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:CROIX reported by User:Peter Ormond (Result: )

Page: Antigua and Barbuda (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: CROIX (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. diff reverting this
2. diff partially reverting this
3. diff reverting this
4. diff reverting this

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [2][3]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [4] (my talk page)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: diff

Comments:
This user doesn't understand WP:BURDEN, and engages in WP:OR. I'm tired of explaining him the issue on my talk page, but he still doesn't understand. Also, he creates ridiculous redirects: GGAB, PMAB, FAWST .... Peter Ormond 💬 05:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

We didn’t just resolve this? Also, the majority of those edits you mentioned were either me making the article look cleaner, considering you spammed citiation needed on every single language, even though all those languages had the same source. And one of those edits was accidental, and I immediately reverted it. And, some of those edits were made before we even spoke. CROIX (talk) 10:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

None of those sources explicitly support your argument. This, I have told you so many times. You don't understand. I told you to read WP:BURDEN, but from edits it gives a view that you don't understand it. Anyone can read this thread, and see that you are parroting the same thing, and don't understand. You create ridiculous redirects, and if one challenges that with sources, then you say they are wrong. I told you to not cite those two sources at Antigua and Barbuda, as they didn't support the content, but you are happy to revert my edits again and again, without actually trying to improve the article and making it factually correct. You just don't understand and keep edit-warring and this prompted me to open this discussion here. Peter Ormond 💬 11:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It is factually correct, they are languages recognized by the government. Once again, the Belize article and the Jamaica article do the exact same thing. CROIX (talk) 11:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@CROIX: "It is factually correct" is not an exception to the three revert rule. You need to discuss the situation at the article's talk page and wait for consensus. —C.Fred (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. CROIX (talk) 12:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

And, I do not recall you saying that I should not use government sources, may I have a link to when you said that? CROIX (talk) 12:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I told you so many times that your sources don't explicilty support the content [5] [6] [7], and now you don't "recall" it. Peter Ormond 💬 13:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

That’s not what I said, what I said is that you never explicitly said I should not use government sources. Which are clearly more accurate. CROIX (talk) 19:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

When did I say to you to not use "government sources"? Peter Ormond 💬 04:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

On your talk page. CROIX (talk) 10:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Diff, please? Peter Ormond 💬 10:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

[8] CROIX (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

It can be clearly seen that I commented on those particular sources that didn't support the content. I didn't say to not use government sources at all. You misquote, misrepresent, and are wasting everybody's time by WP:BLUDGEONING this discussion. Peter Ormond 💬 20:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

No, you said those sources were not reliable. CROIX (talk) 20:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Stop wasting my time. If you don't understand the English language I can't help. If this isn't the case, read the earlier reply carefully and understand what is being said to you. Peter Ormond 💬 20:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm trying to reach an agreement with you so we can end the argument? Did you not see it? CROIX (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Peter Ormond What do my redirects have to do with edit warring? I thought this was the place to report edit warring, not report that someone made some redirects. CROIX (talk) 19:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I did report edit warring, which is the main issue. Also, I think other issues need to be highlightled too so that admins can see what to do with you. Peter Ormond 💬 04:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I also do not see how my redirects broke any rules, because I did discuss them, and I never interrupted their process of reviewing them. CROIX (talk) 10:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Where is Antigua and Barbuda's Governor-General referred to "GGAB", the Prime Minister as "PMAB", and the National anthem as "FAWST"? The answer is nowhere. Don't create nonsense on Wikipedia. Peter Ormond 💬 10:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

The Antiguan media regularly refers to the prime minister as PMAB, so with the governor-general GGAB. This is very prevalent on political campaign signs on the island. This is the same with FAWST. Do your research before coming to conclusion. CROIX (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I did my research dear. I find no source on the web supporting your view. Repeatedly making WP:OR edits is disruptive. Peter Ormond 💬 20:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

How am I supposed to add a source to a redirect page? CROIX (talk) 20:36, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Can't you source it at the redirect's target article? Peter Ormond 💬 20:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

But I do not see why you are bringing them up, when these issues are being resolved/already been resolved. CROIX (talk) 20:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Because you don't understand Wikipedia policy. Your disruptive editing doesn't end. And I know it would not stop, if I hadn't opened this thread. Peter Ormond 💬 20:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

How was I being disruptive? I did not disrupt the process when the redirects were being reviewed, if you can prove I was interrupting the process I would love to see the evidence. CROIX (talk) 21:23, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I’m tired of continuing this argument, I’m on vacation, let’s make a deal that instead of adding a citation needed tag, we can add a better source needed tag. Also, I do not see how my redirects broke the rules, as I did discuss with the users involved, although I do not want to debate that. And finally, I’ll agree to remove the recognized languages as long as you are aware that there is no legislation that creates an official language + de jure capital city. CROIX (talk) 20:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Again, you are parroting the same thing. If there is "no legislation that creates an official language + de jure capital city", then high quality sources must be cited that explicity state that thing. If the soucres don't exist it is WP:OR. Also, nowhere it is written that legislation is must for establishing a capital city. No legislation makes London capital of UK. Peter Ormond 💬 20:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Thats the definition that is said here: [9] CROIX (talk) 20:35, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot be used as a source per WP:CIRCULAR. Peter Ormond 💬 20:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Thats not a source, that's a definition. CROIX (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

User:StN reported by User:Dekimasu (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: StN (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus_2&oldid=1086843322

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [10]
2. [11]
3. [12]
4. [13]
5. [14]
6. (also, the same thing a week ago: [15])

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [16] (warned by Hemiauchenia before final revert); [17] (warned by Alexbrn after final revert listed here)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: There is discussion on the article's talk page, but I have neither participated in it nor edited the page anytime recently. StN is participating in the talk page discussion but has not ceased reverting.

Diff of a new notice posted to user's talk page: [18]

Comments:
The page is also eligible for discretionary sanctions. I would take care of this incident myself, but I edited the article a great deal in 2020. Dekimasuよ! 07:08, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

This may be stale overall, but similar edits are continuing today: [19], subsequently reverted to stable version here. Dekimasuよ! 03:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 03:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

User:LemonPie00 reported by User:Czello (Result: Blocked indef )

Page: Adrian Zenz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: LemonPie00 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "Optional method, not mandated by Wikipedia policy. You seem to be pushing your own agenda."
2. 12:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "The author's own views and opinions were "challenged by several editors"? Stop trying to defend him. The article is supposed to keep an unbiased and neutral point of view, which the edit provides."
3. 11:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "Could you stop vandalizing the page?"
4. 11:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "Avoid bias. You don't get to paint only one side of the story whilst ignoring Adrian Zenz's homophobic views."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 12:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Adrian Zenz."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Note as well this [[20]] and their last edit summary, they are clearly not interested in obeying policy or in not edit waring. Slatersteven (talk) 13:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Note as well similar attitudes (and false accusations of vandalism) at other pages. Strong signs this is a wp:nothere account. Slatersteven (talk) 13:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Given that a lot of their edits seem to be whitewashing the CCP or other totalitarian regimes,[21] including genocide denial,[22] I'm inclined to agree that they're WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. — Czello 13:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely as NOTHERE Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

User:40.133.234.46 reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: Blocked for 2 years)

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

User being reported: 40.133.234.46 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "incorrect arabic also. adding references and actually researching this, not just using google; I looked in FOUR dictionaries. to appease you, I added both definitions. please let me finish."
2. 21:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "there is ABSOLUTELY NO SUCH THING as "the square root of k minus s"; the closest thing to anything in any reference is *KS. leave this alone. I'm going to work on this more; please don't revert while I do."
3. 20:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "yes it is sourced. I myself checked and cross-checked it. it's in the entyomology section. please do not revert when you could have simply added the reference at the top or moved the reference."
4. 05:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "changed because I actually looked it up in a dictionary?"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 21:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Couscous."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 20:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "/* May 2022 */ new section"
2. 21:25, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "/* May 2022 */"
3. 21:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "/* Why are you doing? */ new section"
4. 21:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC) "/* Why are you doing? */"

Comments:

Despite my efforts to make them refrain from removing easily attributable content and pointing them to a list of sources (search google books for "kaskasa to pound") to prove to them that their claim of circular referencing is baseless, they kept edit warring and finally, blanked their talk page to continue the edit war. M.Bitton (talk) 22:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

There isn't a lot I can do to deal with an edit warrior who thinks that <ref>French, from Arabic kuskus, from kaskasa, to pulverize; see kšš in Semitic roots.</ref> (i.e., their commentary inside ref tags) qualifies as a source that trumps the reliable sources. M.Bitton (talk) 22:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Please also see this relevant discussion from earlier this month: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1098#40.133.234.46 Disruptive editing and edit warring. Peaceray (talk) 23:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Interested administrators & editors would do well to review User talk:40.133.234.46: Revision history. User:40.133.234.46 has removed at least 10 warning or notices this month. Peaceray (talk) 23:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of two years. Edit history shows several previous long blocks, including one for a year. Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Mausebru reported by User:Pahlevun (Result: Both warned)

Page: Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mausebru (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [23]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:16, 24 May 2022 and 19:17, 24 May 2022
2. 21:27, 24 May 2022

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

• Proof that the user was aware of discretionary sanctions on the article
• My warning that they should not revert

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• 08:33, 18 May 2022 New topic started at the talkpage; 08:44, 18 May 2022, asking on my talkpage for an answer on the article's talkpage
• 16:00, 21 May 2022, Pinging the user to respond since they have been active without showing up in the talkpage
• [24] New section pinging for de-escalation

Comments:
The article in question is under WP:1RR. Pahlevun (talk) 12:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

• Note. It looks to me like you both violated 1RR.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  I made one edit and one revert. Pahlevun (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  I assume you think of this as your "edit", but it was a change to the map and a removal of the date of the conflict, which previously were in dispute. That is a revert.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  I know i violated 1RR because I wanted to revert but Pahlevun reverted it back. So sorry for breaking 1RR, but Pahlevun, I have left a message in the Talkpage. I gave you sources Mausebru the Peruvian (talk, contibs) 01:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• Pahlevun, I have put this in talk page. Mausebru the Peruvian (talk, contibs) 10:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• Result: Both User:Pahlevun and User:Mausebru are warned for violating WP:1RR on this article. You are both risking a block if you revert the article again without getting a prior consensus for your change on the article talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 04:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Berry stark reported by User:Ab207 (Result: blocked 1 week)

Page: Prashanth Neel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:50, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "Previous editor changing details about living person called Prashanth neel, Prashanth neel's father was working as a bus driver & migrant in Andra Pradesh editor seems to be telugu person claiming after the success of a KGF chapter 2 movie . Haven't seen when editing after KGF chapter 1 release."
2. 15:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "Some people tried to malign the information of living person called Prashant Neel, Giving wrong information about family, Caste I fixed it with reference please consider my edit."
3. 13:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "Added a language"
4. 11:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "He is not telugu, He is from ediga community which can be found in Karnataka. He was born in Andra Pradesh's Neelakantapuram but raised in Bengaluru."
5. 11:05, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "He is from ediga community ( Kannada caste ) he just revealed has special connection with Andra Pradesh he born in Neelakantapuram but raised in Bengaluru."
6. 10:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "Prashanth neel is from ediga community there is no source that he is reddy"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "Notice: Edit warring softer wording for newcomers (RW 16.1)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC) "/* Ethnicity */ new section"

Comments:

The new users is edit warring over the ethnicity of a WP:BLP subject. Removing reliably sourced content and adding WP:SPS sites to support their changes Ab207 (talk) 17:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

• Continues to edit war despite stronger EW notice by other editors

1. 05:01, 26 May 2022 "Bot spotted : Fixed the content"
2. 04:50, 26 May 2022 "Warning: This editor is giving wrong information. Bot content"
3. 17:57, 27 May 2022 "In telugu article there is no full name mentioned. Just mentioned Subhash."

Indistiguishable from vandalism and personal attack at this point. If same user is editing as an IPv6, the disruption is worse and might need a page protection as well -- Ab207 (talk) 05:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week Jayron32 12:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Wildhorse3 reported by User:Abhishek0831996 (Result: Blocked)

Page: Awan (tribe) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Wildhorse3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [25]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:19, 24 May 2022‎ Wildhorse3 talk contribs‎ 11,547 bytes +226‎ rv
2. 15:54, 25 May 2022‎ Wildhorse3 talk contribs‎ 11,547 bytes +226‎ Reverted 1 edit by Abhishek0831996 (talk): Rv
3. 22:20, 25 May 2022‎ Wildhorse3 talk contribs‎ m 11,547 bytes +226‎ Reverted 1 edit by Orientls (talk) to last revision by Wildhorse3
4. 08:20, 26 May 2022‎ Wildhorse3 talk contribs‎ 11,547 bytes +226‎ Reverted 1 edit by 122.170.45.88 (talk): Reverting vandalism
5. 12:26, 26 May 2022‎ Wildhorse3 talk contribs‎ 11,546 bytes +195‎ reverting vandalism, restoring stable version, discussion: User_talk:Wildhorse3#Awan

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [27]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [28]

Comments:
The last 4 reverts came under 21 hours. He has made 0 attempts to discuss any of his edits, despite consensus against his edits on the talk page.

You can also see how he is falsely labeling the edits as 'vandalism' even after being warned. He is confident that whatever he is reverting is actually vandalism per User_talk:Wildhorse3#Awan

Since this editor is a SPA, largely dedicated to promoting "Awan" tribe, I think an indefinite page block or topic ban from this topic would be more effective because of his falsification of sources, WP:CIR, edit warring and inability to gain consensus. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 14:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – 48 hours for edit warring. Wildhorse3's claims that they are reverting vandalism are quite unjustified. They also continued to revert while this report was open. EdJohnston (talk) 03:54, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

User:151.197.236.78 reported by User:Praxidicae (Result: Partial block)

Page: Free people of color (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 151.197.236.78 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "gente de color libre) are people of mixed .I change were to are Because original people of color still exist . do you think all first nation people no longer exist too?"
2. 16:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC) ""
3. 15:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "please change your post to are people o f color i am a free person of clolor i still exist and so does my culture please leave it as are not were"
4. 10:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Free people of color."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

IP continues to edit war to change the tense in the section about slavery (in the past) to being current and refuses to actually engage in discussion on their talk page PRAXIDICAE💕 16:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• And now they've continued for a 5th time. PRAXIDICAE💕 20:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
• Blocked – for a period of 1 week. Partial block only so that they can continue to make their case on the talk page, though a quick review of discussion there makes me think they don't likely have the language skills to effectively communicate their case. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

User:BryanAJones reported by User:PAVLOV (Result: Partial block)

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

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "Fixed grammar"
2. 18:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "Fixed grammar"
3. 07:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "Fixed grammar"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on RTFM."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 07:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC) on User talk:BryanAJones ""

Comments:

Edit war against different users after discussion PAVLOV (talk) 18:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 60 hours. Note that this is only a partial block. Primefac (talk) 18:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Newimpartial reported by User:Kwamikagami (Result: No violation)

Page: Same-sex marriage (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Newimpartial (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [long history, not sure where to link, but the reverts are all simple]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [29]
2. [30]
3. [31]
4. [32]
5. [33]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [34]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Same-sex_marriage#Gender

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [35]

Comments:
There is an ongoing discussion on the article talk page over the appropriate definition of 'same-sex marriage', which occurs in the lead of the article, and whether that definition is compatible with how the term is used in our various sources. The debate includes whether the words 'legal' and 'gender' belong in the definition.

Recently, I noticed two sources had been added for the definition, and wondered if they might shed some light on the issue. However, neither was a source for the definition. I therefor removed them and added a 'citation needed' tag.

User Newimpartial replaced the tag with a better source. However, that source doesn't fully support the wording of the definition as Newimpartial wants it. I tried both changing the definition to conform to the source, and marking it as 'failed verification', but Newimpartial has reverted me each time, claiming they're "pointy" edits, and that it doesn't matter if the definition doesn't match the source even though it's the point of the ongoing discussion. They also claim I'm the only one who has a problem with it, though others have brought up some of these problems on the talk page and Newimpartial has responded to them. It wouldn't matter even if I were the only one, as failing verification is failing verification, and if they can't correct that themself they should at least leave the tag until the issue can be resolved. — kwami (talk) 22:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• No violation. Newimpartial has reverted only twice in the last 24 hours. I strongly urge an RFC on the definition.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

  Bbb23, while that is true, I do think both editors have displayed edit-warring behaviour so I'd recommend a formal warning. The reverts/interactions between the two editors have extended throughout the week, and I don't think they should be cut slack thanks to gaming the 3RR limit. I do agree RFC is the best way to actually resolve the conflict, tho. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 23:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

  I didn't come here for a 3RR violation, but because I was following the instructions on the main ANI page. I went there to file my complaint, and it said that if the issue involved edit-warring, I should file it here instead. So I did. There's nothing in the ANI instructions about needing to be a 3RR violation to file here. If I should've filed there, please let me know for next time.

  My issue isn't about gaming 3RR (I don't know that either of us were doing that), but that tags should remain in place until the issue is resolved, unless there is consensus that the tag is not needed. They shouldn't be removed just because the other editor doesn't like them, no matter what the dispute. — kwami (talk) 02:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Alexispapp reported by User:Taxin609 (Result: Blocked one week)

Page: National Creation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Alexispapp (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 23:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC) to 23:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
   1. 23:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC) ""
   2. 23:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC) ""
   3. 23:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 23:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "ONLY Warning: Edit warring (UV 0.1.3)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 23:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC) "/* Please Reach Consensus. */ new section"

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 00:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

User:WatanWatan2020 reported by User:Noorullah21 (Result: )

Page: Herat (1793-1863) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: WatanWatan2020 (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. [36]
2. [37]
3. [38]
4. [39]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [40]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [41]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [42]

Comments:

I have submitted a report because this user is constantly edit warring on the page, he takes to the talk page but continues to edit war on the page after and doesn’t provide any reliable sources to his claims usually either. I am reporting this user as he reverted Kailan’s edits, and mine, and another editor which told him to stop. A total of 3 editors told him to stop to which he ignored and continued edit warring, you can view for yourself on the page. Noorullah21 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, User Noorullah21 and Kalian are engaged in POV Pan Iranian pushing on such article. The sources provided do not show that Persian was the official language of the Afghan dyansty. Furthermore, and to add context to this matter, Afghan Empires, dynasties, and principalities had Pashto as their main language, since they were Pashtuns and had wanted to establish Pashtun dominance over their conquered lands. It is preposterous that such users who are engaging in POV pushing will try and conceal that. Along with this, they Use Iranian sources to try and make their case, but even then those sources do not indicate Persian was the official language of the principality. That is why the user Kalian tried to change the language from main to ‘common languages’ and then added Pashto to try and sweep the matter under the rug. Noorullah21 did not even contribute to the discussion that is ongoing still. His disruption is uncalled for and is taking sides when the matter is not finished from discussion either. Please check those sources they are pushing. It does not even go in line with their theories. WatanWatan2020 (talk) 07:19, 27 May 2022 (UTC)