Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive286

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

Noticeboard archives

Contents

User:64.53.186.64 reported by User:TAnthony (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page
A Song of Ice and Fire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
64.53.186.64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 01:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC) ""
  2. 20:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC) ""
  3. 17:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 21:31, 22 June 2015 (UTC) "/* June 2015 */"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  • Result: Semiprotected two months. EdJohnston (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

User:William M. Connolley reported by User:Tkuvho (Result: Warned both users)[edit]

Four consecutive reverts at the page The Assayer by User:William M. Connolley within a period of less than 33 hours are first, second, third, and fourth. Recently there had been an apparent improvement and I engaged the user in discussion at the talkpage of the article here, but my overture went unanswered and there is now an additional revert here by User:William M. Connolley. It is disappointing to have an experienced editor behave in a nonconstructive fashion, particularly when this is accompanied by foul language as in this edit. I request a block of a suitable duration so as to prevent future behavior of this sort on the part of User:William M. Connolley. Tkuvho (talk) 08:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:BRD applies. The 4th revert listed above is on the 19th, which is rather a long time ago. Since I'm reverting T, he has exactly as many reverts as me, though he neglects to mention this. Actually, he has more, because he's also been reverting an anon William M. Connolley (talk) 08:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I should emphasize that User:William M. Connolley's deletion of material comes dangerously close to the category of vandalism, because the material being deleted is properly sourced. I recently added yet another source, and pointed this out at the talk page of the article. My comment went unanswered and the wholesale deletions continued. User:William M. Connolley gives no other reasons for his deletions than the cryptic comment "as before" which is not very informative. This accompanied by the foul language as in the comment left on my talkpage does not make for an effective wiki editor, William. Tkuvho (talk) 08:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Tkuvho's edits in many articles in WP come close to lunacy. He says that there is a Jesuit plot against infinitesimals, calculus, democracy, your cell phone and the like. He claims that the Egyptians of 1850 B.C. were early democrats and helped produce your cell phone. Tkuvho also says that George Berkeley was a Jesuit. The alleged "sources" used by Tkuvho are Mordechai, Amir Alexander and the like. Another alleged "source" is Redondi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.23.153.229 (talk) 09:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
The previous comment sadly illustrates what kind of allies User:William M. Connolley has in his fight against sourced materials at Galileo-related pages. Tkuvho (talk) 09:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Articles in WP about Tkuvho's "sources" are started or partly written by Tkuvho. See Raymond Rosenthal and Redondi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.125.220.140 (talk) 09:24, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
See Amir Alexander. This was started and mostly written by Tkuvho. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.125.220.140 (talk) 09:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
In response to User:William M. Connolley's reference to WP:BRD, I would like to emphasize that the "discussion" part of "BRD" has not been followed through by User:William M. Connolley, despite my attempts at dialog at the talkpage of the article. Tkuvho (talk) 09:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Tkuvho seems to be at Bar Ilan University in Israel and cannot speak or read or write in English. His effort "This accompanied.. " above is an example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.92.201.73 (talk) 09:46, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

T is once again flinging around accusations of vandalism, though last time I challenged him on this he backed off User_talk:Tkuvho#Vandalism William M. Connolley (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Repeatedly deleting carefully sourced material without any explanation is an act of vandalism. There is nothing personal here; a very ethical and decent editor can sometimes perform actions that are questionable. It is the action I protest against rather than the person, William. Tkuvho (talk) 10:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Inexplicably, Tkuvho has not written a biography of his fake source, Mordechai Feingold. At least, he has not done this in WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.154.10.14 (talk) 10:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
There is a possible COI here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.61.56.255 (talk) 10:41, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment I have semi-protected the article The Assayer. The history of that article shows a pattern of strikingly similar removal of content by William M. Connolley and half a dozen IPs. That pattern, and the appearance of multiple IPs at this discussion, suggests that maybe this should become a sockpuppet investigation rather than an edit-warring complaint. --MelanieN (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think the IPs are sockpuppets for User:William M. Connolley. They are probably sockpuppets for User:Azul411. I don't think User:William M. Connolley would stoop to that, though I have yet to understand the motive for his multiple unhelpful deletions and failure to engage in dialog at Galileo-related pages. Tkuvho (talk) 14:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Ah, that might explain it! It did seem out of character for a long-established user like William M. Connolley. However the IPs do seem to be following him around and echoing his edits. By my count, eight IPs at the article, all brand-new and quacking loudly. Then one of them plus four other brand-new IPs at this discussion. --MelanieN (talk) 15:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting wait.svg Warned Page semi-protected, both registered editors warned. NeilN talk to me 16:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

User:‎MELB1110 reported by User:Alessandro57 (Result: No violation)[edit]

Page
Armenia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
‎MELB1110 (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]
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. [5]
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

[6] and, in response to another user sharing my same opinion [7]


Comments:

This new user started edit warring after abandoning the discussion on the talk page. He is clearly POV pushing (see also these edits - [8] and [9] - about Cyprus), refusing to get the point, ignoring the lack of present consensus and going against long time consensus previously established (also in other threads in the archives) on the talk page. Alex2006 (talk) 10:14, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting x.svg No violation @Alessandro57: Given that the user has included a different source every time they insert the material, it seems this is a good-faith attempt to improve the article/add verifiable information. Even if we count his first insertion as a revert, he'd only be on his third revert now. —Darkwind (talk) 20:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks @Darkwind:! Then I will bring it to ANI, since what I wrote in my comments remains. Alex2006 (talk) 04:16, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:114.167.178.175 reported by User:Emeraude (Result: Articles semiprotected)[edit]

Also IPs User:153.230.154.119 User:153.202.187.153 and User:153.205.19.189

Page: 3ChordFold (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 114.167.178.175 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) Also using IPs User:153.230.154.119 User:153.202.187.153 and User:153.205.19.189

Previous version reverted to: [10]


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3ChordFold&type=revision&diff=667751968&oldid=667744905]
  2. [en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3ChordFold&diff=next&oldid=667756011]
  3. [en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3ChordFold&diff=next&oldid=667784656]
  4. [en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3ChordFold&diff=next&oldid=668255544]

Also pages: Flyer (album), Clock Without Hands, The Dust Bowl Symphony, The Dust Bowl Symphony, Blue Roses from the Moons Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

Comments:
This issue has been discussed on my talk page where editor admits use of multiple IPs.

The basic point at issue is whether or not I was correct to tag these articles questioning notability for music. This I did on the basis that no assertion of notabilty was given in the articles and, indeed, some are entirely unreferenced. Anon IP reverted on the basis that the albums were notable, writing "meets WP:NALBUMS criterion #1". These reverts also removed the rest of my edits when simply removing the notability tag would have been sufficient (or, better still, providing some evidence of notability into the article which is the whole point of the tag). A message was left on my talk page stating that, in their opinion, WP:NALBUMS was satisfied because "multiple, non-trivial, published works" were available. I responded that reviews alone did not establish notability.

I reverted with the comment "Reviews alone do no satisfy WP:NALBUMS". IPs then reverted with comment "meets WP:NALBUMS criterion #1", again removing all of my edits, not just the notability tag. And so it continued.

Now, it may be correct that a collection of reviews and nothing more does confer notability (that could be discussed) but that's not the point. This person, using multiple IP addresses, has repeatedly reverted legitimate edits using misleading edit rationales just to make his point, despite me pointing out on my talk page and in edit rationales that unrelated material has been wilfully deleted. I also pointed out to this person at 16:27, 20 June 2015 on my talk page that 2RR had been reached and to be careful. Emeraude (talk) 09:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Result: Several articles are now semiprotected due to the IP-hopping edit warrior. No comment on the notability issue, which ought to be decided in the usual way. EdJohnston (talk) 16:41, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:KakiTree reported by User:Smurfmeister (Result: Declined – malformed report)[edit]

User has reverted my edit to Olly Alexander three times on 22 June 2015. My edit removed irrelevant trivia and poorly souced information, namely WP:OR - interpreting social media posts to suit their viewpoint that the subject is in a relationship with Neil Milan Amin-Smith; something independent sources only describe as a rumour. KakiTree claims this was "approved by Wiki admin" but has not provided any evidence of this. KakiTree has been warned about disruptive edits to this page before on his/her talk page. S/he also seems to believe any attempts to remove unsourced content is an attempt to remove references to Alexander's sexuality, which is not true - this is something which can easily be independently, reliably sourced. An unconfirmed relationship cannot. Smurfmeister (talk) 10:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments:

  • 3RR notice issued [11]; notification of discussion [12]. Keri (talk) 10:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
I've added third-party sources for the content in question which should now prevent any potential edit warring by all involved editors. The reported user is new and inexperienced and wasn't correctly warned. Keri (talk) 12:09, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Also, the disruption seems to have stopped at least for now. —Darkwind (talk) 20:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

User:92.26.220.49 reported by User:PeterTheFourth (Result:Blocked )[edit]

Page: A Voice for Men (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 92.26.220.49 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [13]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [18]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [19]

Comments:
Just run of the mill POV edit warring. PeterTheFourth has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 11:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Acroterion (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

101.185.18.37 reported by User:76.107.171.90 (Result: Protected )[edit]

Page: Parapsychology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 101.185.18.37 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [20]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [21]
  2. [22]
  3. [23]
  4. [24]
  5. [25]
  6. [26]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [27]

Comments:
Fringe pushing at the parapsychology article. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 12:27, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

User:50jmd and User:66.192.172.132 reported by User:JoeSperrazza (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Beltway sniper attacks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 50jmd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) & 66.192.172.132 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

link to stable version: [28]

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted] diffs showing 1st introduction of non-WP:RS text: [29], [30], [31], link to that version: [32]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [33], [34], [35]
  2. [36]
  3. [37], [38]
  4. [39], [40], [41], [42]
  5. [43], [44]
  6. [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50]
  7. [51] (after being warned on both user talk pages and after article talk page section created with comments from two editors)
  8. [52] edit @50jmd: 13:44, 2015 June 24, which is well after being told of this noticeboard entry
  9. [53] another edit @50jmd: 09:23, 2015 June 25

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [54], [55] and [56]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [57], [58], [59], Article talk page section: Talk:Beltway_sniper_attacks#The_.22Exculpatory_Evidence_Exonerating_So-Called_.27DC_Snipers.22_text

Comments:
WP:SPS WP:FRINGE materiel. Editor continuing to re-add [60], even after warnings and notice of this noticeboard entry. JoeSperrazza (talk) 18:46, 24 June 2015 (UTC) JoeSperrazza (talk) 15:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Pinging @50jmd: & @66.192.172.132: regarding update, above. JoeSperrazza (talk) 19:09, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Like I noted on the talk page, I'm convinced that 50jmd and IP 66.192.172.132 are the same person. Flyer22 (talk) 02:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 1 week to User:50jmd plus semiprotection for the article. This is a war to insert fringe self-published material about the Beltway sniper attacks. EdJohnston (talk) 16:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Bryantriplex reported by User:Sundayclose (Result: 24 hours )[edit]

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


Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saoirse_Ronan&type=revision&diff=668330590&oldid=668310016

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [61]
  2. [62]
  3. [63]
  4. [64]
  5. [65]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [66] (This created user page; no diff link available)

Comments:
Bryantriplex (talk · contribs) also has begun edit warring at Anna Paquin but does not yet have four reverts.
Bastun (talk · contribs) also just made a 4th revert at Saoirse Ronan.

Sundayclose (talk) 20:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Several of my reverts were reverting where no edit summary had been left; and/or where references had been removed. I engaged on one user's talk page and at Talk:Saoirse Ronan. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 23:17, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
Bryantriplex (talk · contribs) Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours for continuing to revert after the warning. I've chosen not to block Bastun (talk · contribs) as they ceased once warned. Tiptoety talk 04:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Augenblink reported by User:Cordless Larry (Result:Blocked 1 week)[edit]

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


Previous version reverted to: [67]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [68]
  2. [69]
  3. [70]
  4. [71]
  5. [72]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [73] [74]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: discussed at length with the user on their talk page

Comments: This user continues to add unsourced material to this article, despite previous warnings and a block. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

6. 4RR [75]. Blatant WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT [76]. Continued use of misleading summaries. Keri (talk) 13:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
The editor has also previously indicated that they will continue to add the material regardless of any warnings, and evaded a ban by editing logged out. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
7. 5RR [77] Keri (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 1 Week -- GB fan 16:50, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:2601:404:8000:8166:FD38:3633:756E:CFF1 reported by User:Doniago (Result: Blocked 24 hours)[edit]

Page
Shrek Forever After (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
2601:404:8000:8166:FD38:3633:756E:CFF1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
[78]
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 19:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Critical response */"
  2. 16:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Critical response */"
  3. 15:56, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Critical response */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 16:35, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Please stop edit-warring. Discuss at Talk page."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

IP editor edit-warring at multiple film articles DonIago (talk) 19:30, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours MusikAnimal talk 19:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Tariq Fadel reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: 24 hours )[edit]

Page
Israel Defense Forces (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Tariq Fadel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 07:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 668581117 by Poliocretes (talk)"
  2. 06:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 668575527 by Amaury (talk)"
  3. 05:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 668564542 by SantiLak (talk)"
  4. 01:55, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "added relevant links"
  5. 01:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 668431127 by Poliocretes (talk)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

[79]

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Tariq Fadel is a new SPA who has been repeatedly adding undue content over the past several days, in spite of both repeated messages on their talk page and being reverted by several different users, and obviously has no intention to stop. Thomas.W talk 09:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours. Tiptoety talk 10:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
(Non-administrator comment) @Tiptoety: 149.200.129.29 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has now (at 2100 UTC) repeated the exact same edit over which Tariq Fadel was edit warring and has been blocked for 24h. I suspect the IP is being used for block evasion. Would you consider also blocking the IP? General Ization Talk 21:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 Done - Tiptoety talk 21:40, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Taoni reported by User:Mahensingha (Result: Blocked 24 hours)[edit]

Page
Rajput (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Taoni (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 17:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "for marriages Britannica is using some + for dislike of marriage the author is using many, plz avoid POV pushing and original research you did for mewar point"
  2. 12:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "please have a look upon Britannica update"
  3. 16:18, 24 June 2015 (UTC) "Britannica update, eastern Punjab + some Rajputs"
  4. 07:19, 24 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Rajput kingdoms */ Britannica update"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 14:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Rajput. (TW)"
  2. 18:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Only warning: Using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion on Rajput. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

The Talk page is full of such discussions.

Comments:

Quoting the single source and ignoring all other sources and views of other editors, the user is determined to let only the promotional contents be published. Opposing all the facts the user is consistently disrupting the page. A serious look, review and attention of the Admins is needed to resolve the issue because the user is invoking the Edit war with almost all the editors who so ever edits the page with NPOV MahenSingha (Talk) 18:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

FWIW, Taoni also had the generic sanctions warning and continued on their merry way. The account is fairly new. I'm not so sure about the experience but guess I'll have to AGF for now. Sitush (talk) 00:16, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
see me on Rajput talk page. You people had discussed nothing with me. Taoni (talk) 02:07, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours as a clear violation of WP:3RR. Additionally, a clear message was left for the editor in question advising that this is a sensitive topic area and further sanctions will be imposed on any additional disruption. —Darkwind (talk) 02:22, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Axxxion reported by User:Volunteer Marek (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page: Cold War II (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Axxxion (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. [80]
  2. [81]
  3. [82]
  4. [83]
  5. [84] (note the completely false edit summary)

One of these is a little bit out of the 24 hr range, but that's still 5 reverts in just over 24 hrs, with 4 of these within 24 hrs. Against two different editors.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [85]

User has been blocked for edit (and move) warring twice before. They know what's up.

The dispute is straight forward and I thought the edit summaries were clear. The fact that Axxion reverted any changes to the article within seconds - before it was even possible to comment on the talk page - also made this difficult. Discussion was started here.

Comments:
Could someone please check on this? Axxxion is still edit warring. Thank you for your attention. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Result: Axxxion is warned that this article is covered by the WP:ARBEE discretionary sanctions. Neither party has reverted again since 24 June so no block seems necessary. Though Axxxion's good faith is not quite evident, his talk page response on 25 June contains the type of analysis that is usually taken seriously. EdJohnston (talk) 02:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

User:MaverickLittle reported by User:SanAnMan (Result: No violation)[edit]

Page
Ivy Taylor (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
MaverickLittle (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 22:03, 25 June 2015 (UTC) to 23:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
    1. 22:03, 25 June 2015 (UTC) ""
    2. 22:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC) ""
    3. 22:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* 2015 San Antonio mayor's race */"
    4. 22:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* 2015 San Antonio mayor's race */"
    5. 23:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* 2015 San Antonio mayor's race */"
    6. 23:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* College */"
    7. 23:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Career */"
  2. Consecutive edits made from 23:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC) to 23:47, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
    1. 23:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Personal life */"
    2. 23:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* College */"
    3. 23:41, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Career */ board wk"
    4. 23:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Tenure */ award"
    5. 23:47, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Personal life */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 23:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "Notice: Not using edit summary on Ivy Taylor. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 23:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Wild, blind revert by SanAnMan (talk) borders on vandalism */"
  2. 03:20, 25 June 2015 (UTC) "/* Wild, blind revert by SanAnMan (talk) borders on vandalism */"
Comments:

User continues to make multiple revisions and edits to article without edit summaries and constantly blanks out any warnings issued to him by multiple parties. SanAnMan (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Comment Your characterization of the three-revert rule on the article's talk page is not correct; any sequence of consecutive edits counts together as one revert. Further, it only counts as a revert if it undoes, in whole or in part, the work of other editors. Pure additions do not count as a revert (at least, not the first time). —Darkwind (talk) 02:32, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting x.svg No violation. The behavior on this page does not appear to be edit warring per se. If you believe that MaverickLittle (t c) is editing disruptively, you'll need to file a report at a different noticeboard such as WP:ANI. The only editing behavior analyzed here is reversion/edit warring. —Darkwind (talk) 02:39, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Mabelina reported by User:Brianann MacAmhlaidh (Result: Blocked 72 hours)[edit]

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

The talkpage discussion is: Talk:David_Cameron#Kinship_issues. The short of it is that another editor double-checked the originally cited source, a Burke's Peerage biography, and found it has nothing to do with the Mabelina's claim: that David Cameron is descendant of the chiefs of Clan Cameron and an 8th cousin of the current chief. The discussion shows that there's no consensus to add such a statement into the article in the first place, and that there's no verifiable source to even support it. That hasn't stopped Mabelina.

  • 00:10, 25 June 2015 [86], I removed the claim which failed verification, and left a note on the talkpage.
  • 00:39, 25 June 2015 [87], Mebelina reverts.
  • 00:41, 25 June 2015 [88], Rjensen reverts Mabelina.
  • 00:46, 25 June 2015‎ [89], Mabelina revert Rjensen.
  • 02:15, 25 June 2015 [90], I revert Mabelina.
  • 03:18, 25 June 2015 [91], Mabelina re-adds the claim though reworded without any source.
  • 22:30, 25 June 2015 [92], I revert.
  • 23:56, 25 June 2015 [93], Mebelina reverts.
  • 00:25, 26 June 2015 [94], I revert.
  • 00:58, 26 June 2015‎ [95], Mebelina reverts.

Comments:


User:Mabelina - hello: I have no wish to engage in Edit War, especially since I have detailed my sources and explained not only the kinship but also the reasons for its mention numerous times; I have simply been blanked without good reason as to why this info should not be included save various dubious, somewhat hostile and slanderous retorts.

The whole justification provided by Rjensen and Brianann MacAmhlaidh for removing the simple and well-known fact that David Cameron and the present Chief of Clan Cameron (known as The Lochiel) is founded on the "consensus" basis that Burke's does not detail David Cameron's ancestry. This is totally inaccurate: qv. either www.burkespeerage.com and/or BPB 2003 and/or BLG 1952.

Furthermore the David Cameron article highlights at length descriptions of his "posh" matrilineal descents, yet fails to make any mention of how he descends from the senior Cameron family. The logic for this non-inclusion / reversions have been variously stated along the lines of "how would 8th cousins know each other?" (answer: Michael Ancram is married to the present Lochiel's sister).

I have no wish to engage in Edit War but naturally would like to see balanced and accurate articles appear on Wiki. And, needless to say, whatever view you reach (ie. inclusion or non-inclusion of Cameron's patrilineal ancestry) shall be followed by me. Many thanks.

Best M Mabelina (talk) 01:29, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 72 hours due to the clear violation of 3RR. Block duration based on previous block history. @Mabelina:, it doesn't matter whether you genuinely think you're improving the article, or whether your information is "right" or "wrong" or any other reason you may have. Edit warring is never acceptable, and you already know this because you've been blocked for it in the past. —Darkwind (talk) 02:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Twobells reported by User:VictoriaGrayson (Result: Protected)[edit]

Page: Caste system in India (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Twobells (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. diff1
  2. diff2
  3. diff3
  4. diff4

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: warning diff

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: talk discussion

Comments:
This user indicated he won't stop. So expect more edit warring and junk editing. And he removed the link to this Noticeboard from his talk page.VictoriaGraysonTalk 14:47, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Result: Page protected one week. Admins are unlikely to put up with an ongoing war on this article, so please be careful. EdJohnston (talk) 17:27, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Request Review: I would like to protest this decision. The user who edit-warred and breached 3RR has been let off without any sanction and the users who have been defending Wikipedia have been punished by barring from edits for a week (essentially a block as far as this page is concerned). This seems quite backward to me. - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Agree. There is now a ridiculously long list of edit requests from me, and many more that should be sorted out that I have not listed. And all the contributors with experience are singing from the same hymn-sheet. The real problem has been missed completely here, sorry. I've got a lot of respect for EdJ, who does wonders here, but I think they've missed the point on this occasion. - Sitush (talk) 00:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
The alternative to full protection would have been a block for both User:Twobells and User:Sitush for 3RR violation. If you can show that agreement has been reached on the talk page the protection can be lifted, but I don't yet see that. Because the role of the British in the caste system is complex, it's likely that an RfC may be needed as a basis for the future. You might even need WP:RSN to get rid of low-quality sources. When edit-warring reports come here, they don't get deep analysis, they get a count of the reverts. If you want to accuse one party or the other of reverting against consensus you need good evidence of the consensus. EdJohnston (talk) 02:29, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Where did I breach 3RR, please? And did you not notice the consensus that Twobells was doing the wrong thing? I said it, VG said it, Kautilya said it and Twobells was removing sourced material without discussing first. - Sitush (talk) 08:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
As far as I can see, VictoriaGrayson had done two reverts (probably reasonably because Twobells was removing sourced content), and Sitush did two reverts, because Twobells was overwriting his edits. Twobells was making a show of participating in the talk page discussion, but it wasn't genuine. My question about whether he has read the cited sources [96] hasn't been answered. At a minimum, Twobells should have been given a stern warning. I believe EdJohnston is making it difficult for us to maintain this page due to his leniency towards edit warriors. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:56, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that is pretty much my reading of the situation, Kautilya, although EdJ isn't usually prone to be anything but fair. FWIW, my edits at that time were entirely uncontroversial maintenance/cleaning stuff. In hindsight, I do wonder whether, despite being here since 2006, Twobells doesn't understand how to deal with edit conflicts. - Sitush (talk) 09:37, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
EdJ perhaps wasn't aware that Twobells had already been notified of the sanctions. That's the only reason I can think of for this edit. - Sitush (talk) 09:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Disagree Thanks to EdJohnston I am now aware of this discussion (having previously deleted the message believing the notice to be of another type). To be frank I am astonished at the assumption of bad faith, users VictoriaGrayson and Sitush proceeded to edit conflict the moment I started to improve the article, no sooner had I updated the article both users proceeded to over-write all my work, I then moved to the talk page, a debate that Sitush now suggests was not genuine, (an incredible assumption of bad faith considering the level of passion I put into the debate) requesting that they please stop removing my contribution, to instead wait, then, once the article was improved discuss it, none of my updates were controversial in any way, my intent was a sincere attempt to improve the article, bringing it to both neutrality and balance. Any deletion of sourced material was, I expect, a result of edit conflict rather than the assumed 'edit warring'. However, VictoriaGrayson rather than make any attempt at informal resolution rushed to this board crying foul in an attempt to get any legitimate view other than the existing one on Wikipedia frozen out. Although I always try to assume good faith such behaviour reeks of attempted article-ownership in that the level of hostility reflected by VictoriaGrayson is highly unusual. I have agreed with EdJohnston that I will in due course put forward a rfc and ask that users refrain from deleting any more of my uncontroversial work. In closing, I think that editors VictoriaGrayson Sitush must realize that there is more than one truth, that there are valid opposing views that must be allowed equal presentation within the article. Twobellst@lk 19:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Funkatastic reported by User:OldSkool01 (Result: malformed report, page prot.)[edit]

Page: The Beast in the East (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Funkatastic (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Funkatastic has broken the 3RR and is deleting all messages off of their Talk page without reading them. I've tried several times to reason with this user and they've refused. -- OldSkool01 (talk) 04:20, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Users are allowed to blank messages from their talk page (with a few exceptions stated at WP:BLANKING). --TL22 (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I read all your posts on my talk page besides the last one because I could tell by the very first sentence that it was a personal message and had nothing to do with the page we interacted on. Also, I have every right to remove posts from my talk page as I please. It's my user page. Funkatastic (talk) 05:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

As for your edit warring allegations, it was on an unprotected professional wrestling page, which are constant targets for vandalism and "internet trolling". You removed verifiable references with citation requests on multiple occasions and your only reason for doing so was that the reference wasn't worded the exact way you wanted it. That is a personal edit and is in no way productive or community friendly. In order to end YOUR edit warring, I was forced to overlook your complete refusal of compromise and spent nearly an hour searching for a reference that was word-for-word exactly the way you wanted it. How is that at all fair on my part? Funkatastic (talk) 05:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • It would have taken you no time to see that I am not a troll nor have I ever vandalized any pages. Also this is not an edit warring allegation. You broke a strict Wiki rule. The 3 Revert Rule. This is not the space to have this conversation. I am not the one that was rude and disrespectful. If you want to continue this conversation then let's use my talk page. If not then so be it. OldSkool01 (talk) 06:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Not the place to discuss? I'm defending myself. Maybe it's obvious that you're not a troll, but I'm trying to stop the page from being vandalized until it gets locked like all wrestling event pages are. I can't research every single person that makes an edit on the page. If anything this should be chalked up as a misunderstanding, but that's not for me to say. Funkatastic (talk) 08:06, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Comment OldSkool01, you are obligated to notify any users you report here by leaving a {{subst:an3-notice}} template message on their talk page, but you did not. There is a big, red, bold notice at the top of this noticeboard indicating this. Please remember to notify users you report in the future. --Chris (talk) 14:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – there appears to be a content dispute on the page. Consider dispute resolution. @Funkatastic: You are misusing the "minor edit" checkbox. Please read WP:MINOR and follow it going forward. —Darkwind (talk) 21:54, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Rojava, 1R rule (Result: Withdrawn)[edit]

User being reported
Multi-gesture (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Rojava is under Wikipedia:General sanctions/Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. User Multi-gesture reverted and deleted sourced materials keeping sentences that fit his agenda well by focusing on Syrian violation of Human rights and trying to hide Kurdish ones.

  • He reverted here [97] claiming to restore deleted sourced material
  • When I reintroduced the info he deleted and kept the info that he claimed to restore, he reverted again [98]
  • He also reverted here [99] and here [100]

4 reverts in two hours.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:34, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

    • It should be noted that after I told him that I reported him, Multi-gesture showed a sign of good well and restored the sourced material he deleted to Rojava. I would like to withdraw the report.--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 18:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Note: Withdrawn. —Darkwind (talk) 22:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Tigerboy1966 reported by User:Dr John Peterson (Result: Filer indeffed as sock)[edit]

Page: Golden Horn (horse) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Tigerboy1966 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Tigerboy1966 has gone way beyond the 3RR (about 6 or 7 times) and ignores the Talk page.--Dr John Peterson (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

please view the edit history of the page. It's pretty obvious what's happening. Tigerboy1966  15:44, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
I have filed a relevant SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dr John Peterson. Winner 42 Talk to me! 16:11, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked Dr John Peterson indefinitely as a sock puppet.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:21, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
This IP User talk:2.123.6.113 has also be antagonistic [101] and is probably also a sock. Froggerlaura ribbit 02:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Also User:2.120.186.252 today - showing a similar pattern --Bcp67 (talk) 18:01, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
The 2.120 IP is now blocked as well. The most recent SPI is now under the name WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Snackbag. EdJohnston (talk) 19:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
This one popped up today User:2.125.172.76. Froggerlaura ribbit 17:55, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
And this one User:2.122.170.80. Froggerlaura ribbit 00:08, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

User:39.47.184.157 reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: Protected)[edit]

Page
Kashmir conflict (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
39.47.184.157 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 17:27, 26 June 2015 (UTC) "I have already used the talk page as well as dispute resolution mechanism. Disputed para removed until Dispute resolution committee decides the dispute."
  2. 16:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC) "Disputed para removed until Dispute resolution committee decides the dispute"
  3. 16:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC) "I have already explained . read again. Disputed para removed until Dispute resolution committee decides the dispute"
  4. 16:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC) "THis para is bone of dispute so is removed till Dispute resolution decides. Do no intimidate on my talk page. Face the Dispute resolution discussion. Do not try to play admin"
  5. 16:16, 26 June 2015 (UTC) "Disputed para removed until Dispute resolution committee decides the dispute"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 17:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Kashmir conflict."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

IP repeatedly removing properly sourced content and demanding that it not be readded until a dispute resolution discussion that was started two weeks ago, and has seen no progress, is over. The article has been protected to end similar previous disruption by IPs, but the protection ended yesterday, and the disruption started again today. And the IP obviously has no intention to stop. Thomas.W talk 17:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Sir, there is generally accepted practice in the world that once a matter is disputed between two parties then legally and ethically neither party try to impose his version and get page protection by using his greater WP knowledge or alliances again and again to keep it for ages. I used talk page for disscussion 20 days ago see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kashmir_conflict then by mutual agreement we all went to dispute resolution noticeboard here https://en.w days ago ikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard . Please stop clever childish and unethical practices; 39.47.184.157 (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
If you are a true nuetral admin then I request you to also initiate sock puppet investigation user Human3015 and Rsrikanth see here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kashmir_conflict&action=history they edit togather to avoid three edit rule. they have done two times on kashmir confict and i am sure they must have done at other pages too. Similarly see offwiki collaboration, unintentional or otherwise keeping in view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Human3015#Those_users ; after reading that plus all indo pak & kashmir relevant Wiki articles edit history; Apparently Kautilya3 Human3015 and CosmicEmperor are doing so and are providing each other back up to avoid 3 revert rule of edit warring. I want justice for all including me 39.47.184.157 (talk) 18:05, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Note: CosmicEmperor is indefinitely blocked. Dustin (talk) 18:09, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Result: Article protected one week by User:Philg88, though the IP would otherwise deserve a block for 3RR violation. The issue of how to describe the 2014 elections is also being discussed at WP:DRN#Kashmir conflict. EdJohnston (talk) 02:38, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
EdJohnston I will try to comply with WP rules. What about sock puppetry investigation of Human3015 and Rsrikanth065 and SPI should also include Kautilya3 CosmicEmperor including investigation for offwiki collaboration, unintentional or otherwise keeping in view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Human3015#Those_users ; after reading that plus all indo pak & kashmir relevant Wiki articles edit history; Apparently Kautilya3 Human3015 and CosmicEmperor are doing so and are providing each other back up to avoid 3 revert rule of edit warring and trapping users like us who have lesser WP knowledge. 39.47.184.157 (talk) 05:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Salar80s reported by User:Samak (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Kurdistan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Salar80s (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Add a fake map in Kurdistan article & manipulating entries

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

SaməkTalk 21:49, 26 June 2015 (UTC) -->

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 24 hours. Salar80s has been edit warring to try to force a map created by himself into the lead of the article. The map is unreferenced. It proposes a much larger area for Kurdistan than the one given in the CIA map. User:Salar80s is missing the need to explain why his map is better, and where he got the data. EdJohnston (talk) 02:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Rojava, Tell Abyad, 1R rule (Result: Malformed report)[edit]

User being reported
عمرو بن كلثوم (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

The user removes sourced contents or changes it with his prefered one ([102], [103]).--Multi-gesture (talk)

  • Comment : considering that Multi Gesture has already reverted five times in less than ten hours, then I dont think he is in a good position to complain [[104][105][106][107][108].--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 02:39, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • (Non-administrator comment) Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. You have also broke the three revert rule so there is no actual reason to complain really. --TL22 (talk) 02:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

User:Multi-gesture reported by User:عمرو بن كلثوم (Result: Both blocked)[edit]

Page: Rojava (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Multi-gesture (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [109]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [110]
  2. [111]
  3. [112]
  4. [113]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [114]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [115]

Comments:

This new user is only for edit-warring. This is the second time they are reported within a few hours. I have left a message to them (that they have also reverted), and we were with user Aram trying to reach a consensus with the user, but they always revert and stick to their point of view. The user has removed substantial amounts of sourced material, simply because it did not fit with their editing direction/agenda. They also did the same thing in Tell Abyad article here, here and here They are trying to fill the article with propaganda glorifying their side of the conflict. This is a third article where they are edit-warring. I urge the Admin to go through all their contributions. Thanks. Amr ibn Kulthoumعمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 02:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Comment: Multi-gesture isnt just edit-warring, but he is a kind of Ethnic fighter. He went so far as to claim that ISIS, the multi-Ethnic terrorist group is an Arab group [116]. He also tried to delete the accusation against Kurdish Militias while keeping only the accusation against the Arab ones [117]. He restored them [118] but only after I told him that I reported him here [119].--Attar-Aram syria (talk) 02:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

You are not allowed to describe me as an Ethnic fighter. Your contributions in wikipedia (you and عمرو بن كلثوم) shows that your only goal is to prove the racial superiority of the Arab race and it isn't fitted into Wikipedia Policies. I only opposed this idea by accredited references.--Multi-gesture (talk) 02:56, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
My contributions revolve around Historic sites and ancient kings, bringing them to GA statues [120][121][122][123]. PS. Im not an Arab and I edited the Arab article perhaps twice. But trying to stick ISIS to Arabs and make it their shame is kind of Ethnic fighting aiming at deforming an ethnicity. Remember, ISIS leader who destroyed Kobane was a Kurd. Other signs of your mission is adding the word claims next to every violation ascribed to Kurds, while presenting the violations ascribed to Arabs as facts not just claims.--Attar-Aram syria (