Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard

    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.

    User:Upd Edit reported by User:Ratnahastin (Result: Page protected)

    [edit]

    Page: Shahi Jama Masjid (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 14:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1261756452 by Upd Edit (talk): Rv vandalism by IP with incoherent edit summaries"
    2. 20:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1261703275 by Upd Edit (talk)"
    3. 10:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1261675169 by Ratnahastin (talk): It might be "archaic" but has been referenced by modern scholars."
    4. 19:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1261506262 by Upd Edit (talk): PLEASE DISCUSS AT THE TALK PAGE: What do you mean by better ordering? Why did you delete the additional information (documents held by the mosque-keeper, etc.) that I added?"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 10:55, 7 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    Constant edit warring with multiple editors by this user on this article since last week[1][2] . - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:40, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Reverting vandalism is exempted; the edits I reverted removed sourced content including an entire paragraph describing Anand Ram Mukhlis' account, which is not under challenge. Additionally, it misrepresented sources by adding unverifiable descriptors like "politically aligned Hindus", "just like nearest river", "skeptic protestors", etc.
    Notably, the filer is tag-teaming against me: see this (rejected) SPI report and the ongoing ANI case. Upd Edit (talk) 14:52, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You absolutely have no idea what is vandalism. Your response only proves my report. - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If removing sourced content and adding misleading descriptors without edit summaries and without any engagement at the talk-page is not vandalism, we agree to disagree. That said, the trend at this page to (1) revert edits with no/misleading edit summaries, (2) not come to the talk-page despite personalized messages at their talk-page, and (3) file complaints against me (as documented by Kautilya3) is mildly amusing. Thanks, Upd Edit (talk) 15:01, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not the kind of "obvious vandalism" exempt from the edit warring policy, and it's unlikely to be vandalism at all. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ToBeFree, are you sure about this? The editor hasn't crossed 3RR! The last revert might not "look like reverting vandalism", but the IP edit was modifying direct quotes with WP:OR. These are the kind of reverts that any of us might do. Applying a sanction for them seems like setting a bad precedent.
    Note also this comment I wrote less than 24 hours ago, and the comment below it from PhilBerger. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Kautilya3, I didn't mean to make it look as if Upd Edit's editing was the most problematic or even the only problematic one. I'm using page protection only now. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks very much. I am trying to get involved with this page as much as I can, though I am busy with other topics. I think we can sort it out. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Æ is a good character reported by User:IceWelder (Result: Declined)

    [edit]

    Page: Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Spacewar! (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Grand Theft Auto (video game) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), List of largest empires (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Animator vs. Animation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: Æ is a good character (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:


    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    This user rotates between two accounts, Æ's old account wasn't working and Ægc's friendly xbox alt, as well as at least two IPs, 2403:4800:351A:BE15:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 2001:8003:58EA:E700:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), to engage in edit warring. In the most recent example, Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing, the user added unnecessary wording, to which I disagreed. Instead of following WP:BRD, the user reinstated their edit with another account, stating only "I am not a sock. I am not a sock. Remain calm." instead of engaging in any sort of dicussion. After I referred to WP:BRD explicitly, the user's next revert, again from another account, reiterated: "Do not panic. This is still me. I am not a sock. Both of my accounts are out of action at the moment, but they are not banned. I am not a sock. I am not a sock. I am not a sock.", once again not attempting to settle the issue via a discussion.

    This is not an isolated case, however. The following examples, from the past month alone, come to mind:

    • Spacewar!: The user makes a factual error that I challenge. After one commentless revert, they are reverted by another user (Rhain), and their second revert only reads "Just get over it mate, you're probably not gonna be winning this one anyway; this is not a threat". Their following two undos claim "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the War Room!" and "Fight me. Just fight me.", only ceasing their warring when a third user intervened.
    • Grand Theft Auto (video game): The user introduced unsoucred claims and is reverted by Rhain. After they partially reinstate their edit, another user enforces WP:NOPIPE, which the user reverts without comment. After being reverted with reference to the guideline involved, the user claims "Why does everything I touch automatically devolve into an edit war? Because of you. Yeah, you. Maybe." and only stopped when I reverted them.
    • List of largest empires: I was not involved in this one, but the user went back and forth with two others, including comments like "Looks like we should prepare for war..."
    • Animator vs. Animation: Another article Rhain was involved in; the user reverts Rhain without comment three times within 13 hours, and provided no rationale even after the minor edit war ended.

    The user appears to intentionally provoke edit wars while often blaming the issue on the other user(s) involved, with individual edit summaries almost leaning into WP:NOTHERE territory, especially after the user has already been on this platform for a little over two years and will have come across the most important guidelines in this time. IceWelder [] 13:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Nelsito Maduro reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Blocked one week)

    [edit]

    Page: Khanate of Bukhara (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Nelsito Maduro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 11 July 2024 9 December 2024

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

    Comments:

    Mindlessly edit warring at Khanate of Bukhara, no edit summary whatsoever, attempting to replace a sourced map with their own unsourced, exaggerated, and likely copyrighted map. This is not the first time they've tried to disregarded WP:RS in favour of their own POV, as seen in this talk section back in July 2024 [8]. Seeing as they suddenly lost the ability to write a single word, I would consider this on the realm of WP:NOTHERE. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Beach00 reported by User:Muboshgu (Result: Blocked one week)

    [edit]

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

    User being reported: Beach00 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [9]
    2. Consecutive edits
      1. [10]
      2. [11]
      3. [12]
    3. Consecutive edits
      1. [13]
      2. [14]
    4. Consecutive edits
      1. [15]
      2. [16]
    1. Consecutive edits made from 22:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC) to 22:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
      1. 22:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC) "Updated short description"
      2. 22:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC) "activism- reverting vandalism"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    Comments:

    This user was nearly blocked for edit waring on Jon Stewart in late November, but they stopped just before violating 3RR actually they did violate 3RR, but they stopped before I could report them here. Now they returned to Jon Stewart's article and vandalized my user page. This is not a 3RR violation, but it is ongoing edit warring. I can take it to ARV if that's a better venue. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:7amzah Alblooshi reported by User:Golikom (Result: Blocked indef and page deleted)

    [edit]

    Page: Balush (tribe) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 7amzah Alblooshi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 12:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC) "I am a balushi from al dhahirah do you think you know our origins more than us? I told you about the migration it’s based on the old British documents and the origins are from zahran not al zaffa"
    2. 11:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC) "Bro balush are not descended from zaffa clan it’s just similar names, the stuff I upload are from British documents not from me"
    3. 09:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC) ""
    4. 09:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC) ""

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 12:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Balush (tribe)."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 05:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC) on User talk:7amzah Alblooshi "Warning: Three-revert rule on Bani Kaab."

    Comments:

    additionally a lot of the text being added seems to be copyvio from here - https://www.agda.ae/en/catalogue/tna/fo/1016/313/n/288

    Was also warned for edit warring by another user yesterday Golikom (talk) 12:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm that other user - we've seen huge problems generally with UAE family articles (in particular, funnily enough, Al Balushi) where users come in with the 'I'm an xxx from yyy and I know my history' OR arguments. This editor is bent particularly out of shape and I stepped back precisely because reverting (and explaining the reversions) the OR additions was getting us nowhere. So glad another editor has stepped in!!! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Blocked indefinitely and page deleted. Daniel Case (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sobek2000 reported by User:Acolex2 (Result: No violation)

    [edit]

    Page: List of ancient Egyptian royal consorts (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Sobek2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [17]
    2. [18]
    3. [19]



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

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

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

    Comments:

    User:Sobek2000 is reverting the page without completing the discussion on Talk:List of pharaohs.

    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. And they also seem to have started discussion. Daniel Case (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Page: Pirates of the Caribbean (film series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 2601:903:4000:6960:2AAA:54E:A984:6269 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 17:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1262293062 by QEnigma (talk) Again, I provided further details in the talk page. The script is the source. Please read before reverting."
    2. 17:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC) "Added with further details in talk page"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 17:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC) "General note: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Pirates of the Caribbean (film series)."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    IP user. Using 2 different IPs. Edit warring and reverting. Please refer to [22] and [23]. QEnigma (talk) 19:52, 10 December 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. Only two reverts, and let's not call them "IP hoppers" when it's clear that, like many IPv6 users, their ISP makes use of that namespace to basically assign them a particular /64 range via dynamic IP. If they do eventually break 3RR or edit war across multiple articles (a possibility suggested by the /64's contributions, all of which focus on the PotC film franchise), then we can and will block the range. Daniel Case (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]