Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars/Fandom and fiction
|This page contains material which is kept because it is considered humorous. Please do not take it seriously.|
PLEASE include two or three edit history links about the lame edit war. It would be also useful to list the date the edit war was added.
- 1 Fandom and fiction
- 1.1 Adria (Stargate)
- 1.2 Amerime
- 1.3 Baby (Dragon Ball)
- 1.4 Batman Begins
- 1.5 Because You Left
- 1.6 Daedalus class battlecruiser
- 1.7 Daffy Duck
- 1.8 Frank Iero
- 1.9 Grace Kelly and Cher
- 1.10 Homestar Runner
- 1.11 Iron maiden
- 1.12 Krystal (Star Fox)
- 1.13 List of Konoha ninja/Naruto Uzumaki
- 1.14 Micronations
- 1.15 Mojo Jojo
- 1.16 More cowbell
- 1.17 Pwned
- 1.18 SkyOS
- 1.19 Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
- 1.20 Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
- 1.21 Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith and other Star Wars film articles
- 1.22 Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire
- 1.23 Susan Hawk
- 1.24 System of a Down
- 1.25 Triple Crown Championship
- 1.26 Underoath
- 1.27 Voyage of the Damned (Doctor Who)
- 1.28 WWE Armageddon
Fandom and fiction
Is the language being spoken Latin? Or is it Ancient? Is it Ori? Is it Ancient-based-on-Latin? Is it Latin-based-on-Ancient? Is it Ancient or Ori rendered as Latin? All of the above? No? Oh, I'm so confused…
A term created to define American anime, Amerime was deleted as a neologism, then reborn, then deleted, then reborn, then deleted, and then stuck when the software jammed. It was then deleted and reborn again, at which point it managed a sufficient rally on the AfD to survive, roughly 18 months after the original was first posted; however, it has been moved to another location.
Is this character canon? Is Dragon Ball GT canon? Who decides what is and is not canon, anyway, and is it fact or opinion to say so? An eight-hour duel between two editors culminates in nearly one hundred assorted reverts, arguments posted in edit summaries, and both parties blocked for ignoring 3RR, which brings to mind the 30+-episode battles the series is famous for (with 5+ episodes being used to launch a single attack.)
Does Liam Neeson portray Ra's al Ghul or Henri Ducard? And shouldn't that just be Ducard, since his first name isn't even mentioned in the movie? And besides, that's how he appears in the end credits, and Wikipedia really ought to respect that. But now it makes no sense that Ken Watanabe is credited as Ra's al Ghul's decoy, because nobody's been credited as Ra's al Ghul. And there's more. Christian Bale is credited as Bruce Wayne and not Batman in the rest of the Dark Knight trilogy, but as Bruce Wayne/Batman on Wikipedia, how does that make sense if Wikipedia is supposed to strictly follow the credits? And what trilogy is that even referring to? One Wikipedian wonders: "is there such a thing as the 'Dark Knight' trilogy, or is it a retroactively applied construct for marketing purposes?". Another argues: "Christopher Nolan's Batman films are grouped as a trilogy, and this is the first film in the trilogy". But is the trilogy even his to claim? In a third edit war, one anonymous editor suggests that Wikipedia take the lead in changing the ridiculous notion that the director is the most important person in the creation of a film, and that the writer should instead be the first named person in the lede. Major discussion about how and if you're even supposed to cite the lede also ensues in both of the latter edit wars. Interesting to note is that the majority of the warring to be found occurred in 2013, despite the fact that the film was released in 2005.
A certain character who appeared before in the show has his name revealed, but while shooting a video uses an alias. Is this fact relevant enough to warrant inclusion? An IP seemed to think so, and the entire issue was described as "nonsense" on the talk page. To render it even worse, the IP went on to dispute things in the article's GA review, and this very page . And no one can deny the guy is persistent: his first edit to the article was on the 3rd March 2009 and he has continued to war into May 2011. It was enough to get the article semi-protected, and once unlocked, the IP returned 3 years later to return Dr. Candle's name whenever he can. The DHARMA Initiative could start a whole experiment on this.
Should the identity of the Daedalus class battlecruiser destroyed at the end of the Stargate SG-1 season 9 episode Camelot be mentioned? The show left this as a cliffhanger for the next episode but widely available casting information and episode summaries for upcoming episodes make the answer obvious. Is such information canon? Is this a "worse" spoiler than other spoilers already present elsewhere in Wikipedia? The edit war continued in fits and starts over the entire between-season hiatus, when the season opener aired and confirmed the information.
- And then - it comes out that a new ship named Apollo would be introduced in an episode of Stargate: Atlantis to be aired several months hence, but the class of the ship is not specified - it might be a Daedalus or it might not. So a section on the Apollo is repeatedly added and removed.
Did Daffy Duck father any children? Should the events of certain animated films be taken to have occurred in "real life" while others should not? Daffy to Wikipedia: "No comment." A Barbara Walters special is reportedly in the works.
Page about a member of a rock group. This article has been subject to several long term, slow pace edit wars. One is about his height, of all things, with the number being changed several times a week. Another slow edit war is over who he is dating/engaged/married to, and whether this GF/fiance/wife is pregnant. (Considering how long this slow edit war has been going on, if she's pregnant it's one of the longest human pregnancies ever.) And a third slow edit war is over how to pronounce his name.
Grace Kelly and Cher
Edit wars over whether each is a gay icon. Sources were given for Cher's iconic status, but not for Kelly's.
Are the official facts canon, or are they part of a universe? Should we even care?
A two-week revert duel (with accompanying Talkpage debates) over whether this should redirect to the band, the torture device, or the disambig page. Is a heavy metal band more popular than a medieval torture device, or vice versa? What will be the case one hundred years from now? And what would Google do?
Revert war on over the contents of the redirect; i.e. whether it should keep the original text or only have the redirect link. The text advocate repeatedly attempts to cite the character's popularity, although, oddly enough, nobody bothers to assist him. Despite the slow speed of the edit war never surpassing the limits imposed by the 3RR, the page is permanently protected anyway. 
When a character casually notes that Naruto Uzumaki is just like his father immediately after noting that Naruto was also just like another prominent character, does that imply that Naruto's previously unmentioned father is that prominent character? Featured revert summaries like "I hope they DAMN WELL ban you!". The battle of interpreters was so intense that two articles needed full protection in order to move the battlefield to various talk pages.
Two self-proclaimed leaders of micronations in a lengthy revert war in this and other articles about the comparative value and notability of their made-up countries. 
A long running revert war that began in June 2004 and continued into August 2005 over whether categorizing a mad scientist — whose goals are to destroy The Powerpuff Girls, crush their hometown, and conquer the world — under Category:Villains violates NPOV. Fortunately, the category has since been moved and deleted.
A single SNL skit generates a remarkable volume of strong feelings among Wikipedians, with a particularly lengthy debate over whether an animated GIF of the skit in question is too irritating for inclusion.
Slang term which originated from a typo displayed on a computer screen during online multiplayer video gaming (video game player meant to type owned) and is now the subject of heated debate as to its actual meaning. Does it mean to reduce your opponent to such a state that no actual words exist to express your dominance over them? Does it mean you possess "ownage" over them? Or does it mean to soundly defeat an opponent? Also, who invented it? What is the correct verbal pronunciation of it? What is its phonetic spelling? is it "powned", "pooned", "poughned", or something else? All these are the subject to serious and heated debates in academic style language mixed in with vandals who type in ALLCAPS, curse like sailors, and call everybody n00bs.
Fast & furious kindergarten catfight with accusations of GPL violations, advertising, lying and fanboyism.
Are Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader considered one character or two separate ones? Do they deserve separate listings in the "credits" section? This seemingly trivial disagreement degenerates into a full-fledged revert war, complete with allegations of vandalism, 3RR violations, aggressive edit summaries and a week long page-protection.
Site of an edit war over whether Ian McDiarmid should be included in the credits or not for his role in the Special Edition version.
Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith and other Star Wars film articles
Revert wars over whether or not the credit list should duplicate the official credits at the end of the film, or be edited by Wikipedians to include uncredited roles. Both sides of the war seem to feel they have the weight of policy on their side, but no one actually points to policies. Thankfully this seems to have eventually resolved itself, with an "official credits" section, and notes made afterward about uncredited roles.
Does the fact that this is not a film preclude it from being categorized as a Star Wars film? Many reverts a day.
Was she in Survivor: Pulau Tiga or Survivor: Borneo? Considering both were in heavy use, one really shouldn't have precedence over the other (although Pulau Tiga was the term used for years before Jeff Probst introduced the term Borneo for the first season); in any case, the edit war between the older term and the newer term has gone on for months.
Are they alternative metal, or should they be on the List of Nu metal musical groups? See the "mature" arguments at the talk page, such as YES, THEY ARE NU METAL, OK! And you know it, don't you?! This band also spawned a few more lame edit wars regarding two of its albums.
Debate rages over whether the WWE United States Championship is included as criteria for becoming a WWE Triple Crown Champion. Edits for and against the inclusion of the title leads to several reverts, many angry people, and one fairly active user retiring due to the edits (he later returns on a semi-active status). Eventually the US Title was given its own section separate from the main list, though the debate is still going on. A similar case is made for the ECW World Championship, but due to its newness in the WWE, it is generally agreed on that it does not count. It's a prestigious title anyways, let's put it that way.
The day I felt old is when I saw an edit war regarding music genres I'd never even heard of. Debate continues to rage over whether to classify Underoath as "Screamo," "Metalcore," "Christian Metalcore," "Screamcore," etc. etc., etc.
Do we need a citation next to David Tennant's name in a cast list, as evidence that he's in the next episode of the show in which he's currently starring? At least one editor thinks so, despite Tennant's appearance in the previous episode's cliffhanger and in BBC news stories about the upcoming episode, one of which is cited in the next line of the article. To be fair, though, the editor has precedent on his side. The character Tennant plays, the Doctor, changed actors between episodes once in 1987 and again in 2005, and was entirely absent from one episode of the series...back in 1965.
A lame edit war erupted at the page for the then not-yet-aired WWE pay-per-view event over whether the match between The Undertaker and Mr. Kennedy should be listed second or third. The official website for the event had the match listed third, but since the "order is unimportant", others continued to make it the second listed match. The ensuing argument led to the page being protected from all edits and spilled into the talk page, the page for the following pay-per-view and even the Wikiproject Wrestling page.