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:94.73.32.9 reported by User:Fdom5997 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Chibcha language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 94.73.32.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: User did not use talk page. Just kept reverting

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User did not use talk page. Just kept reverting

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: User did not use talk page. Just kept reverting

Comments:

Hello Fdom5997, would you mind joining the discussions at Talk:Chibcha language? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Between us and User:94.73.32.9? Fdom5997 (talk) 21:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Fdom5997, I'm not sure who "us" refers to as you haven't edited the talk page yet. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Yeah let’s just go to the talk page. Fdom5997 (talk) 06:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello user:ToBeFree. I disagree with the blocking, I have participated in the discussion page Talk:Chibcha_language#About_Phonology to express my arguments and show that the user Fdom5997 is the one who has vandalized the article. DavidElche (talk) 08:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello DavidElche, thank you very much for describing your concerns at Talk:Chibcha language, which is exactly where a consensus about this issue needs to be found. Fdom5997 can address your concerns there. I don't believe "vandalism" (intentional damage) was involved from either side; please avoid making such accusations. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:38, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

You're right. I should have written was "altered". DavidElche (talk) 10:50, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

No it was not “vandalism”. He is deliberately mischaracterizing my intentions, and the main source I am using is Gonzàlez (2006). I am only using Saravia (2015) for extra info on the allophones. We should only have *one* section for the phonology. Not a bunch which display all different sources. Fdom5997 (talk) 01:15, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

User:KaiWoodBCB reported by User:Remsense (Result: Reporter blocked 24h)

Page: Russian Civil War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 06:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC) ""
2. 00:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 01:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing (UV 0.1.5)"
2. 01:31, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "/* May 2024 */ Reply"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Result in infobox */ Reply" — thread did not directly involve them, but was about the same subject.

Comments:

Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 24 hours Kept restoring while discussion was ongoing, and did it four times in 24 hours as opposed to twice by the reported editor. They may be right, but this is not covered by 3RRNO.

This issue is a contentious topic (infoboxes) within an article already designated as a contentious topic in the whole (ARBEE), which the article history shows Remsense to have been on about for some time. Their user talk page indicates that they are aware of all contentious topics, and they made the report, so we can presume they were fully aware of the policies and rules around edit warring. Thus they don't have any excuse for it on this article. Daniel Case (talk) 21:20, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Bolatio reported by User:BalaM314 (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: Dance in Thailand (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Vandalism, these thai nationalists be desperate... removed a book by James Rodger Brandon to add an ebook by sketchy author Hseham Amrahs (the same book that Bokator was inscribed in the Unesco in 2016 instead of 2022), lakon kbach boran isn't khmer classical dance, cherrypick the bits of Buppha Devi's inteview she proceeded to say that her grandmother removed all Thai influence to adopt the pure Khmer style. In line citations are welcomed the book's very unlikely to describe it as "sensual""
2. 16:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Vandalism, these thai nationalists be desperate... adding a book by Hseham Amrahs (sketchy author, says in the same book that Bokator was inscribed in the Unesco in 2016 instead of 2022), lakon kbach boran isn't khmer classical dance, cherrypick the bits of Buppha Devi's inteview she proceeded to say that her grandmother removed all Thai influence to adopt the pure Khmer style, wonder how would they know the dancers swinged their hips based on sculptures? In line citations are welcomed"
3. 16:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Vandalism, these thai nationalists be desperate... adding a book by Mahesh Dutt Sharma (sketchy author, says in the same book that Bokator was inscribed in the Unesco in 2016 instead of 2022), lakon kbach boran isn't khmer classical dance, cherrypick the bits of Buppha Devi's inteview she proceeded to say that her grandmother removed all Thai influence to adopte the pure Khmer style, wonder how would they know the dancers swinged their hips based on sculptures? In line citations are welcomed"
4. 10:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "reverting vandalism, thai nationalists can't just cherry pick what they like lol, there were references sorry not sorry, that's history"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Dance_in_Thailand."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Edit war with User:Quantplinus, seems to be a content dispute, edit summaries suggest this user has assumed bad faith and made personal attacks 『π』BalaM314〘talk〙 16:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Merzostin reported by User:Obsidian Soul (Result: Page protected, user partially blocked)

Page: Junk (ship) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Page: Djong (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Merzostin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [6], [7]

Diffs of the user's reverts: Junk (ship)

1. diff
2. diff
3. diff
4. diff

Djong

1. diff
2. diff
3. diff

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: diff (I guess this would count too)

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

Comments:
I am WP:INVOLVED. User's removals and reverts are based on vague claims of "disinformation", "vandalism", and "disruptive edits", of which my changes are definitely not (link, link) apparently motivated by nationalism in complete disregard to the fact that the text he is removing are sourced. He has similarly slapped a vague hoax template on the Djong article. He has engaged in a similar edit war with User:Nitekuzee in the past. OBSIDIAN†SOUL 17:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

This editors have stalked and been reverting all my edits on various pages based on intense nationalism in complete disregard to the fact that the information although reliably sourced was a disinformation, since the information was quotes about Chinese ship but used for Javanese ships, the editors also removed all the template seeking expert assitance on Djong article. Also he admitted he was mistaken about only one revert after proven wrong, but adamant about other reverts plainly because the editors have not check the sources or talk page to see the blatant disinformation Merzostin (talk) 18:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

"the information although reliably sourced was a disinformation". That does not make sense.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 18:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

you literally admitted that you were wrong about the Zhou's quote because you didn't do basic research, that quote was reliably referenced, but it didn't belong on Djong page since it was a description of Chinese ship not Javanese ship as the reference had said Merzostin (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

this user edits were obvious vandalism and wanting to present a cohesive propaganda, this user had also been blocked in the past for engaging in similar disruptive edits before Merzostin (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

sigh. -- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 18:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

El C has fully protected Junk (ship) for a week, and I have partially blocked Merzostin from continuing to dedicate a large portion of their editing towards edit warring about Djong and Junk (ship). Merzostin will need to convince others to implement changes on their behalf using {{edit partially-blocked}}, which is less likely to be successful if accusations of "vandalism" and "propaganda" are thrown around. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:04, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Tuhinsarkarproti reported by User:Rahio1234 (Result: Already indefinitely blocked)

Page: Draft:Tuhin Sarkar Proti (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Tuhinsarkarproti moved page Draft:Tuhin Sarkar Proti to Tuhin Sarkar Proti over redirect"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 07:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Final warning: Vandalism on Wikipedia:Sandbox."
2. 08:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "ONLY Warning: Vandalism (RW 16.1)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Move warring Rahio1234 08:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Editor has been indefinitely blocked by User:Seraphimblade for operating an advertising only account, so this complaint is now moot.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Headtothestripe reported by User:Wikishovel (Result: Blocked one week)

Page: Abi Carter (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 09:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision"
2. 07:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision"
3. 07:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision, it is not improper to list a city or two which is nearby. Many Wikipedia articles have this. You are difficult and uncommunictative."
4. 22:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision"
5. 22:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision"
6. 22:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision, you need consensus"
7. 22:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "STOP, make suggestions on the talk page"
8. 21:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision, please take up this topic on the talk section"
9. 21:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "please stop with the deletion of information which pertains, however you are an individual who doesn't see a connection"
10. 06:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision, setting poll"
11. 22:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision, prv."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 05:43, 06 March 2024 (UTC) "Edit warring on Abi Carter:"
2. 07:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Abi Carter."
3. 21:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Abi Carter."
4. 08:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Abi Carter."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 01:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Violation of WP:COATRACK: new section"
2. 07:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Violation of WP:COATRACK: Reply"
3. 22:02, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Violation of WP:COATRACK */ r"
4. 22:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Violation of WP:COATRACK */ r"

Comments:

Editor is a SPA created in March, and nearly all their edits have been to create Abi Carter, and then attempting to recreate it twice following AFD, to the point that it had to be protected admin-only until Carter had won the contest. Strong WP:OWNER issues, with angry posts to the user talk pages of every editor she's reverted, including mine, User:Valjean, User:Manticore, User:Philomathes2357, User:Amakuru, and User:HypeBoy. User:Valjean, I and others have been repeatedly explaining the policy reasons for our edits, but it all bounces off, and warnings about 3RR at their user talk are simply deleted without comment. At Talk:Abi Carter they pointedly refused to answer my questions about COI, and I suspect UPE about an unrelated venue they keep adding to the article, despite reverts by other editors. The account was confirmed to another user in an earlier SPI, but not blocked, on behavioural evidence. Wikishovel (talk) 09:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Nonsense! An admin has already stepped in so ANI isn't necessary. The users that Wikishovel mentions and Wikishovel, themselves are incapable supposedly of being reasonable. Let's go back to when I created the Abi Carter article... No one, of the paltry less than 8 people objecting to the article existing would engage in even slightly substantial discourse. Just as I was right at the time, same now. Further, even the helpful admin who is assisting isn't correct. Almost no one knows where Indio is and at least four of the users I have mentioned can't figure out that it is beneficial even necessary to put that into the article as EVERY news media outlet does. The things that these people argue are kind of absurd.

Very obviously Abi Carter has been a busker and she brings it up in discussions about how she became a performer. TB (Tommy Bahama) and Village StreetFest are key places. The golf course may have some relevance as either a place Carter worked or performed or something else.

Wikishovel has been a nuisance first in trying to have the Carter article redirected to Season 22 then deleting it. Ask yourself, why would they even want to edit the article now? Is this normal behavior?

Two of the editors were acting as a defacto tag team, even if they didn't realize it. Philomathes357 followed Valjean to the Carter article and performed the edit they were pushing for or making themselves. Then each of them denied it or any collusion. It still looks fishy and goes to supporting that this little band of editors isn't really improving the article. They make minor changes and create hullabaloos.

Policy is cited, let's take one example where they don't know what is really policy. As I have said Indio is not big, it's not irrational to follow the lead of other media and say it is near Palm Springs or a certain distance from LA. Amakuru is an admin; they're doing a good job in trying to solve some of the disagreements here. To repeat, there aren't many things in dispute. I am saying this tiny number of people are making a big thing out of not much and they won't even really engage in a discussion as to why they could be wrong. Is this fuss over merely three subjects? The couple of venues, the city itself, something similarly minor in addition to those? Seriously? I asked Valjean to list each change they wanted to see implemented or made in the article. Seems like a pretty average request. Then we could have talked about each one or even put up a poll. In truth these people want to be troublemakers, more than likely. Lastly we did agree on a reference system so we were making a little progress. Headtothestripe (talk) 09:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, the group of users are predisposed to not using their own talk pages and wanting all communication done on the Carter talk page. Which leans towards they don't really want to make constructive changes. I may add there is a slide in American Idol coverage overall. Very few editors cover the topic here. Notice how the number of performers on the show have fewer and fewer articles. Some people think that AI is less relevant, that doesn't explain the biases here. It's overboard. Headtothestripe (talk) 09:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 12:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Wikibear47 reported by User:Tueasy (Result: Reporter blocked)

Page: List of federal agencies of Pakistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Wikibear47 (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. [8]
2. [9]
3. [10]
4. [11]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [12]

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

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

Comments:

I suspect that @Tueasy has some personal vendetta against me. Please consider this scenario: Today first some random IP instigates an edit war unprovoked and gets banned. Than User:Tueasy comes along and reports me in both SPI and Edit warring noticeboard. Mind you that this is the second time he has reported me into SPI this week. Its almost like I have been stalked and baited. Wikibear47 (talk) 17:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked Tueasy.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Mohhamad Khalid rafsan reported by User:M S Hassan (Result: Both editors blocked 48 hours)

Page: Rudra: Boom Chik Chik Boom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mohhamad Khalid rafsan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [14]
2. [15]
3. [16]
4. [17]
5. [18]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [19]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [20]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [21]

Comments:

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 18:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Redacted II reported by User:Redraiderengineer (Result: Blocked from page for one week)

Page: Talk:SpaceX Starship flight tests (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Redacted II (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 19:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 01:00, 22 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of discussion close template (series of edits)
2. 11:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of discussion close and RfC templates and archive time (series of edits)
3. 11:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of archive time that removes RfC template (series of edits)
4. 14:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of RfC template and archive time (series of edits)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 18:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 23:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 19:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments:
Redacted II has performed four reverts within a period that slightly exceeds 24 hours in apparent violation of 3RR (outside the 24-hour period) and the spirit of the rule. Redacted II has previously been warned and blocked for edit warring on the SpaceX Starship flight tests article by ToBeFree. This is Redacted II's third report in as many months for this type of violation and ownership-asserting behavior.

Redacted II continues to "not [learn] from a block for edit-warring" regarding SpaceX Starship-related articles, and editors express concerns of civil POV pushing. (Redacted II has previously admitted to this POV on their user page.) Redraiderengineer (talk) 19:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week from page. Daniel Case (talk) 19:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Kashmiri reported by User:Pharaoh of the Wizards (Result: Declined, at ANI )

Page: Tamil genocide (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:45, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "There was nothing stable about it."
2. 18:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "Reverted edit by Dowrylauds (talk) to last version by Kashmiri"
3. 18:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "Seek consensus before re-adding this arguably incorrect wording"
4. 18:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225308392 by Dowrylauds (talk) Take it to Talk before restoring"
5. 23:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1225192263 by Kashmiri (talk): Don't re-add without discussion: material on two US legislators, material on a local authorty. Don't bump up heading level unnecessarily as it clutters the TOC. Read WP:BRD"
6. 22:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225190798 by Petextrodon (talk) Removing again per MOS:OVERSECTION"
7. 22:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1225189855 by Petextrodon (talk) you'll re-add the heading once you add content."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

• →‎Edit warring on Tamil genocide page

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. reverts by Kashmiri:

Comments:

Editing warring in Tamil genocide and removed a 3RR warning with an edit summary Bullshit. Meatpuppetry report coming Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• I agree. It was my mistake as my edits were split between two days in my timezone, on two rather intense days, and I missed the 24h clock. However, I'm also extremely concerned about the multitude of newly registered or newly active accounts suddenly coming to Tamil genocide and reverting to one specific POV version – something I've seen only once before in my 10+ years on wiki. It's very far from normal on Wikipedia and points to some sort of off-wiki coordination (meatpuppetry). This may be taken into account when judging this report. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Adding to that – a meatpuppetry report is on its way, most likely tomorrow. There's obvious meatpuppetry going on between certain editors that extends into several other Tamil-related articles and discussions. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Admins: please be warned about other related discussions at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Personal Attack by User:Kashmiri and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leed110. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 21:38, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

• Declined This is at ANI, let's keep it at one venue. Acroterion (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• Acroterion they are unrelated this is about edit warring but that report is about personal attack.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 22:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Then it's best presented there together with the ANI discussion, since the same topics are concerned. Acroterion (talk) 22:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC)