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:SojournerJim reported by User:Firefangledfeathers (Result: indefinite partial block)

Page: Christianity and homosexuality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid obvious bias. Wikipedia content should be neutral, clear, and encyclopedic."
2. 17:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC) "Blatant POV issues. Activists misrepresenting the facts."
3. 16:19, 1 July 2024 (UTC) "Added citations and proof texts. Corrected vandalism by previous author."
4. 06:49, 1 July 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC) "escalated NPOV warning and 3rr warning"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 17:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC) "/* July 24 edits */ new section"

Comments:

Obviously problematic content, saying for example "For all questions such as this, the supreme guide in Christianity is the Bible. Do not trust what people on the internet say ABOUT the Bible, go straight to the source (the Bible) to see for yourself what it has to say!" Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:46, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I have blocked them indefinitely from the Christianity and homosexuality article. PhilKnight (talk) 17:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I have also added a CTOPS notice to the article talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 21:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Salibou reported by User:Cookiemonster1618 (Result: Page-blocked 1 week)

Page: Zaghawa people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts: [1] [2]

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

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [4] Claims they 'Think there are no Zakhawa people in Libya', when the cited sources show that there are ethnic Zaghawa people in Libya.

Comments:

This User has been removing sourced information at the Zaghawa people for a few days now and has been engaging in an edit war. When I reverted their edit the second time I gave them a warning on their talk page but they continued to remove the information. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 05:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week Page block from the article in question. Cookiemonster1618, it would help to add a citation that does not have a dead url. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

  Hi @Firefangledfeathers you said the citation link for the Zaghawa population in Libya is dead but it is still working. It is likely that you couldn't view it because either your not subscribed to Ethnologue or your internet is bad. It is still working though. Thank You. Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 17:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

  Gotcha. If you're able to access the source, it would help if you could briefly quote—in the citation template—the part that supports the Libyan population. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

  Sure Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 18:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

  I dont know how to add it so I'll give you the direct quote and you can add it. Here it is: "User Population: 9,400 in Libya (2020)." Cookiemonster1618 (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Thebestforever210 reported by User:Nswix (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Jon Jones (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Thebestforever210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Sources state he is 'the greatest mma fighter of all time' and is ranked so. Now stop changing and reverting changes that have cites and sources or I'll ask for you to have a mark."
2. 20:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232453329 by Nswix (talk)"
3. 20:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "The sources cite him as the greatest. Leaving it as the greatest. Not 'one of' every outlet calls him the greatest."
4. 16:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Every Source lists him as the greatest MMA artist of all time, no reason to not give him that same credit here."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Jon Jones."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

All his edits are changing pages from 'one of the greatest' to the much more subjective 'greatest ever'. Nswix (talk) 20:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

SEE! Now he's lying, I wrote 'Jon Jones is regarded as the greatest of all time' I didn't write 'Greatest ever'. Also, I provided sources, so now I changed it to 'Widely regarded as the greatest of all time' which is true, now I provided sources and This guy keeps changing what is stated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebestforever210 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Continuing to edit war after responding to a noticeboard report about it is... unusual. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Newpicarchive reported by User:TheWikiholic (Result: Warned user(s))

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Page: List of best-selling music artists (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Newpicarchive (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [5]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [6]
2. [7]
3. [8]
4. [9]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [10]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: # [11]

1. [12]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [13]

Comments:
This user is continuing to restore his version even though it was reverted by two different users.— TheWikiholic (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi TheWikiholic, why are you filing a report 7 hours after your warning and 15 hours after the user's latest edit? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

It was late night here, and I couldn't file a report while he was engaged in edit warring. The user has already made four reverts of edits from two different editors within 5 to 6 hours. I'm sure he would have continued if the article didn't reflect his version. TheWikiholic (talk) 00:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the clarification. Newpicarchive, thoughts? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:58, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I only updated Beyoncé's total certification worldwide on List of best-selling music artists. Yes, there's an error regarding U.S. certification and it has been fixed but user TheWikiholic kept reverting my contribution back to the outdated version. He also accusing Beyoncé's record label faking her numbers without a proof/source-- It seems like there is a personal vendetta against the artist, doesn't it? WP:NPOV Furthermore, they were adamant about referencing a chart blog such as Chartmasters(dot)org in their argument, despite the fact that this particular chart blog is not considered a credible source on Wikipedia because the blog's methodology does not provide any indication of the source of the figures per WP:BADCHARTSAVOID. Unexpectedly, they started to gaslight me on my talk page about the edit-war warning that they were the ones who had caused. Newpicarchive (talk) 09:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I have already updated the UK certifications of all the 120 artists on the list on May 17, 2024. Since then BPI has only updated certifications equal to 140,000 units[14]. But this editor has added certifications equal to 11M units. BPI only awarded certifications equal to 33M units to Beyonce as of May 17, 2024 since her debut as a solo artists in the mid 2000's, but this user has added one third of her total to this tally. When we pointed out this he was refusing to get the point and showing a link to German Wikipedia as a source. Sony Music is the record label of Beyonce. Record labels are known to inflating record sales to promote their artist and there is a consensus to not use labels as source, and we are not using the record labels as a source for any artists on that list. TheWikiholic (talk) 18:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Newpicarchive, accusations of a "personal vendetta" or even "vandalism" are inappropriate and likely incorrect. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources without directly accusing any primary source of lying; over 20 years of encyclopedia/community experience have shown that secondary sources are generally more reliable than primary ones about most subjects. Relying on reputable interpretations from secondary sources with editorial oversight avoids misinterpretation of primary sources by individual Wikipedia users.

In any case, edit warring is disruptive even if you are right. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

because your negative claim has no source/proof, then what it is?? I don't even mentioned the word "Vandalism" at all here but You're the one that brought it up here and playing a victim. If the shoe fits, wear it. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

• Warned ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

  Why you keeps reverting my edit TheWikiholic?? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1232680476&oldid=1232532865&markasread=319012718&markasreadwiki=enwiki&title=List_of_best-selling_music_artists the update for Beyoncé's total certifications worldwide is already correct! You're the one who should be reported here because you keep vandalizing the page just because it doesn't fit your bias/narrative. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:00, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Newpicarchive: TheWikiholic's edits are very obviously not vandalism. If you continue to label them that way, you'll be blocked for personal attacks. Keep using the talk page; if your edits are so good that you consider reversions vandalistic, it should be easy to convince other editors and build consensus. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

  LLet's take a look at Brazil certification (Pro-Música Brasil for instance, source: https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=Beyonce&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano=

  International

  • Gold: 30,000
  • Platinum: 60,000
  • Diamond: 250,000

  She has sold a total amount of 7,7M certifications in Brazil, the same amount of what I have updated. Additionally, that source (Irish Independent) stating 160m sold is dated April 15th, 2016, which is actually pre-Lemonade. Lemonade was released on April 23rd, 2016. Considering she released 3 studio albums, 1 soundtrack album, live album and another album with the Carters and various singles since that article was published, i would argue the article is outdated and not particularly relevant as a source. Newpicarchive (talk) 04:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:Karkafs Desiderium reported by User:Aintabli (Result: Page protected)

Page: Mount Ararat (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 06:03, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "undid 4 edits by "24.133.65.44". This article doesnt claim Kurdistan is a state. You did not "fix grammer" you deleted the Kurdish name, clear vandalism. Go to the Talk page on Mentioning Kurdistan here if you want to lay out your counter-arguments."
2. 03:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232507963 by CodeTalker (talk) I have opend a section in the Talk page on mentioning Kurdistan in this article."
3. 02:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1232505801 by Yerevantsi (talk) How are these three different sources not reliable? Kurdistan or Greater Kurdistan is according to its own Wikipedia article; "[A] Region of West Asia with a historical Kurdish presence", and Nothern Kurdistan or Turkish Kurdistan is according to its own article; "[The] Kurdish inhabited area of Turkey". Please tell me how I missused these terms. Thx."
4. 17:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC) "Undid vandalism, the Kurdish name was removed from the top section with all mention of Kurdistan and the Armenian Highland being removed aswell. I guess a turkish nationalist?"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Mount Ararat."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Long-term edit-warring is not limited to this page but also Lake Van and others. Let me know if I should add those diffs as well, but they are easily visible through the revision history of these pages. Aintabli (talk) 07:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:27, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

I attempted to resolve the dispute on the articles talk page:

03:02, 4 July 2024 - Opened discussion on mentioning Kurdistan Karkafs Desiderium (talk) 15:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Sol505000 reported by User:SchroCat (Result:48 hours)

Page: Richard D'Oyly Carte (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Sol505000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [15]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 10:35, 4 July 2024
2. 16:28, 4 July 2024
3. 22:02, 4 July 2024
4. 22:09, 4 July 2024]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [16] (subsequently deleted)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Richard D'Oyly Carte#Americanisation of pronunciation

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [17]

Comments:
This is no edit warring, at least not on my part - the editor has been repeatedly notified of an already existing, well-established consensus at MOS:DIAPHONEMIC and Help:IPA/English. Therefore, their behavior is a deliberate choice. It is on them to try to change the already-existing consensus on the appropriate talk pages. Sol505000 (talk) 21:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Of course you’ve edit warred! See WP:3RRNO, which are the only allowed exemptions for breaking 3RR. Blindly claiming you’re in the right isn’t among the list. There is a talk page where things should be discussed: you have ignored it and tried to issue diktats in edit summary, which is a poor way of communicating. The MOS is a flexible set of guidelines, not the Ten Commandments to be slavishly followed, particularly when there is good reason. Arrogantly stamping your preferred choice and then edit warring to retain it is sub standard. - SchroCat (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC) (addendum: Just as a note to admins: I am aware that I have also edit warred, although I stopped at 3 reversions and do not intend to breach 3RR. - SchroCat (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC))

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Clear 3RR violation in a content dispute.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:32, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Adelbeighou, User:2A02:8071:64D0:7900:3965:A375:34BD:A3C0 (also known by other IPs) reported by User:AntiDionysius (Result: User behind 2a00:20:d005:c3bb::/64 blocked for 1 year)

Page: Sport in Albania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Adelbeighou (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [18]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [19]
2. [20]
3. [21]
4. [22]
5. [23]
6. [24]
7. [25]
8. [26]
9. [27]

(Some of the edit summaries also indicate there may be a broader CTop issue at play)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [28]

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

Comments:
This is a messy one. It is a two-sided edit war, the other side being a multi-IP user who is, based on their edit summaries, clearly well aware of the rules against this behaviour. There are far too many reverts by them to link to comprehensively, but a quick scroll through the article revision history makes it obvious which anon edits are by this user - they revert Adelbeighou's edits, and have a consistent tone of edit summary. A few examples: [30] [31] [32] [33]

This anon user did make some attempt to discuss the issue on both the article talk page and Adelbeighou's talk page, but in those two venues and in their edit summaries they have engaged in repeated personal attacks - and they kept reverting despite their knowledge of the rule.

Adelbeighou has claimed in some edit summaries that this IP user is evading an existing ban, but I have not found where this is meant to have taken place, nor did Adelbeighou seek outside intervention at any point (even after receiving an edit warring warning containing explanation on how to do so).

--AntiDionysius (talk) 21:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

This may be about [34] and possibly more blocks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Ahh, it being a rangeblock was probably what tripped me up when I was looking for it. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:49, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, these are tricky to find. Took me a while to find that block, and there may have been more. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

• The user behind 2a00:20:d005:c3bb::/64 is Blocked – for a period of 1 year to prevent further harassment. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Michalis1994 reported by User:D.S. Lioness (Result: Nominator blocked 24 hours, reportee warned)

Page: Niki (Greek political party)
User being reported: User:Michalis1994

Previous version reverted to: [35]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [36]
2. [37]
3. [38]
4. [39]
5. [40]

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff] no, is experienced user

Comments:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Niki_(Greek_political_party)&diff=prev&oldid=1232627940

• Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 24 hours. DSL breached 3RR and has previously been warned about edit warring. M1994 is still new enough that they should have gotten a warning, which I'll deliver soon. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)