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:Mahan Matin reported by User:Miha2020 (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Iran Football Championship Cup (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mahan Matin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1] When the discussion was going on

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [2]
2. [3]
3. [4]
4. [5]
5. [6]
6. [7]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [8]

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [9]
[10]

Comments:
i prevented his vandalisms few times but now i'm tired of him. i cleaned up refs in article but he added them again. me and user:Shahin noticed him many times about his vandalisms. he comebacks after a time and do it again! he wants to change the history of articles by fake references and Wikipedia:NPOV dispute. Miha2020 (talk) 19:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

The diffs you posted are NOT an ANEW notice. As seen in red at the top of this page, you must notify users with {{subst:An3-notice}} when opening an ANEW topic regarding them. I have done this myself for the sake of that user. Moving forward, you need to be aware that this action is not optional. GabberFlasted (talk) 11:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

i tried but that template didn't response. history of article shows that 4 diffs are new. i said that he went a time off wiki then come back and do this edits again! his refs are not correct (wp:RS) (he added them in Fawiki and put it them here too!). he used fake refs to change the history! Miha2020 (talk) 16:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 17:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

  thanks. but he'll come back after few days and do that edits again! he is not active much. please ban him from this page: Iran Football Championship Cup and this template: template:Iranian football top flight seasons. thanks. Miha2020 (talk) 22:37, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Bbb23 hello. did you see my last cm?--Miha2020 (talk) 10:06, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes. I'm not taking the kind of preemptive action you suggest.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

if he come back and do that edits again. what should i do? you can see he was not online here last 4 days and 48 hours block didn't make any difference to him Miha2020 (talk) 09:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

User:JamesManderberg reported by User:Morbidthoughts (Result: Blocked 24 hours)

Page: Jessica Matten (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 01:30, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Personal life */ it is a third party source not self reported, so I think it should have a greater weight. Metis is used as short hand for mixed, it does not mean red river metis."
2. 01:06, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "updated mother which was removed" and 01:00, 4 August 2022 combined
3. 22:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "There was no synthesis. It is from a single source. Saulteaux is Plains Ojibwe. Metis is not mixed raced, it is a specific group."
4. 22:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "Either way it makes not sense to remove the Pocahontas part. Undid revision 1102200602 by Morbidthoughts (talk)"
5. 20:24, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Personal life */ clearly defined community heritage is a very important standard for Indigenous peoples"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:19, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Jessica Matten."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 22:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Paternal Heritage */ comment"

Comments:

Continued insertion of WP:UNDUE synthesis from an article that does not even mention the subject. BLP discussion [11] Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours For longer term edit warring. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:44, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Morbidthoughts reported by User:JamesManderberg (Result: Nominator blocked 24 hours)

Page: Jessica Matten (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

User continues to remove the subjects mothers name for editorial purposes. The article in question is being removed because the subject's mother provided a conflicting narrative of heritage and refers to herself as a "Pocahontas".

The use has also been relying on self-published sources.

https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/canadas-pocahontas-theresa-ducharme-is-a-powerhouse

Continued insertion of WP:UNDUE synthesis from an article that does not even mention the subject. BLP discussion [12] Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

• Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 24 hours EvergreenFir (talk) 05:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User:31.182.160.94 reported by User:Fyunck(click) (Result: Blocked 31h)

Page: Djokovic–Nadal rivalry (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 31.182.160.94 (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 08:22, 4 August 2022 (UTC) to 08:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
   1. 08:22, 4 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   2. 08:23, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Famous matches */"
2. Consecutive edits made from 15:55, 3 August 2022 (UTC) to 16:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
   1. 15:55, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   2. 15:57, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   3. 15:58, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Famous matches */"
   4. 16:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 07:26, 3 August 2022 (UTC) to 07:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
   1. 07:26, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   2. 07:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   3. 07:28, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   4. 07:29, 3 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   5. 07:30, 3 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Famous matches */"
4. Consecutive edits made from 10:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC) to 10:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
   1. 10:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC) ""
   2. 10:19, 2 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Famous matches */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:35, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Removal of content, blanking on Djokovic–Nadal rivalry."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

All this IP is doing is vandalism and blanking. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Blocked 31 hours by LuK3 Daniel Case (talk) 17:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Editor8220 reported by User:Kashmiri (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: Jammu and Kashmir (union territory) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Editor8220 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1102322528 by Kashmiri (talk)"
2. 13:02, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "Jammu and Kashmir is a union territory of India. Arunachal pradesh is another disputed state. Go and check its wikipedia page. It has emblem and map"
3. 12:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1102315895 by Arjayay (talk)"
4. 12:18, 4 August 2022 (UTC) "Map change"

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

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Edit warring in violation of 3RR and ARBIPA. Four warnings (level 1–4) on the editor's Talk page and an ARBIPA warning clearly did not work; editor continues with disruption.

Comments:

I was filing my own report, when I saw the warning on the user's TP - having tried to resolve this on my talk page at [14] - Arjayay (talk) 14:00, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

The user was also warned about discretionary sanctions regarding this topic on their talk page [15] - Arjayay (talk) 14:00, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Editor is still edit-warring, despite being notified of this report - Arjayay (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours. Unfortunately we will be contending with this sort of edit war until we can also block India and Pakistan from edit-warring over the actual territory ... Daniel Case (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User:George_Ho reported by User:NickMartin (Result: Stale)

Page: Second Cold War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: George_Ho (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Second_Cold_War&oldid=1099709250

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [16]
2. [17]
3. [18]
4. [19]
5. [20]

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

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [23]

Comments:

There is a long history of WP:OWNERSHIP and constant reverts from George Ho on this page.

• Stale Bbb23 (talk) 23:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Ippantekina reported by User:Tree Critter (Result: No violation)

Pages: I Knew You Were Trouble (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
White Horse (Taylor Swift song) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ippantekina (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [24]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [25]
2. [26]
3. [27]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: N/A

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [28]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [29]

Comments:
This goes for every other Taylor Swift re-recording as well. Tree Critter (talk) 14:36, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tree Critter: There are many problems with this report, but without going into them for the moment, you have failed to notify Ippantekina of this report, which you are required to do.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

[30] What else is wrong with it? Tree Critter (talk) 15:46, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I simply adhere to WP:SYNTH; "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source. Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source." The source that Tree Critter gives does not mention explicitly any of the information they want to verify, thus I removed it. Ippantekina (talk) 00:12, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Furthermore, I added a rationale for my edits every time, but Tree Critter reverted my edits without proper explanation. This is as much as Tree Critter's fault, if not more than mine, to fail to acknowledge that I cite proper guidelines (WP:V, WP:OR or WP:SYNTH) every time I revert their edits. Ippantekina (talk) 03:55, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

I have not combined sources, I'm using one source. I made the initial edits. You reverted my edits several times without taking your concerns to a talk page. I have brought it up in both your talk page and an article talk page because you didn't feel it necessary to do so. I'm not sure if you know what the contents of an album are, but its songs. The songs she has re-recorded. She said contractually she CANNOT re-record them any earlier than November 2020, so I had the articles reflect that. Later in the interview the interviewer asked "So, you'll be doing that?" an Taylor responded with "Yea it's next year. I'm gonna be busy." What is difficult to understand here? Tree Critter (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

A request was made at DRN for dispute resolution. I have declined the request because there has not been discussion at Talk:I Knew You Were Trouble. I will repeat my advice to discuss at the article talk page. That's what article talk pages are for.I have closed the request because the dispute is also pending here. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

• No violation Bbb23 (talk) 22:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

User:GusRDRM reported by User:MrOllie (Result: Blocked)

Page: List of metaphor-based metaheuristics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "lol"
2. 16:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "So you clearly state that you can not judge an algorithm. Just get a life."
3. 16:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "Who are you to judge and what is your field of expertise?"
4. 13:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "I think someone has become obsessed with a widely used algorithm. It has nothing to do with self-promotion. Please be serious."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

GusRDRM is a single purpose account dedicated to writing about one particular algorithm and has previously indicated that they have a conflict of interest. MrOllie (talk) 16:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

This particular wikipedia page is about the brief description of several metaheuristic algorithms. As noted on the page, "This list is incomplete; you can help by adding missing items". That's exactly what I did, and that's exactly what other researchers are doing. It has nothing to do with self-promoting or whether the algorithm is mine or not. It has to do with the fact that this page is about a list of algorithms. User MrOllie seems to have become obsessed with this particular topic. I fill it in, he takes it out. As you will see in the comments of history, he judges it, saying e.g. "nonnotable, rarely used algorithm" although it leaves the Firebug Swarm Optimization algorithm which appears to be more "nonnotable", according to its citations. Really, can he explain to us why this distinction between those two? Also, how can he judge something that is not in his field? I wish the user MrOllie would stop messing with me, and if he wants to continue improving wikipedia he should learn to do his research before judging. GusRDRM (talk) 16:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

If It has nothing to do with self-promoting why did you say you have a conflict of interest? Please explain. MrOllie (talk) 16:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Because I had created a full page that has been put down in order for the algorithm to be on that list. If I remember correctly, I was asked to state this before the page was published. And now you take it out. I just say some information like everybody does. Also, I am still waiting for your explanation on my statements above. Thank you. GusRDRM (talk) 17:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – 48 hours for edit warring. EdJohnston (talk) 19:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Sru111 reported by User:Praxidicae (Result: Blocked one week)

Page: Paladins (video game) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Sru111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:01, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "Added sources, but why is the original unsourced version allowed to exist?"
2. Consecutive edits made from 18:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC) to 18:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
   1. 18:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "What's even wrong, the link is reliable and the information is also accurate"
   2. 18:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Setting */"
3. 17:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "I like to think a direct post from the person in question is a reliable source. .-."
4. 15:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC) ""
5. 15:17, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "/* Setting */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Paladins (video game)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 18:58, 5 August 2022 (UTC) on User talk:Praxidicae "/* Paladins */"

Comments:

Despite a clear and adequate explanation by Jéské Couriano on my own talk page, Sru111 continues to edit war to insert unsourced/poorly sourced cruft to the article. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

You gave me zero reason for reverting my edits until the second time, acted like a complete asshole by ignoring my attempts at figuring out what was wrong, and now reported me after I added sources straight from the developers. You apparently can't follow a simple explanation of the setting and removed a Forbes article because you didn't personally like it. Ego much? Sru111 (talk) 19:23, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I explained in my edit summary, as did Jeske. Perhaps you should read our policies before creating personal attacks. The one here without a clue is not me, it is in fact, you. Also ironic given your complete inability to follow a simple instruction while also attacking me on my talk page. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:28, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Like I said, you only did that in the second edit, and you never explained what you meant by "cruft" and just kept being an asshole. There was absolutely no reason to revert everything, as there was a source straight from a developer in the latter section, as I said, yet you did anyway, and now there are sources for the setting as well, yet you reported me anyway, and removed a review that you personally didn't like. And please, give me a break, you consider what I wrote on your page "attacking"? I made absolutely no insults towards you and barely even referenced you, and Jeske's response didn't include any further indication of what was wrong beyond lacking sources and not going too in-depth, while you just told me in the most asshole way possible to "learn to sign responses". Maybe try actually responding and explaining things to people instead of removing what they say and being an asshole about it? So how about actually explaining what's so "cruft" about my edits? Sru111 (talk) 19:44, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not going to engage with you any further since you can't seem to have a civil conversation without calling me an asshole for simply going by Wikipedia's rules. PRAXIDICAE🌈 19:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

User:FMSky

On the page Greatest of All Time, user:FMSky violated WP:3RR. On the third revision, he asked to talk on the talk page. I proceeded to do just that, only for him to not bother engaging there at all. Instead he talked about another editor and then asked that same editor to revert my edits since he had already violated 3RR. Then he has the audacity to accuse me of edit warring when he refused to engage in a conversation. Regardless, he has no basis for reverting my edits, he is gatekeeping the page, which violates WP:OWN, and he is trying to get me in trouble. Please discipline him Administrators.--Valkyrie Red (talk) 23:45, 6 August 2022 (UTC)