Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive248

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Noticeboard archives

Contents

User:Preator1 reported by User:Eflatmajor7th (Result: Protected)[edit]

Page: Ivory tower (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Preator1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [5]

Comments:
I didn't put anything for the diff of edit warring because I don't understand what goes there; the individual diffs seem to make the point. I have received zero communication from this user regarding a paragraph that I don't think belongs in the article, and they have not responded to my comment on the talk page.

Eflatmajor7th (talk) 02:33, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – there appears to be a content dispute on the page. Consider dispute resolution. And please read the instructions at the top of this page as well as WP:3RR, the bright-line threshold was not crossed, although there is definitely Edit Warring going on. Work it out on the talk page of the article. Dreadstar 04:21, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I see the template I should have put on the user's talk page now. And thanks for protecting the article. Eflatmajor7th (talk) 07:10, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

The article is entitled the Ivory Tower. The paragraph I added simply makes a short description of the Ivory Tower as it appears in the book, The NeverEnding Story. This is a very famous book. In the article itself the term Ivory Tower is a phrase used to describe imagination. In the book the Ivory Tower is the capital city of Fantasia, the land of human imagination. Other articles allow for sections that describe items as they appear in popular culture, why would this reference not be allowed? --Preator1 (talk) 22:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

User:24.47.68.71 reported by User:Black Yoshi (Result: IP blocked for 1 week)[edit]

Page: List of Code Lyoko episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 24.47.68.71 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [6]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [7]
  2. [8]
  3. [9]
  4. [10]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [11] (which the IP then blanked)

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

Comments:

User is harassing me in the edit summaries. I know I've been warned for edit warring in the past, I just want it to stop. Black Yoshi (Yoshi! | Yoshi's Eggs) 20:20, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 1 week. Less for the edit warring itself than for the general disruption. Huon (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Michael josh reported by User:Aspects (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: TNA Bound for Glory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Slammiversary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
TNA Lockdown (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
TNA Sacrifice (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) User being reported: Michael josh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous TNA Bound for Glory version reverted to: [12] Previous Slammiversary version reverted to: [13] Previous TNA Lockdown version reverted to: [14] Previous TNA Sacrifice version reverted to: [15]

Diffs of the user's reverts: TNA Bound for Glory

  1. [16] 20 May 2014
  2. [17] 27 May 2014
  3. [18] 2 June 2014
  4. [19] 8 June 2014
  5. [20] 8 June 2014

Slammiversary

  1. [21] 15 May 2014
  2. [22] 27 May 2014
  3. [23] 2 June 2014
  4. [24] 8 June 2014
  5. [25] 8 June 2014

TNA Lockdown

  1. [26] 27 May 2014
  2. [27] 2 June 2014
  3. [28] 8 June 2014

TNA Sacrifice

  1. [29] 27 May 2014
  2. [30] 2 June 2014
  3. [31] 9 June 2014

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

  1. [32] Level 1, 28 May 2014
  2. [33] Level 2, 28 May 2014
  3. [34] Level 4, 6 June 2014

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: Michael josh keeps removing infoboxes from various wrestling articles without any edit summaries, messages on any of the articles' talk pages and does not respond to warnings left on their talk page. Michael josh was also given a level 4 vandalism warning on 8 June 2014, [35]. Aspects (talk) 06:45, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 3 days. EdJohnston (talk) 01:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:J05HYYY reported by User:Walter Görlitz (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
Firefox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
J05HYYY (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 19:32, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Standards */ discussion concluded, bringing up edit."
  2. Consecutive edits made from 22:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC) to 22:51, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
    1. 22:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Standards */ how to turn off safe browsing"
    2. 22:51, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Standards */ link"
  3. 23:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Standards */ please discuss properly in talk before removing."
  4. [36]

+ three yesterday

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 19:46, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* June 2014 */ follow-up"
  2. 22:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "More disruptive"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 17:15, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Google Cookies */ Reply. I would like to hear the removing editor's opinion though."
  2. 19:50, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Google Cookies */ Reply"
  3. 22:22, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Google Cookies */ Reply"
  4. 22:43, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Google Cookies */ Sure"
  5. 04:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Safe Browsing API */ That would be finr"
  6. 22:24, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Safe Browsing API */ Reply"
  7. 22:38, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Safe Browsing API */ Duh"
  8. 23:04, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Safe Browsing API */ Mu"
Comments:

Anon edit made by 86.152.89.167 is clearly the same editor. The editor has decided that "the world needs to know" this conspiracy theory and refuses to take the advice of other editors that the material is not reliable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:21, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

If you look at the edits, you will find that Walter has made the same amount of edits as me, if not more. Eventually a compromise edit was reached, where both Walter and I agreed that the user should be informed about how to turn of safe browsing. J05HYYY (talk) 00:38, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 31 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Cwobeel reported by User:NazariyKaminski (Result: No violation)[edit]

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


Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. 13:47, 12 June 14 diff
  2. 14:08, 12 June 14 diff
  3. 14:41, 12 June 14 diff
  4. 15:30, 12 June 14 diff

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 3RR warning

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User:Cwobeel calling people that disagree with him "lazy" on the talk page

Comments:

User:Cwobeel simply reverts edits and makes no attempt to work out differences. He then calls those who disagrees with his reverts "lazy" and "childish", which of course if very mature of him.--NK (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Arrived at that article while patrolling WP:BLP/N. Granted, that article has experienced intensive editing over the last few days, including many edits and reverts by NazariyKaminski, but nothing out of the extraordinary. Now that we have arrived at a compromise on that particular edit, this report seems to seek punishment, which is unwarranted. Cwobeel (talk) 16:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Please note that I did not call anyone lazy. I asserted that it is lazy to use full quotes when as editors we are capable of summarizing quotes by paraphrasing. Also, NazariyKaminski never engaged in a discussion on the subject, I started a thread, but he did not engage. Cwobeel (talk) 16:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
See also Talk:Dave_Brat. NazariyKaminski has not engaged even once in any of the discussions on that article as other editors and myself have done. Cwobeel (talk) 19:06, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Result: No violation. The diffs provided don't show four reverts. The last diff seems to be a copy edit. Cwobeel did in fact give up on reinserting the 'holocaust' language to which you objected. I share your concern about the 'holocaust' wording. EdJohnston (talk) 02:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Mdpoly5 and User:Leevank reported by User:Amortias (Result: Protected)[edit]

Page: Michael U. Gisriel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Users being reported: Mdpoly5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) and Leevank (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [37]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [38]
  2. [39]
  3. [40]
  4. [41]
  • And another 62 reverts at the time of posting this

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Warned by other user

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

Comments:

User:Sudhir7777 reported by User:NeilN (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
India (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Sudhir7777 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 20:49, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "india membership at UNSC & at different groups"
  2. 01:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  3. Consecutive edits made from 02:58, 12 June 2014 (UTC) to 03:04, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
    1. 02:58, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "i added the different groups to which india belongs like brics , g20 etc"
    2. 03:04, 12 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  4. 09:59, 13 June 2014 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 03:07, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on India. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 14:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Changes to lede */"
Comments:

While not WP:3RR in 24 hours, user is edit warring on a WP:FA. This is typical of the user's editing history - make the same edits again and again when there is clear consensus against them. In the past, he's resorted to sock puppetry when warned for WP:3RR. Now, he just waits until 24 hours are up. NeilN talk to me 10:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of one month. In addition to the edit warring in more than one article, the user has committed several copyright violations (his English is very poor, so he often copies the text directly from the source), and his edits are disruptively biased in favor of India.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Graniole reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: blocked indefintely)[edit]

Page
Systems of inheritance among various peoples (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Graniole (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 07:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612734558 by Sam Sailor (talk) Not helping any other user, just adding minor data"
  2. 05:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612713479 by 151.228.106.6 (talk)"
  3. 21:41, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612672501 by NQ (talk)"
  4. 18:15, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612470533 by NQ (talk)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

[3RR-warning]


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Repeatedly making edits without consensus, being reverted by different editors each time. Even continuing with the edit warring after being given a stern warning by Bishonen. Thomas.W talk 10:27, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

I talked to some other users, like NQ and Sam Sailor, and they let me introduce my edit. Seriously, I don't know why making an slight edit to an article is such a serious issue. Graniole (talk) 10:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Symbol opinion vote.svg Comment: My reply to your post on my talk page certainly was in no way meant to be understood as an acceptance. The fact that I reverted you in the first place should also indicate that. Sam Sailor Sing 11:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC) (please WP:PING when replying)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Nikkimaria (talk) 11:47, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Horst-schlaemma reported by User:Mostlyoksorta (Result: Article protected)[edit]

Page
Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Horst-schlaemma (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. Consecutive edits made from 11:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC) to 11:22, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
    1. 11:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Weimar Republic and the Third Reich */ No consensus for the former photo."
    2. 11:22, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Economy */ ECB picture, better quality image."
  2. Consecutive edits made from 12:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC) to 14:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
    1. 12:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Weimar Republic and the Third Reich */ We're not changing sensible content like that without consent. Revert again and you're getting reported. See talk page. Thanks."
    2. 14:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* top */ more purposeful map"
  3. 19:19, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Weimar Republic and the Third Reich */ Nothing will be changed here before the discussion didn't come to an end. Stop the EW or I'll report."
  4. 23:09, 12 June 2014 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Catflap08 (talk) to last revision by Horst-schlaemma. (TW)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 01:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Germany. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

I am uninvolved in this debate, but I see a pattern of disruptive editing, POV pushing, and edit warring by this user here Mostlyoksorta (talk) 01:58, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

This is a coordinated attack on Horst-schlaemma: [42]--82.113.121.228 (talk) 05:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I have no connection to Horst or to any other user 'attacking' him. The Three Revert Rule was clearly broken, he engaged in edit warring and I reported him because I saw that it was disruptive to the talk going on the Germany talk page. I have no connection to the users who have different views than Horst and I have no opinion at the moment about the argument in question. I only believe that Horst was disruptive and clearly engaged in a violation of the 3RR and was edit warring. Please do not accuse me of a coordinated attack unless there is any proof. This case is simple 3RR was violated. (Mostlyoksorta (talk) 08:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC))
We see several attempts at pushing through a POV here before the discussion is settled and a common ground is found. The reverts thus were inevitable to protect this vital article. Perhaps the page should be protected for a few days or the relevant users blocked, as it'll probably happen again. They clearly are on a raid. It's beyond comprehension. Thanks and all the best, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:15, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I will not get sucked into an edit war with Horst because, like I said, I have no opinion on this. However, he reverted the photo AGAIN, without consensus on the talk page. I am not sure what relevant users he wants blocked, since it seems like he is the only one in violation of 3RR and has used highly disruptive techniques and language, see [43]. (Mostlyoksorta (talk) 10:38, 13 June 2014 (UTC))
These people are on a mission to rail down the article. The picture was at first ADDED without consensus and we have an ongoing vote. Still it's getting re-established without the issue being settled. That's not how it should be done. Obviously the mission is damaging this Feature-Class article. It's not in line with the FA consensus there. So of course I'll keep reverting, even if it's against the 3RR. Admins were asked to step in but didn't react so far. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 10:51, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Horst-schlaemma, that is fine, like I said I won't argue with you. I am in fact curious how Wikipedia will enforce it's 'bright line rule.' I think the rule speaks for itself and allowing the knowing continuous open violation of such a rule sets a very dangerous precedent. Whether or not you win the content dispute Wikipedia has a framework in which all users should work - this framework demands civility and has a hard and fast rule that edit warring in violation of the 3RR is not an acceptable means of working through content disputes. Frankly, I am disappointed by the administrator's inaction not because I care about the content dispute, but because I want to see a fair and consistent application of Wikipedia rules. I think the rules are sadly not being applied consistently. (Mostlyoksorta (talk) 11:00, 13 June 2014 (UTC))
I agree with you. I hope the issue gets resolved asap. All the best, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:25, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Result: Protected 5 days. This can be lifted if consensus is reached on the talk page about including the picture of Buchenwald victims. You could ask at WP:AN for someone to close the discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

It would be useful if the Berlin in ruins picture is also taken out of the article. I am a German national, but if the Buchenwald picture is taken out of the article instead of a Berlin in ruins picture it disturbs me BIG TIME. In my books the Admins moves are recently supportive of Holocaust denial – this is disturbing to say the least. I would also support calls to block User:Horst-schlaemma on editing the article on Germany --Catflap08 (talk) 14:30, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate Mostlyoksorta and EdJohnston actions to prevent further editing on the page. I also think that consensus would be reached a lot more easily if User:Horst-schlaemma was asked to sit this discussion out. He has repeatedly reverted, stonewalled the conversation, and threatened other editors. He appears to be disrupting the conversation so that he can keep the article the way it is, which is probably, in large part, the way he wrote it.Monopoly31121993 (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
First, everyone needs to calm down and have a cool drink or two. Enjoy your weekend, leave the article alone, go out and have fun. Then come back and think again if causing all this fuss is such a good idea. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 18:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

I do not need a weekend to fell sick and disgusted actually--Catflap08 (talk) 19:36, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:108.84.26.45 reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
2014 Jinnah International Airport attack (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
108.84.26.45 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 22:22, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612819670 by Dr.K. (talk)"
  2. 20:16, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612803802 by Anir1uph (talk)"
  3. 16:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612786083 by Devbolt (talk)"
  4. 03:44, 13 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  5. 02:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  6. 21:40, 12 June 2014 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 22:14, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on 2014 Jinnah International Airport attack. (TWTW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Continuous edit-warring adding POV material in the lead in Wikipedia's voice. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 22:25, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:47, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Edmondhills reported by User:Jyoti.mickey (Result: Protected)[edit]

Page: Pune techie murder case (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Edmondhills (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: link

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 3RR warning

Link of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

  1. [44]
  2. [45]
  3. [46]

Comments:
For me, I voluntarily commit that I will not edit for 48h starting now. He removed the edit warring notice on his talk page also. Aside: He also nominated two articles I edited recently for afd here: 1, 2. He has made no attempts to discuss or to clearly provide the policy for afd. He had earlier reported me in ani for a content dispute and abused another editor who participated on the discussion, I abandoned the discussion around that point. --Jyoti (talk) 09:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Result: Article protected five days. Please use the talk page to reach agreement. The steps of WP:Dispute resolution are open to you. EdJohnston (talk) 02:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
  • User:Jyoti.mickey, why didn't you notify me with {{subst:an3-notice}}? Btw, I didn't abuse any editor but asked for explanations. Your edit was not done in good faith that is why I reverted you and also took part in the discussion. Thank you. Edmondhills (talk) 13:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
I put proper template, you removed. check the diff you did abuse. You first revert and then comment, that is not WP:BRD, you should first discuss. Jyoti (talk) 02:10, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

User:5onofmyfa7her reported by User:Psychonaut (Result: 72 hours)[edit]

Page: Talimeran Ao (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 5onofmyfa7her (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [47]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [48]
  2. [49]
  3. [50]
  4. [51]
  5. [52]
  6. [53]
  7. [54]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [55] [56] [57] [58]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [59]

Comments:
This user is edit warring over his preferred spelling of the article subject's name. The naïve search-and-replace method he uses to change the spelling in the article ends up breaking image links. Unfortunately he is completely unresponsive to any attempts to communicate. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 72 hours. Warring on the name of the article subject since April 30. Other editors on the talk page have considered the naming issue but they have decided to follow the majority of the sources. User has no edits besides this article and has never used the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 04:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

User:YJAX reported by User:ViperSnake151 (Result: No action)[edit]

Page
LG G3 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
YJAX (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 17:30, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "The lead should reflect the body so there is no problem with highlighting its key features. Again, you cannot remove or modify sourced material as per WP:Verfiability. I have addressed your tone issue and added further sources."
  2. 10:30, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "Which is no reason to blank out sourced material as per WP:Verifiability."
  3. 17:07, 10 June 2014 (UTC) "reverting unexplained removal of source material"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 15:01, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Re: G3 */ new section"
  2. 15:02, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Re: G3 */"
  3. 17:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Re: G3 */"
  4. 17:57, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "/* Re: G3 */"
  5. 18:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on LG G3. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Insists on specific wording and redundant citations, attacks attempts to revise and copyedit lead by stating that per WP:V, content that is sourced must not be removed from an article (it is in fact, the opposite, as verifiability does not guarantee inclusion) ViperSnake151  Talk  18:05, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

I have never argued that WP:V guarantees inclusion. You have clearly misinterpreted this policy - You're suppose to not modify the core meaning of the source, which would constitute to violating WP:OR. You have been equally involved in edit warring, if not more, so it's an irony you're reporting me here. First you reverted by giving no explanation whatsoever and then after being challenged, claiming that the lead should not contain material from the body, when in fact the opposite is the case - The lead should reflect on the body. I have made attempts to reach a consensus by addressing your concern with regards to the tone and added further sources, yet other than engaging in a pointless edit war, you do not seem very constructive at all. See User:ViperSnake151's edit warring diffs:

YJAX (talk) 18:23, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

No no no, I said the lead must summarize from the body, and that unless its contentious or something, you usually do not have to recite things in the lead if they are cited in the body. And I also do not think that edits made to continue one after a revert count as a "revert" per se. And how did I modify the core meaning? Is it OR not to refer to the ahem laser autofocus as laser autofocus? ViperSnake151  Talk  18:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
It's surprising how contradicting you are. All you did was basically repeat what I said, so you obviously agree that the "lead must summarize from the body" as you claim. Since the qHD screen and laser autofocus are two major features from the body, you basically agree that there is no problem with summarizing them on the lead. In fact, you even state that we don't even need to recite them, when in fact, you started the edit war through claiming that there was no source on the qHD part. You seem to change your stand by the minute. It is OR if you change the core meaning - You removed the "laser" part and instead replaced it with the term "infrared", which is a blatant example of OR. You're not the inventor of this product. YJAX (talk) 17:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Result: No action. There have been no reverts by YJAX since 11 June, no actual 3RR violation and no discussion on the talk page. If the war restarts, make a new report. EdJohnston (talk) 04:58, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

User:76.122.113.49 reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: Semi-protected)[edit]

Page
2014 Jinnah International Airport attack (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
76.122.113.49 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 17:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC) Undid revision 612915301 by Dr.K. (talk)
  2. 17:47, 14 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  3. 17:36, 14 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  4. 19:27, 12 June 2014 (UTC) ""
  5. 17:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 17:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on 2014 Jinnah International Airport attack. (TWTW)"
  2. 17:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC) "IPsock"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Block evasion. This IP continues edit-warring started by 108.84.26.45 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Both IPs geolocate in Georgia and IP 108.84.26.45 was blocked yesterday due to violation of 3RR. Article documents a current event and the sock IPs keep adding a POV political edit at the lead. IP sock 76.122.113.49 is also blanking details about a letter from the Indian Prime Minister to his Pakistani counterpart. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 17:54, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected (semi) for one week.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Qizilbash123 reported by User:Binksternet (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Iran (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Qizilbash123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [65]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [66] 16:52, June 13, 2014. Removed text and photo of women protesting.
  2. [67] 18:46, June 13, 2014. Removed text and photo of women protesting.
  3. [68] 14:16, June 14, 2014. Removed text and photo of women protesting.
  4. [69] 15:40, June 14, 2014. Removed text and photo of women protesting.
  5. [70] 16:28, June 14, 2014. Removed text and photo of women protesting, calling the previous change "vandalism".

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [71] 15:47, June 14, 2014

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [72] (See Talk:Iran#Photo_wars and Talk:Iran#The_Protest_of_Iranian_Women_Against_the_New_Rules.)

Comments:

Qizilbash123 has a legitimate complaint that the article has recently been given too many photos. However, the photo of thousands of women protesting in 1979 is very relevant to Iran, and is of great interest to English language readers. Qizilbash123 has been warring to remove the photo, calling my most recent careful reworking of the article text "vandalism". He has been warned three times against edit-warring in the past two weeks, so my warning after his 4 reverts should have been heeded. However, he continued to revert a 5th time after the warning. He is not acting in a rational manner, thus the wiki should be protected from disruption. Binksternet (talk) 16:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Binksternet, have you check page history regarding to controversy and previous edit war? When I removed it I put explanation here: Talk:Iran#Photo wars. First one who opposed my edits was User:LouisAragon who started ad hominem attacks against me, and later he was proved as some long-term abusive sock. Photo was also forced by User:Soroush90gh who inserted it without discussion months ago, person who repeatedly engage in edit wars without leaving any constructive comments on talk page. User:Arvid Qasemy has also very similar behavior: periodic editing, mostly relating to photos of dubious copyright, and presistent WP:BIGOTRY (avoiding discussions and engaging in edit wars). Could be even the same person, I don't know. But I'm not only one here who disagree with them/him, for example User:SSZ reverted the same content also, and some other IPs (not mine) complained on talk page for undue weight. --Qizilbash123 (talk) 17:25, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 31 hours. EdJohnston invited Qizilbash123 to make an "appropriate promise" regarding their breach of WP:3RR and their future conduct. I would hardly call the comment above such a promise.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
    • EdJohnston suggested I look at this given I'd commented on a prior ANI thread concerning this exact same problem. While I see it's already been handled, I would concur with the outcome given Qizilbash123's behavior and comments; pushing the blame on people like LouisAragon, regardless of whether he is a sock, is not addressing the actual problem here, which is the edit warring. I had said I'd support temporary page protection in the prior ANI thread as a means of forcing discussion to occur. Since that time, there has been discussion... and at the very least it seems clear there's no consensus to remove it. While more discussion would be helpful, Qizilbash123's claiming there's consensus to remove it is a fairly bad misunderstanding at best. As such, temporarily blocking Qizilbash123 is a good, preventive means of cutting the edit war off at the knees. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Mehmed the Conqueror reported by User:EtienneDolet (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Turkey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mehmed the Conqueror (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [73]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [74]
  2. [75]
  3. [76]
  4. [77]
  5. [78]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [79]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [80]

Comments:

(Comment from uninvolved editor) There has been no discussion of the issue on the talk page (the diff above is repeat of the 3RR warning). Also, reporter has failed to notify reportee with {{an3-notice}}. No 3RR violation since only 3 reverts on 14 June and the others are from 12 June – edit warring though. Peaceworld111 has added the info as many times as Mehmed the Conqueror has removed it (but EtienneDolet only gave 3RR warning to Mehmed) – no other editors involved. ~ Kirin13 (talk) 05:24, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of one day This is a clear case of edit warring after being warned to stop (warning followed by a revert) Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 07:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Andreas11213 reported by Alans1977 (talk) (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Tony Abbott (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Andreas11213 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Time reported: 08:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

  1. 00:55, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612831897 by Alans1977 (talk) They don't need to, it looks better just as the Liberal Party, if he is the PM of Australia it's obvious it's the Liberal Party of Australia")
  2. 06:44, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612961206 by Timeshift9 (talk) Cool, I don't see any consensus for the change Alans1977 wants to make")
  3. 06:47, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612980006 by Timeshift9 (talk) What do you mean no thanks? I always have to gain consensus to make a change, so should Alans1977")
  4. 06:55, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612980399 by Timeshift9 (talk) You're the one trying to make a change, I'm pretty sure you're the one who needs consensus")

Alans1977 (talk) 08:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:ScotXW reported by User:Czarkoff (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
GNOME Shell (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
ScotXW (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 08:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC) "do not worry; I am used to that"
  2. 12:17, 14 June 2014 (UTC) "Undid revision 612876817 by Czarkoff (talk) I am BOLD; I presented ARGUMENTs, which you did not"
  3. 10:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC) "contrast to KDE Plasma Workspaces Aaron Seigo wrote quite extensively about the different approaches"

More, albeit at slower rate, can be found in article's history.

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

I did not warn him, but Aoidh did.

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 22:01, 13 June 2014 (UTC) "GNOME Shell#Diagrams"
Comments:

The discussion at Talk:GNOME Shell#Diagrams is lasting since October 2013, and ScotXW simply ignores everyone. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talktrack) 09:30, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

The discussion on the talk page seems to indicate a pretty clear consensus against ScotXW adding his images to the article, and has been slow edit-warring to include these images for a few months now. Diffs showing this are [81][82][83][84], and these aren't even counting the three diffs above Czarkoff gave above in the initial report, so that's at least seven reverts on this one article alone regarding these images. ScotXW has also started using inappropriate personal attacks ("and you are, obviously too stupid to present arguments...") in addition to the edit-warring shown in the diffs. - Aoidh (talk) 09:50, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:03, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Timeshift9 reported by Alans1977 (talk) (Result: No action)[edit]

Page: Tony Abbott (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Timeshift9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Time reported: 09:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC

  1. 02:08, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612955274 by Andreas11213 (talk) WP:BRD")
  2. 06:45, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612979910 by Andreas11213 (talk) no thanks")
  3. 06:52, 15 June 2014 (edit summary: "Undid revision 612980090 by Andreas11213 (talk) rubbish, you've been trying to change these for ages and have been reverted by multiple users. GET CONSENSUS.")

Alans1977 (talk) 09:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Timeshift accurately points out that the attempted edit has not gained consensus, nor has it even been mentioned on the talk page. This is not even a technical vio, and it is yet another attempt by Alans1977 to circumvent the BRD process. If Alans1977 continues to edit-war on this, I'm happy to stand by Timeshift in support of due wikiprocess. Those wishing to make a controversial edit should make their case on the talk page. --Pete (talk) 10:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I am not edit warring on this issue. I am pointing out that Timeshift has violated the three revert rule. Alans1977 (talk) 10:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

4 reverts are required to break 3rr. Timeshift (talk) 10:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

My mistake. I thought that 3 reverts violated the rule. Withdraw my submission if that is the case. Alans1977 (talk) 10:57, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm calling gammon on that. Just a couple of sections previously, you successfully reported User:Andreas11213 for a 3RR vio with four reverts. [85] You know the procedure. --Pete (talk) 11:04, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
The procedure as far as I am aware is 3 referts. I chose to put Timeshift up after I saw no action on him as well. Alans1977 (talk) 11:09, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Furthermore, may I draw the attention of any admin to this and this and this and this. Alans1977 is no stranger to 3RR procedure. --Pete (talk) 11:13, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
So you attempt to excuse behavior because of edit changes made by other people?Alans1977 (talk) 11:17, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Again I suggest you read and comprehend. You have multiple appearances on this noticeboard for 4 reverts or more. You have reported other editors for 4 reverts. Your claim that you don't know the rules is hard to accept, given your long and repetitious history here. --Pete (talk) 11:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Once again, are you trying to excuse the behaviors of others on the past behaviors of people not under current conversation? For the record I thought that a violation of the 3RR is a the third revert not the 4th revert. Why are you trying to deflect behavior?Alans1977 (talk) 11:31, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined. As others have pointed out, four reverts are required to breach 3RR. On that basis, the reporter has "withdrawn" the report. I should add a couple of things. First, I agree with the other users that given the many reports Alans1977 has filed on this board, he should know the policy. If he doesn't, he shouldn't report here. Second, the article is now subject to a WP:1RR restriction, so editors should be careful.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:13, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Jalapenos do exist reported by User:Dlv999 (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: 2014 kidnapping of Israeli teens (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Jalapenos do exist (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: For diff 1: [86] For diff 2: [87]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [88]
  2. [89]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [90] Diff of official ARBIA sanction warning: [91] Diff of previous warning for edit warring in violation of 1rr sanctions in ARBPIA related articles: [92]


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [93]

Comments:

As documented above the editor has been officially notified of the ARBPIA sanctions and previously been warned about edit warring in violation of the 1rr restrictions in Isreal-Palestine related articles. The diffs above show two clear reverts of other editors within 24 hours. I gave the editor the option to self revert but he declined. In light of previous warnings, refusal to self revert and that in my view the editor's pattern of edits at the article in question is not consistent with WP:NPOV (promoting only one specific POV while deleting sourced material that document other significant published viewpoints) I think sanctions are appropriate. Dlv999 (talk) 15:40, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 31 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Omar-toons reported by 2.28.240.160 (Result: Blocked; semi-protected)[edit]

Page: Pan-Arab colors (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Omar-toons (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Diffs of the user's reverts:

Omar-toons edit warring is characterised by a combination of complete reverts, complete reverts plus new contentious edits, complete rejection of previously existing text or any linguistic improvements to intro text.

  1. [94]
  2. [95]
  3. [96]
  4. [97]
  5. [98]
  6. [99]
  7. [100]
  8. [101]
  9. [102]
  10. [103]
  11. [104]
  12. [105]
  13. [106]
  14. [107]
  15. [108]
  16. [109]
  17. [110]
  18. [111]
  19. [112]
  20. [113]
  21. [114]
  22. [115]


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


Comments:

As Omar-toons' almost two dozen reverts demonstrate, he has adopted a very aggressive, bad faith and confrontational approach in an effort to force through his own edits in the absence of consensus. He rejects overtures to take the issues to Talk, and instead responds with false accusations of sock puppetry (without offering any evidence). After his edit warring was referred to as vandalism, he used that same term to refer to others who were attempting to conserve the existing text.

Page protection was requested yesterday (both for and against Omar-toons), however, Callanecc directed the issue to this noticeboard. The details for the page protection requests (which explain the substance of the problem) are below: 2.28.240.160 (talk) 11:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Note. Removed those details.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:40, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I've left a note at Omar-Toons's talk page. As I stated in my note, I'm inclined to semi-protect the page (too many different IPs to sanction) and block Omar-Toons for edit warring. I'd like to hear from him why he believes he should not be sanctioned.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Bbb23, thank you for your involvement, the substance of which I have noted. If you need any further information from me I will be happy to provide it. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Your latest revert was unwelcome.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:51, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Bbb23, thank you but I have NOT performed ANY edits (reverts or otherwise) to Pan-Arab colors since yesterday. User 78.149.26.4 is NOT me. As mentioned in the page protection comments, a simple geographical confirmation of IP addresses will demonstrate this. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 14:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't accept that. All of the IPs geolocate to England. Some geolocate to different spots in England, but geolocate is not reliable enough to eliminate the possibility - in this case probability - that the same person is using different IP addresses to edit the article. The coincidence is too stark. You certainly have edited using the same range of IPs, e.g., 2.28.240.152. If you prefer me to think of you as a different individual, then you have no excuse for your edit warring and should be separately blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
With the greatest of respect, the United Kingdom has a population of some 60 million, so the fact that numerous IP addresses within the UK are being used to contribute to the Pan-Arab colors page is not in any way suggestive of it being one and the same person. Moreover, you will find that most of the IP addresses active on the same day as each other from within the UK are separated by significant distances, sometimes even several hundred miles of one another, including the following localities: Sheffield, North East Derbyshire district, Chesterfield, Northampton and London. The last edit, for example, made by User 78.149.26.4, shows as being from London. My location (as confirmed by my IP address) is a minimum of three hours driving distance from London. I invite you to look at the time stamps of my contributions on Wikipedia today, and the time stamp of User 78.149.26.4, and determine whether it is possible for me to have driven to and from London within that time to make contributions from IP addresses in two wholly different parts of the UK hundreds of miles away.
I further invite you to consider what possible reason someone would have for acting in the manner that you suggest in this particular instance, as there have been no earlier edits today, so something like the 3RR is not a risk that would merit someone having to operate from a different IP address. I have never engaged in any element of sock puppetry, and as I stated in my comments yesterday, I view the use of sock puppets as a very serious breach of trust between that user and the rest of the Wikipedia community.2.28.240.160 (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Wait a minute! That's clearly a single user using different IPs to add persistently WP:OR content without using the talk page (I started two discussions to which he didn't, or refused to, participate), then aswering using the explaination that "since a fact isn't contradicted by the source, we could consider it true"... and I'm the one who is facing blocking? Thanks to manage this issue in order to protect what Wikipedia is: an encyclopedia, not a tribune for ethnic nationalism (ie: Pan-Arabism, in this case). --Omar-toons (talk) 16:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Sadly, this aggressive and confrontational response by Omar-toons is symptomatic of the approach that he takes to anyone who he disagrees with. Also, he's apparently now adding to his earlier baseless allegations with claims of "ethnic nationalism" (a very strange claim which has not been made earlier, and which he has offered no evidence for). As to the false claims of sock puppetry, as mentioned before, perhaps he would like to explain how a person can make an edit in central England and then within minutes make an edit in London (southern England). I ask again for Omar-toons to pull back from the route of edit warring and engage in measured, constructive discussion in Talk. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 16:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
I have just reached out to Omar-toons directly on his Talk page to see if we can resolve these persistent issues together in a friendly and constructive manner. I await his response. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 17:11, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Discussion started 2 weeks ago on article's talk page... too bad, you didn't paid attention, you just have undone each edit without answering or giving your opinion. Otherwise, for example, if you had take a look on article's talk page you could have seen that there's no consensus about adding Somaliland's flag and that no source is supporting its adding, but you chose to ignore the discussion. I let admins decide. :) --Omar-toons (talk) 17:21, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Yet further sad proof of Omar-toons' total unwillingness to engage with others and his insistence of forcing through his own edits no matter what. Very sad.
Contrary to his claims, I have followed all discussions. Rather it is he himself that has refused to seek consensus, refused to state his reasons for continual reverting, refused to state his objections to the longstanding intro text, refused to take a cooperative approach, and now even refused to discuss the matter at all.
I look forward to the decision of the admins. 2.28.240.160 (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Note. I don't like any of the comments, either by the IP(s) or by Omar-toons. I have therefore blocked Omar-toons for 72 hours and semi-protected the article for two weeks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:95.199.198.59 reported by User:188.74.96.138 (Result: Semi-protected)[edit]

Page: Template:Fascism sidebar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 95.199.198.59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) / 95.199.198.159 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) / 95.199.221.179 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [116]
  2. [117]
  3. [118]
  4. [119]
  5. [120]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [121]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Template_talk:Fascism sidebar#width

Comments:
the edits by me after the last listed diff were self-reverted, since I realized that engaging in the same bahaviour was not a good idea. 188.74.96.138 (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected (semi) for two weeks.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:12, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Beyond My Ken reported by User:Lugnuts (Result: No violation)[edit]

Page: Boy Meets Girl (1938 film) (