Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
    Shortcuts
    Update this page

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

    You must notify any user you have reported.

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

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

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

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

    Click here to create a new report

    User:Montigliani and User:D.S. Lioness reported by User:ToBeFree (Result: Refer to AN/I)

    [edit]

    Page: Super League Greece (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    Users being reported:

    Diffs of Montigliani's reverts:

    1. 19:35, 13 August 2024 (UTC) "Canvassing is not allowed though. Anyway, I'm glad you recognize that you're bringing something back that isn't yours."
    2. 19:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC) "Because you are re-editing a blocked user. That's what it's called Canvassing."
    3. 18:27, 13 August 2024 (UTC) ""

    Diffs of D.S. Lioness's reverts:

    1. 19:49, 13 August 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1240143181 by Montigliani (talk) you don't even know what canvassing is..."
    2. 19:28, 13 August 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1240138672 by Montigliani (talk) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Banning_policy#Edits_by_and_on_behalf_of_banned_and_blocked_editors It is permittable"
    3. 18:57, 13 August 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1240133558 by Montigliani (talk) why?"
    4. 18:11, 13 August 2024 (UTC) "/* History */ restoring content with some changes"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    • See the block logs of both users and the following warning:
    1. 18:14, 4 August 2024 (UTC) on User talk:Montigliani "/* An unproductive battleground */ new section"
    2. 18:14, 4 August 2024 (UTC) on User talk:D.S. Lioness "/* An unproductive battleground */ new section"

    Comments:

    I'm tired of this. I'd now indefinitely block both accounts for persistently misusing Wikipedia as a battleground, but that might be because of their constant attacks against each other including on my talk page,* so I'd prefer to let someone else decide. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    *Search User_talk:ToBeFree/A/6 for their usernames for an overview if desired ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:28, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Actually, my number 4 is not a revert. I just adding content who immediately removed
    See also here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#I_am_prevented_from_adding_content D.S. Lioness (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:17, 13 August 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]
    It is a revert of Special:Diff/1215075851. However, if that's your point, the edit war has a longer history than 24 hours and my concern is unrelated to the three-revert rule. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:26, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've had a look again and D.S. Lioness's accusations seem to have been exclusively directed against Michalis1994 who did turn out to be a sockpuppet. I'd say the persistent battleground behavior is from Montigliani, not D.S. Lioness, despite their edit warring, current partial block and previous edit warring block. The warning linked in the report is primarily about Montigliani's behavior, and the persistent accusations on my talk page are not "against each other" but rather one-sidedly from Montigliani against the rest. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:52, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am surprised by this comment that I did not see yesterday. If I understand correctly, you are accusing me of attacking everyone else! Let it be. Now I am forced to defend myself. The user I am now in conflict with had called me first when he had a dispute with a known puppet. Then they turned out to be partners. It's tiring to give links all the time to prove myself right. They even tried to delete my clipboard. I won't say any more. I am only sorry for this comment from ToBeFree. Montigliani (talk) 07:45, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The discussion has not ended here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evangelos_Marinakis#Request_for_comment and the other user adds to the input of the entry, what he himself disputed!
    Here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_League_Greece&diff=1240144883&oldid=1240143181 brings back a puppet contribution apparently for revenge.
    Here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Just_Step_Sideways#Article_in_sandbox_page trying to delete my clipboard
    Meanwhile the puppet silences him from behind https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Evangelos_Marinakis&diff=prev&oldid=1239915156
    These few to give you an idea. Montigliani (talk) 08:14, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And here to see who she really is
    https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User_talk:%CE%9C%CE%B1%CF%81%CE%AF%CE%BD%CE%B1_%CE%B7_%CE%86%CF%83%CF%87%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%B7
    In translation:
    i'm stuck in the b.p. from the wretched Glucken. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/NikolaosFanaris I'm afraid to talk here now because if he discovers me he'll make me a bully and maybe cause me trouble and I don't want to. let's wait for the user check to finish and we'll see.. D.S. Lioness (talk) 01:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC) Montigliani (talk) 15:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    one more reversal https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_League_Greece&diff=prev&oldid=1240242675 by Montigliani D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit warring while the report about it is still open, I see. And new attacks on my talk page. Montigliani's approach to Wikipedia conflicts is perhaps best described by their own words:
    If you don't block her, you'll be forced to block me. I appreciate you immensely, but I won't back down. They want to pass the slanders about Marinakis to the Super Liq article. Over my dead body.[1]
    ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:17, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I honestly don't understand why you are so hostile towards me. I am not making any personal attacks on anyone. I wrote a proverb, which means that if someone does something once, he will do it again. Ok. If you want me to be punished, do it. You don't have to hurt me. I don't forget how much you helped me. Montigliani (talk) 07:45, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

     Comment: I would ask the administrators before making their final decision to see how the user User:D.S. Lioness he follows and restores his puppets' edits to the letter Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NikolaosFanaris/Archive, where they all deal with the articles Evangelos Marinakis and Super League Greece.

    What is your point? You are just slinging mud to cause blur. You are an SPA and the only care of you is to whitewashing Marinakis. D.S. Lioness (talk) 16:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Strange. An ip puppet tells me exactly the same thing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evangelos_Marinakis#Proposal :This is either a joke or, more concerning, evidence that this person is somehow connected to the subject. The version provided below is a blatant attempt to whitewash Vangelis Marinakis. It's alarming that no appropriate action has been taken despite the numerous threats and insults directed at other users. 92.25.44.181 (talk) 11:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC) Montigliani (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    a quick look at your contributions can verify what I said - anyone with eyes can see - even a blocked user. D.S. Lioness (talk) 17:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're right, you're right. Montigliani (talk) 18:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    By the way, why you don't fill an SPI request? maybe because of this diff D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Τhe user seems to be trying to establish a relationship with me and the blocked user to mislead the admins to get me sanctioned. D.S. Lioness (talk)

    You are always behind the footsteps of the puppets. Maybe of course it's a coincidence. Repeated coincidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Greece/Article_alerts&diff=prev&oldid=1240884973 --Montigliani (talk) 10:06, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined It's gotten a little stale, and with all this discussion that should have been on the talk page and accusations of sockpuppetry this would better off at AN/I. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Alhitmi123 reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Defer to AN/I)

    [edit]

    Page: Qarmatians (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Alhitmi123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

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



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [7]

    Comments:

    WP:NOTHERE user, more info at the WP:ANI report [8], during which they violated WP:3RR. --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Completely forgot, they have done the same at Abu Tahir al-Jannabi [9] [10] [11] [12]. HistoryofIran (talk) 12:51, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    as this is indeed under discussion at AN/I with an indefinite block very possible and seeming likely. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lost in Quebec reported by User:Smasongarrison (Result: No violation)

    [edit]

    Page: Category:Newspaper people by newspaper in New York City (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Lost in Quebec (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 16:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC) "See Omnis Scientia talk page and NP criteria. Since when does working in a city make you from there? Do we classify NY Rangers hockey players category People from NYC?"
    2. 13:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC) "Working somewhere doesn't automatically make the person from there."
    3. 13:36, 17 August 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1237720256 by Smasongarrison (talk)"

    Additional diffs for other edit warring on Category:Blanche Ely High School alumni

    1. [16]
    2. [17]
    3. [18] including reverting my request to wait until the disussion was over.Mason (talk) 20:39, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 01:12, 16 August 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Category:Blanche Ely High School alumni."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 15:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC) "/* Parent categories of journalism */ new section"
    2. 23:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC) on User talk:Smasongarrison "/* New message from Lost in Quebec */ closed"

    Comments:

    I've tried to engage them but it's clear that they are not willing to actually have a civil discussion with me Mason (talk) 20:15, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Question: Is more information needed? Mason (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. Another report where the filer conflated the edit reverted to and the first revert. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, thanks for the extra info. I typically don't deal with edit warring. Mason (talk) 03:48, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Drmies reported by User:Altenmann (Result: Decline)

    [edit]

    Page: Carousel (Marcia Griffiths album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Drmies (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [19]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [20]
    2. [21]
    3. [22]
    4. [23]

    Comments:
    The user is clearly aware that the issue is under discussion, as you can see from this rude dismissive comment. There is also an active discussion of the issue in [[Talk:Electric Boogie#Written in 1976?, which the user chose to dismiss as well. --Altenmann >talk 01:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see anything necessarily rude about it. The worst he's said is you being picky, which, in my opinion, doesn't even seem insulting. I also saw that he was showing you a source from Google Books, so perhaps you'd like to look at that too and do the discussion on the talk page like he asked? NoobThreePointOh (talk) 01:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes "picky" is insulting. It is also clear that you didn't bother to look into talk page, where I the discussion was started, precisely to prevent edit war, but a seasoned Wikipedian decided to WP:IAR :-). --Altenmann >talk 01:38, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Declined Since you are both veterans of the wiki, one an admin, with tenures comparable to mine and similar 200,000+ edit counts, I will assume that, having reached three reverts each, you will focus on the talk page discussion and lay off the edit warring so I don't have to full-protect the page. I hope that in the process you will also reflect on just how it worked out that you both let things get this far. Daniel Case (talk) 03:56, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So bullying by a veteran who even removes {dubiuous} tags is OK.
    18:04, August 18, 2024‎ Altenmann talk contribs‎ 6,787 bytes +66‎ Reverted 1 edit by Drmies (talk): Please do not remove tags without addressing the issues.
    Now tell me that "there is no clique". ...Whatever. --Altenmann >talk 05:43, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It takes two to edit war. You didn't have to keep restoring the tag, did you? If you would feel more comfortable with the page full-protected, just say so. Daniel Case (talk) 18:35, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:2600:1702:4280:8B0::/64 reported by User:Geraldo Perez (Result: Already blocked for two years)

    [edit]

    Page: Ewan McGregor (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: 2600:1702:4280:8B0::/64 (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]
    4. [28]



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [29]

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

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [30]

    Comments:

    Edit warring on /64 range. Has been range blocked before. Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:10, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Already blocked  for a period of 2 years by myself following the AIV report. Daniel Case (talk) 18:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Kire1975 reported by User:FellowMellow (Result: Both warned)

    [edit]
    We're done here. Unless I see violations of my warnings by either user, the back-and-forth bickering on this page is done.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    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: User talk:FellowMellow (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Kire1975 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [31]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [32]
    2. [33]
    3. [34]
    4. [35]
    5. [36]


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

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [38]

    Comments:

    As seen in the links provided, at first it was unclear, as I thought my comments were clear, but I had only made one edit (in contrast to what user made) and then accusation of vandalism followed. User has edited and reverted multiple times on talk page (which appears to be like vandalism) and I was interested in discussing, until user alleged that I had made such as being "uncivil, inappropriate or otherwise unconstructive" and made "abusive" comments. As you can take a look in the edit summary and the edits themselves, no such "inappropriate" and "abusive" have been made. I warned the user that further reverts, instigation, and what appears to be vandalism on the talk page would result, in me requesting administrator intervention. User has now left a message, threatening to block me without further notice. [39]. So I believed it was appropriate to generate this report. - FellowMellow (talk) 07:38, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    These are not reverts. Kire1975 (talk) 07:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As seen in (Diffs of the user's reverts) section. - FellowMellow (talk) 07:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Why did you edit your 07:38 comment to make it look like my 07:34 comment is a reply to yours? Kire1975 (talk) 07:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The comment is an explanation to why the report was made and what specifically needs to be mentioned. You happened to write before I was able to publish the comment. That has to be at the top. Then all comments below are discussions. That’s how it has always been. Also what are you talking about? How is this considered to be a lookalike? - FellowMellow (talk) 07:51, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is nothing to discuss. I didn't revert anything related to you tonight or ever. Kire1975 (talk) 07:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, you don’t have to. That’s solely your choice. I will wait to discuss with the administrators. - FellowMellow (talk) 08:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Why did you also change the time on your signature without an edit summary after the Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion on my talk page as you did here? Kire1975 (talk) 08:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    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.
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=1241340960"