sources so badly? fixing")
    7. 05:03, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Bone health */")
    8. 05:08, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Effects */ update again per sources and ongoing talk-page discussion that reverter seems unaware of")
    9. 05:45, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Cardiovascular disease */ say something more about ongoing studies; it's relevant that the report support and reports them")
    10. 16:05, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Effects */ re-fix the fortmann quote to what applies here; don't suppress the information from the quoted sources")
    11. 17:26, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "/* Cardiovascular disease */ a 2014 report should not censor others from the last few years, per WP:MEDRS")
    12. 17:33, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "Reverted 1 edit by Alexbrn: Alex, please restrain your censorship reflex and try to work this out on the talk page; I did not pick these refs have been in the article long before I looked at it. (TW)")
    User:Dicklyon made nine reverts on February 1 alone. Though Dicklyon is not the only person reverting here, he beats the others by a wide margin. Everyone is well-intentioned, but it would be best if Dicklyon would agree to take a 7-day break from the article to avoid a block. EdJohnston (talk) 22:57, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of these edits are good-faith attempts to improve the article in the direction that we had been discussing on the talk page. How can you characterize an edit such as this one that nobody objects to as a revert? I'm already taking a break from the article, as I said. I can make it seven days if you like, but I'd rather have you look into what's going on and say something appropriate the other three guys with the censoring reflex defending the status quo and making progress difficult. See the talk page discussion (not just the section that the doc linked, but several before and after). Dicklyon (talk) 23:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Geraldo Perez reported for editwarring at Rick Joyner by User:Grade X (Result: Locked)

    1st 2nd 3rd 4th

    Enjoy.

    Grade X (talk) 19:29, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Jackmcbarn reported by User:88.104.24.150 (Result: No violation)

    Page: User:Jackmcbarn/PCRFC implicit oppose (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Jackmcbarn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


    Previous version reverted to: [16]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [17]
    2. [18]
    3. [19]
    4. [20]

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [21]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [22]

    Comments:

    For one, 3RR doesn't apply in your own userspace. Also, I made it clear that that was the wrong page to edit. Thirdly, the warning link was ME warning YOU. Finally, you started undoing my regen of the page, which is clearly blatantly unconstructive. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, AND the first two reverts were by Technical 13, not me! Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi Huon,
    Can you please educate me, and show me that specific policy?
    And please note that the diff you showed [23] was just me undoing this [24] where Jackmcbarn undid the edit from Aircorn - not me. Thanks. 88.104.24.150 (talk) 04:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Aircorn never edited that page. I added his name to the list in [25]. You undid my edit for no reason in [26]. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:18, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Read 3RR exemptions, it clearly states it. AcidSnow (talk) 04:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    AcidSnow already pointed out where the exceptions to WP:3RR can be found, and Jackmcbarn pointed out that he didn't revert thrice anyway. Regarding Aircorn, he supported proposal 1, which by the rules laid out at the top of Wikipedia talk:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014#Implicit oppose counts as an implicit oppose to proposal 4. Jackmcbarn added them to that column of his list; 88.104.24.150 removed them with an edit summary that rather clearly shows that 88.104 didn't understand what they were doing, and reverted a second time for good measure. Both the original report and 88.104's reply here contain so many falsehoods that it's almost comical. 88.104.24.150, you may want to read WP:BOOMERANG. Huon (talk) 13:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:88.104.24.150 reported by User:Technical 13 (Result: Semi-protected)

    Page
    User:Jackmcbarn/PCRFC implicit oppose (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    88.104.24.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 22:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "/* Implicit opposes */ r"
    2. 00:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593502212 by Technical 13 (talk) per [27] and lack-of-response theirin"
    3. 02:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593521016 by Jackmcbarn (talk) IP hate, meh"
    4. 02:12, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "oops"
    5. 02:14, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593522253 by Jackmcbarn (talk)"
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 23:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC) "General note: Editing tests on User:Jackmcbarn/PCRFC implicit oppose. (TW)"
    2. 01:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Final warning: Vandalism on User:Jackmcbarn/PCRFC_implicit_oppose. (TW)"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
    1. 00:47, 2 February 2014 (UTC) on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring "Archiving 4 discussion(s) to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive234) (bot"
    Comments:

    My first revert of this user's post was a full WP:AGF assuming it was just a misplaced or test edit. The IP, told me it was not a test and reverted my undo of their edit. This quickly escalated into a full out edit war between this IP and another user which resulted in protection of the page being edited. Reviewing the contributions of the IP will show that it is obviously and vandalism only account and should be dealt with as such. Thank you. / Technical 13 (talk) 05:15, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    "it is obviously and vandalism only account and should be dealt with as such"

    Obviously.

    Even though I've 'vandalised' nothing.

    Meh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.24.150 (talk) 05:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ersroitasent reported by User:Faizan (Result: Blocked)

    Page
    Yom Kippur War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported
    Ersroitasent (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
    Previous version reverted to
    Diffs of the user's reverts
    1. 12:02, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593570058 by Faizan (talk) it was not supported by consensus Do not edit war, take it to talk page"
    2. 11:38, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 593542650 by Brewcrewer (talk) no consensus"
    3. 00:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "undo trivial edit by Mikrobølgeovn"
    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
    1. 08:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Yom Kippur War. (TW)"
    2. 11:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Yom Kippur War. (TW)"
    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


    Comments:

    Clear violation of 1RR rule within 24 hours. Spotted this violation earlier too, warned the user several times, but still another case of edit-warring. The diffs have been provided, the user is edit-warring with several experienced editors, as evident from the article's history. He did three reverts in 24 hours. Faizan 12:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


    Clearly not supported by consensus

    We've had this discussion it was not supported by consensus--Ersroitasent (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    And that's an exception to edit-warring? In addition, 3 separate people seem to be "against" your edit - that looks like better consensus that you think DP 12:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure Callanecc, thanks. Faizan 12:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, Faizan, being 3 hrs outside of 24 is usually considered gaming the system, and should also have led to a block DP 13:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Oda Mari reported by User:STSC (Result: Declined)

    Page: Air Defense Identification Zone (East China Sea) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Oda Mari (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


    Previous version reverted to: 04:57, 1 February 2014

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 08:56, 1 February 2014 (edit summary: "Reverted to revision 592667818 by Mogism: The description of the source is unreliable. Besides, there's no mention on Japan in the source. Please provide RS with evidence like the source #37. . (TW)")
    2. 06:32, 2 February 2014 (edit summary: "Reverted 3 edits by 54.199.150.33 (talk): Though it's cited, there are no evidence in them. (TW)")
    3. 08:44, 2 February 2014 (edit summary: "Reverted 1 edit by 54.199.161.4 (talk): The evidence is the photograph of the forein aircrafts and their identification. See talk page. (TW)")

    Comments:
    These are unjustifiable disruptive reverting purely for personal nationalistic reasons.

    • Declined. STSC, don't make accusations without evidence. I don't even understand your involvement (or uninvolvement) in the dispute. The IP addresses, btw, all come from an Amazon corporate account. There's been no WP:3RR violation and the reported editor has opened a discussion on the talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Ryulong reported by User:Beautyfrisco (Result: )

    Page: AKB48 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Ryulong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)


    Previous version reverted to:

    order of personnel preferred by ryulong

    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AKB48&oldid=588668935

    order of sections preferred by ryulong

    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AKB48&oldid=593132184

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1 january

    5 january

    13 january

    14 january

    30 january

    31 january

    1 february

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ryulong&oldid=593249962

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:AKB48#Member_list

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:AKB48#History_section

    Comments:
    ryulong is edit warring alone against many users

    3rr on 13-14 january and 30-31 january

    ryulong's last edit war block was in december for 14 days


    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=593625528"