Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive290

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

Noticeboard archives

Contents

User:Big-Endians reported by User:Roscelese (Result: 48 hours)[edit]

Page: Reza Aslan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Big-Endians (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [1]

This user persists in adding the obvious BLP violation that the subject has called for someone's assassination, despite such a claim neither being supported by the (primary) source nor present in any reliable secondary sources.

Diffs of the user adding this claim within the past 12 hours:

  1. [2]
  2. [3]
  3. [4]
  4. [5]
  5. [6]
  6. [7]
  7. [8]
  8. [9]
  9. [10]

Other reverts by this user within the past 12 hours:

  1. [11]
  2. [12]
  3. [13]

Warned for BLP: [14][15] Warned (not by me) for EW: [16] (and persisted)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [17][18]

Comments:

  • "I don't think it's a BLP violation" is not one of the exemptions from 3RR. Even if the user somehow miraculously turns out to be right, and it's not a BLP violation to add your own interpretation of a primary source as a BLP subject calling for someone's assassination, the user's still reverted 12 times in about 12 hours, demonstrated a thorough misunderstanding of sourcing policy ("The context speaks for itself"), and made insinuations about my sexuality[19] and other rude remarks [20]. Can we just end this now? –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 04:16, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Roscelese is part of the LGBT project at wikipedia, and Reza Aslan is a prominent supporter of gay rights in the Muslim American community. All I was saying is that because someone supports gay rights doesn't give censorship rights on other topics the person might be involved in (also, supporting gay rights is not the same things about being gay). Reza Aslan's comments speak for themselves. And here is the first question after he finished his speech.Big-Endians (talk) 04:19, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Big-Endians blocked for 48 hours. I should let you know, it really really doesn't matter how much you think you're right, or what you think of Roscelese. Edit warriors will be blocked. Especially for an accusation as serious as what you've been trying to add, this a situation where you should seek consensus first. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:47, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Article and talk page under attack by forum members[edit]

ARTICLE: List of Internet forums

A forum has put a call to its members to fight with editors in a revert war and on the talk page [[21]]

REVERT WAR (reverting the same edit from various editors 9 times):

22:00, 4 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.142 (talk)
source:http://www.tribalwar.com/forums/ added further description of tribalwar: source meta tags <meta name="keywords" content="technology, men's lifestyle, forum, free speech" /> <meta name="description" content="TribalWar.Com)

02:15, 6 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.223 (talk)‎
These are in the meta tags of the website, there is no formatting rule on wiki against categorizing them this way. sourced fact.)

04:11, 6 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.223 (talk)‎
(Please stop messing with the official meta tag description of Tribalwar.com. It fits the wikipedia description. An admin will get involved shortly if you keep these pointless revisions up.)

05:19, 6 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.223 (talk)‎
(Yes I believe the condensed version of most important descriptors is why there are web meta tags in the first place chap! Please stop pointlessly editing/reversing.)

09:14, 7 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.142 (talk)‎
(noegaf is different from tribalwar. follow tribalwar's meta tags from the website itself. it is a free speech forum not video games. no im not going to a talk page when i can just keep making the edit and arguing here.)

12:29, 8 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.142 (talk)‎
(Nonsense waste of time edit for something that isn't breaking any article rules. TW is not neogaf don't categorize them the same, use the meta tags of the websites thank you.)

21:45, 8 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.142 (talk)‎
(Talk first expound on a rule or something this category is breaking because there is none sourced and you are the one breaking wiki rules by pointlessly editing without stating a reason or rule break.)

06:24, 9 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.142 (talk)‎
(you on mobile phone keep reverting a majority opinion of a forum of 32000 people. literally you and an ip account (two people) vs 32000 people. please stop this heavily opinionated and non fact/rule based argument)

09:33, 9 August 2015‎ 70.27.1.142 (talk)‎

ERASING TALK PAGE DISCUSSION: Comment "(Removing irrelevant blahblahlah courtesy of this[22]
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Internet_forums&diff=prev&oldid=675244934

COMMENT: There have been 18 reverts of the same table cell since 22:00, 4 August 2015‎. Its appears that members of a forum put out a call to arms to fight (specifically using this term) with editors. The owner of the forum is involved. My attempts to get a discussion on TALK and encourage consensus have not deterred the edit war. Twice, the talk page discussion has been erased.

72.181.218.181 (talk) 09:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

 Comment: I was just going to flag them on AIV given the "discussion" on the forum in question:
Given the above, temp protection to autoconfirmed may be required (not just yet, however). Proper move for talk is probably the red collapsible template thing (escapes me at the moment) and mv to archive... although the racist comments in tail of talk page by IPv6 address may need to be dealt with via oversight. Clearly WP:NOTHERE. -- dsprc [talk] 09:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

IP range spanning User:171.82.160.154, User:171.82.160.162, User:171.82.160.153, etc. reported by User:Benlisquare (Result: Declined)[edit]

Page: World of Tanks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:

  • IP range spanning:


Previous version reverted to: [23]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  4. diff
  5. diff
  6. diff

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: I'd rather not, this user has a history of vandalising the userpages of anyone who leaves a message on his talk page

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See above, I'd rather not deal with the headache

Comments:

  • General nonsense vandalism (e.g. replacing images with File:Jihad.jpg) by IP-hopping editor. ISP information shows that he is from Wuhan, Hebei, China, using China Telecom. The article was semi-protected between 29 July 2015 and 5 August 2015; prior to the semi-protection this same editor has made the exact same repetitive vandal edits during July 2015. --benlisquareTCE 11:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined The page has been protected; that should suffice. To block these IPs is pretty useless. ceradon (talkedits) 13:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:PennyDarling reported by User:DVdm (Result: Blocked 24 hours)[edit]

Page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/Relativity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: PennyDarling (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [24]: insertion of website link

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [25] after my first undo and referral to talk page
  2. [26] after my second undo
  3. [27] after my third undo and 3RR-warning on user talk page
  4. [28] after JRSpriggs' undo

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [29]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [30], [31], [32], [33], [34].

Comments:
My 3RR warning resulted in a retaliating copy of the warning (including my own signature) on my talk page: [35]

User insists on my proving to them with references why their addition is inappropriate, i.o.w. putting the burden on others.

User was already explained at Talk:Special relativity#Citations, Quality and Personal Theories by user Martin Hogbin how best to go about editing here (wp:BRD). - DVdm (talk) 08:54, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:DVdm has been asked to engage in discussion towards resolution, however, has continued to delete a qualified and reviewed web link. This escalation appears to be a Point Of View conflict (WP:NPOV) that the user (User:DVdm) holds against the owner of the linked website (quote from User:DVdm on WikiProject Physics/Taskforces/Relativity talk page: "Bad Source. To be avoided at all cost, at least for relativity. I have written them a few emails about this. Never got a reply."). User:DVdm has been asked to provide justifications, with links, showing the linked website to be of poor quality, but has only been able to supply hyper-links to personal web pages and forum bulletin boards, which are not of the quality required within a rigorous scientific discipline or wikipedia. The linked website is well established and was created by an expert in the field; furthermore it has been reviewed by the Physics Today (published by the IoP) and selected by the SciLinks program, a service of National Science Teachers Association. PennyDarling (talk) 12:45, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Two other users have agreed that Hyperphysics is bad: [36], [37]. The reasons are extensively explained on the article talk page. There clearly is no consensus for the addition. - DVdm (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours ceradon (talkedits) 14:10, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Thulqarnayn reported by User:DeCausa (Result: Blocked 48 hours)[edit]

Page: Ibn Nusayr (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Page: Al-Khaṣībī (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Thulqarnayn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: for Ibn Nusayr:[38]; for Al-Khaṣībī:[39]


For Ibn Nusayr: Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [40] (31 July)
  2. [41] (All other reverts 8/9 August)
  3. [42]
  4. [43]
  5. [44]

For Al-Khaṣībī: Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [45] (31 July)
  2. [46] (All other reverts 8/9 August)
  3. [47]
  4. [48]
  5. [49]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [50]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [51]

Comments:

These are two linked articles where the user has edit-warred simultaneously. The last revert on each article is by an IP in Germany, 79.248.65.152 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). The IP made the same identical reverts as Thulqarnayn after I had posted the 3RR warning to Thulqarnayn's talk page. Within 5 minutes of those reverts, Thulqarnayn posted this to my talk page. WP:DUCK, but I can't say whether it was a deliberate attempt to get round 3RR or whether (since it is so obvious) the user simply forgot to log in - but it's still a deliberate breach of 3RR. DeCausa (talk) 09:01, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

(uninvolved non admin) I think either a comment by this user that they were the IP, or the results of a SPI investigation would be needed before linking them to the IP. I'm not saying its not them, but this may be the wrong place to come to that conclusion. AlbinoFerret 13:12, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
WP:DUCK doesn't require either an SPI decision or an admission. Either its a WP:DUCK or it's not and admins regularly make that decision on their own. Of course, if it's not so obvious that it is a WP:DUCK then it would require an SPI. But I think it is obvious. DeCausa (talk) 13:18, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. 24 hours for sockpuppetry; 24 hours for socking. ceradon (talkedits) 14:17, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Cruks reported by User:Jamie Tubers (Result:Protected)[edit]

Page
List of Nigerian billionaires by net worth (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Cruks (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, 6 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 674867242 by Wikicology (talk) this list is about the stable 2015 Forbes version and not in real time"
  2. 23:55, 6 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 674901707 by Jamie Tubers (talk)"
  3. 04:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 674916600 by Jamie Tubers (talk) this version shows the stable version as it says "2015 Nig. billionaires list"! Do not remove this edit"
  4. 04:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Lists */"
  5. 04:23, 7 August 2015 (UTC) "/* 2015 Nigerian billionaires list */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 00:23, 7 August 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on List of Nigerian billionaires by net worth."
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
Comments:

This user has been engaging in edit warring on the article List of Nigerian billionaires by net worth for some days now. First he kept removing the "incomplete" template which was placed in the article to enable users to add lists for previous years, but this user kept stating that "the article is complete". Further more, he started changing figures in the article, from the long standing appropriate version, saying that "the list is about 2015 not realtime", like we still are not in 2015. He also ignored that there's no consensus on whether figures for current years should be realtime or not. He also started changing wordings of the subheading in the article to try to support his stance; for example, he deleted the main subheading "lists", and changed the "2015 list" to the main subheading, when the article clearly isn't year-specific. The user has been disruptive on other articles too as it is evident on his talkpage, with several warnings. He left a message on my talkpage, which seem almost like an harrassment; Myself and one other editor replied and tried to make him see reasons, but he never replied or tried to resolve the dispute. Instead, he went ahead to perform several reverts again. He has also violated 3RR. Jamie Tubers (talk) 13:39, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I do not agree with the statement above and I tried to find an agreement on the talk page of the article, but without any response. Instead User:Jamie Tubers and User:Wikicology are denouncing me bringing up examples from my talk page. This is poor and ridiculous. I have been working on several pages named List of (German, Swiss, Austrian and many more)... billionaires by net worth to shape them up in the same style. I got never any complaints from nowhere. The complaints come from 2 Nigerian editors when they tried to put figures into the article which are showing the real time ranking and not the stable 2015 version as like here. It is obvious that both users feel hurt in their national pride and want to leave their country people always stand in a better light. They are not willing to understand my neutral point of view. We cannot change every day the net worth data (because they can change daily) and that is why I put 2015 Nigerian billionaires list as a subtitle. Next year we could add a 2016 Nigerian billionaires list. Easy as that. Thanks for understanding. Cruks (talk) 15:15, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
  • You only decided to leave a message at the article's talkpage hours after another user had already reported you for disruptive edit at admin incidence page. Moreover, the message you left is more of an authoritative comment anyway, rather than someone who wants to resolve a dispute. At the end, it still doesn't change the fact that you were edit warring, to the extent that you broke the 3 revert rule.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 20:53, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

 Comment: --- It doesn't appears to me that user:Cruks is here to build an encyclopedia. I never noticed their disruptive behavior until I found this ridiculous warning on Jamie Tubers's talk page. I responded to them here explaining to them why the user's edit did not constitute vandalism and User:Cruks quickly left this irrelevant note on my talk page that my revert on the article, List of Nigerian billionaires by net worth is not useful even when I never reverted anything that changed the list. I responded here telling them why the List of Nigerian billionaires by net worth should not only be on the list of Nigerian billionaire compiled in 2015 but also other years. They responded here that I shouldn't treat them unfairly simply because they want to justified their action. I edited the article [52] to enhance the inclusion of "list of Nigerian billionaire" compiled in other years to reflect the title but they abysmally reverted my edit. When I checked through their talk page history, I discovered that the editor is problematic. Last week, they created Declan Costello (economist), a blatant copyvio that was speedy deleted per G12 by User: Jimfbleak. A day before the page was deleted, I found this warning] by JMHamo on their talk page regarding an edit warring on Morgan Schneiderlin. I also saw this warning on their talk for not been using the edit summary. There are also several warning on their talk page regarding the addition of poor sources to article such as this one. When I considered all this misconduct, I really don't think that this editor can contribute usefully to Wikipedia. Wikigyt@lk to M£ 20:21, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Both comments above are clearly unfair. What has to do my talk page with the edits on the Nigerian billionaires? Nothing at all! It seems to be clear that both users poke around in the past of other people because they themselves have no more convincing arguments. My final conclusion is that both users mentioned are not interested in bringing arguments forward to my edits instead, it's all about them another user badmouthing. Thats how it is. Cruks (talk) 13:37, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected Consecutive edits count as one action; 4:21, 4:22 and 4:23 count as one action. There is no 3RR vio demonstrated here. However, the absence of any conversation about this on the talk page is concerning; there's a reason why there's a section for "Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page". That has not happened here. Article protected for three days to allow this important step to take place. Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Jasimkhanum10 and User:Zmaghndstakun reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: Page protected; users sanctioned)[edit]

Page: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:
Jasimkhanum10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Zmaghndstakun (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:
Jasimkhanum10:

  1. [53]
  2. [54]
  3. [55]
  4. [56]
  5. [57]

Zmaghndstakun:

  1. [58]
  2. [59]
  3. [60]
  4. [61]
  5. [62]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Jasimkhanum10, Zmaghndstakun

Comments:
A few hours after the article was protected to prevent IPs from adding dubious material and revert-war over it registered users started doing the same... Thomas.W talk 19:01, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment: User Zmaghndstakun has a history of POV editing and stonewalling changes that don't fit his preference. I first encountered him at Talk:Balochistan, Pakistan. There's a dispute resolution case open at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Balochistan.23Recent_changes about a continuation of his edit-warring. The other user, Jasimkhanum10 appears to be a brand new account interested in a very specific area. The article in question, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, is about a location in Pakistan, and discretionary sanctions may be appropriate, since this is a subject area of great passion and dispute. Although I'm probably not technically WP:INVOLVED, I'm personally abstaining from taking action against either user while I get my admin chops. I encourage other admins to judge the behavior, though. I have fully protected the article for 2 days to cool off the war. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Page protected; users sanctioned. Both users are now subject to a 3-month ban from editing articles relating to India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, all broadly construed. As for a block, the page has been protected, and these sanction have been put in place, so a block would be punitive at this point. Thank you, --ceradon (talkedits) 13:58, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Ceradon I am utterly surprised for being topic ban from India Afghanistan and Pakistan. Reason number one: I have never edited any india / afghanistan page. Number two: I never voilated any WP rule except 3RR on Tank and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa pages for which maximum you shold have blocked me for 24 hours on first Offence. I question Blind following of volunteer comment of a DRN competitior user Cyphoidbomb on ANI. Now how will I able to comment on DRN. Actually by doing so user Cyphoidbomb has denied my right to speak on DRN to which I was party. Can I call this democracy? Zmaghndstakun (talk) 17:13, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Marsavian reported by User:Thomas.W (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
Eurofighter Typhoon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Marsavian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 17:03, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675412213 by ScrapIronIV (talk) - restoration of perfectly valid new data on Typhoon's performance."
  2. 12:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675411168 as It is notable as it contradicts the earlier 'However, in one to one dogfights the Typhoon was found to be superior' statement."
  3. 12:16, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675408977 by BilCat (talk) The 2014 meet provides new insight into the relative performance of Typhoon and both sides of this insight have been impartially presented for fairness."
  4. 05:30, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675346945 by BilCat (talk) All Indra-Dhanush exercises are combat exercises, if one is to be removed then all should or none."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

[63], [64]

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Edit-warring to get disputed material into the article, not stopping even though they've been reverted by multiple other editors.

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 24 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

92.149.192.237 reported by 109.158.107.195 (Result: )[edit]

Page: The Fall (TV series)
User being reported: 92.149.192.237

Please help me resolve this. It's just gone too far now.

Page before editing by 92.149.192.237 began: [65]

Updated page as it looked before his latest addition (and how it should remain): [66]

Diffs of the user's reverts (latest to earliest):

  1. [67]
  2. [68]
  3. [69]
  4. [70]
  5. [71]
  6. [72]
  7. [73]
  8. [74]
  9. [75]
  10. [76]
  11. [77]
  12. [78]
  13. [79]
  14. [80]
  15. [81]
  16. [82]
  17. [83]

Colin Morgan is being constantly added to the opening header alongside Anderson, Dornan, Panjabi and Lynch (who are the four leads, with moniker credits (ie. starring, and, and with). He's being moved up in the info-box into an incorrect position, he's being moved in the series 2 section to before cast members who first appeared in episode 1.

user has been warned by several people in the comments section of the edit history page, but responds saying he is right

--109.158.107.195 (talk) 19:40, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi guys. I'm just going to wade into this discussion because I'm becoming rather frustrated with this too. Discussions have been held on the users talk page ([[84]]), and (s)he seems to be completely ignorant to what she's being told. There have also been several more violations since this complaint was put forth.
  1. [85]
  2. [86]
  3. [87]
  4. [88]
  5. [89]
According to the users talk page there are also issues with his editing Humans (TV series) in order to move Colin Morgan up to starring credit, despite the actor actually being credited fourteenth. Some of the users rebuttals include:

"I find totally stupid to make in first an actress who is no longer in the series while Colin Morgan is still present in the series.." "I don't stop to edit ! Laura Donnelly is no longer of The Fall so why put her before Colin Morgan ?" "Your organization is really stupid! It's stupid to put one person who are no longer in the serie before the other is still in it" "in The Fall, Colin Morgan is credited in third place so he must be in third place in the cast list that's all"

We really need an admin to wade into this discussion and sort the situation out because it's a tad silly now. Thanks! --Unframboise (talk) 19:02, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
IMHO this is also immediately connected to previous discussions on other Colin Morgan-related pages, see Talk:Humans_(TV_series)#Disruptive_editing, User_talk:Smaugh and Talk:Colin_Morgan#Removal_of_information. –Dark Cocoa Frosting (talk) 19:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:109.64.38.239 reported by User:Tenebrae (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Gigi Hadid (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 109.64.38.239 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [90]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [91] 16:39, 10 August 2015 (re-added infobox MOS vio, raw URL)
  2. [92] 16:43, 10 August 2015 (the same)
  3. [93] 16:44, 10 August 2015 (the same, plus restored commented-out uncited claim about siblings, for a BLP vio)
  4. [94] 16:46 10 August 2015 (same as #3 above)]
  5. [95]
  6. [96]
  7. [97] 18:16, 10 August 2015 (reverted a second editor)
  8. [98] 20:02, 10 August 2015

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [99]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [100]

Comments:

I have cited every detail with a ref, and improved her infobox to look more Wikipedia-esque and plain professional. 109.64.38.239 (talk) 17:11, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
As I just wrote on the article's talk page: "He continues to compound his edit-warring, removing a cite that he had improperly placed in the infobox and then not placing it in the article body, keeping a raw URL rather than the properly cited URL, and continuing to make uncited claims about a living person's siblings in defiance of WP:BLP." In any event, he has bright-line exceeded 3RR. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
As I just wrote on the article's talk page: "I have cited every detail with a ref, and improved her infobox to look more Wikipedia-esque and plain professional." In any event, you are just annoyed that my information is correct and cited. 109.64.38.239 (talk) 18:13, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Even after another editor reverted his BLP- and MOS-video edits, this anon IP again is edit-warring. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. MelanieN (talk) 20:16, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Al Khazar reported by User:Whakaoriori (Result: blocked)[edit]

Page
Type 99 Tank (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Al Khazar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts


Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

This account was edit warring on Type 99 tank. Whakaoriori (talk) 23:20, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello, this is Khazar. I am currently in the process of reporting an IP address for edit warring while refusing to comply with my points. I attempted to use the talk page, I welcomed the new IP address, and I was patient enough to give several notes to the IP about edit warring. Kind regards, Khazar (talk) 23:24, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I blocked them both--the IP for 48 hours, and Khazar for a week (repeat offender). Drmies (talk) 23:37, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

User:98.162.224.14 reported by User:General Ization (Result: )[edit]

Page
Ronda Rousey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
98.162.224.14 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 02:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "The race of her maternal grandfather is not needed. If it is needed then why isn't the race of her other grandfather revealed? Or how about the race of her grandmothers? Rousey's racial ancestry is by and large English and Polish. This is most relevant."
  2. 11:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Ronda Rousey's heritage is English and Polish. She is only part Venezuelan. The most prominent part of her heritage should be considered first......followed by her Venezuelan heritage."
  3. 06:07, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Rousey's main genetic heritage is English and Polish. Therefore her prominent genetic heritage is the proper way to describe her racial heritage."
  4. 00:20, 10 August 2015 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 11:47, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Caution: Removal of content, blanking on Ronda Rousey. (TW)"
  2. 12:10, 10 August 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Ronda Rousey. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

The IP seems to have some issue with the brief mention of Rousey's great-grandfather's Afro-Venezuelan ethnicity (but none with discussion of her English and Polish ancestry). The subject of the article has freely discussed her ancestry in interviews cited in the article, and even tweeted on the subject. The IP is removing this information along with citations that support it, even after warning concerning WP:3RR. General Ization Talk 02:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Viet-hoian1 reported by User:TaivoLinguist (Result: 24 hours)[edit]

Page: Crimea (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Viet-hoian1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [101]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [102]
  2. [103]
  3. [104]
  4. [105]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [106]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [107]

Comments:

Four revision is not a revert, but still edit warring. Blocked for 24 hours. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Burridheut reported by User:Zoupan (Result: 31h)[edit]

Page: Spiro Koleka (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Burridheut (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. [108]
  2. [109]
  3. [110]

Comments:
There have been countless attempts for constructive discussions. There was an ANI, and a previous EW that ended in semi-page protection. He has major WP:OWN and POV problems. The latest comments include "Please don't touch the article again." and "Get out of here, vandal. You have been warned by several users many times to stop this shameful campaign of yours." Please see the lengthy discussions on the article talk page for more information.--Zoupan 18:03, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I want to note that the user started an ANI thread regarding me and another user's involvement in that article: Disruptive users vandalizing article about Spiro Koleka.--Zoupan 18:14, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Low tactic, it worked for you the first time though. You complain about me few minutes after I complain about you. Why so scared? You seem so brave when you disrupt articles. Over and over. Burridheut (talk) 18:30, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
Burrid's disruptive pattern is quite obvious even in his edit summaries. Moreover, excessive wp:own and wp:npa violations are part of his daily activity focused in this specific article. It appears a short term block is warranted, seeing that the user displays a strong wp:spa pattern.Alexikoua (talk) 18:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
I have to say that Burridheut had clearly opened his account only for creation of Spiro Koleka, He/she has clearly run by WP:SPA to recognise Spiro Koleka as his own content without allowing other contributors to edit the article, Burridheut have clearly insulted other editors using summary. Thus i see this account Burridheut as violation of WP:OWN, WP:NOPV and WP:SPA, This account Burridheut should be banned permanently on prolonged edit wars with other editors. --Prince Sulaiman Talk to me 19:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked by another admin --slakrtalk / 06:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Xtremedood reported by User:Human3015 (Result: protected)[edit]

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


Previous version reverted to: [111]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [112]
  2. [113]
  3. [114]
  4. [115]
  5. [116]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [117]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Punjab region#Order in Infobox

Comments:

Editor is involved in slow edit war. Editor is known for nationalistic editing and have been notified for discretionary sanctions by admins too [118]. --Human3015Send WikiLove  00:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment - I did not break the 3RR rule, I participated in the discussion and waited for about 2 days before reverting. Human3015 failed to effectively communicate in the days and flipped flopped and failed to provide a proper rationale for keeping India on top, when clearly Pakistan has greater relevance to the region (more people and more territory). He then changed his position for it to be alphabetical.
  • I have been the victim of an organized campaign by the sockpuppet user user:OccultZone who used multiple fake ID's, such as user:Delibzr to try and get me blocked. There is even an account solely dedicated to being used against me, such as user:Gorgevito, who has all of his edits aimed at me in some way [[119]].
  • OccultZone used his fake account Delibrz here [[120]] to send multiple complaints about me. Since I have been a victim of an organized campaign to censore me in the past, I believe administrators should proceed cautiously in this matter. Xtremedood (talk) 03:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – there appears to be a content dispute on the page. Consider dispute resolution. --slakrtalk / 06:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Human3015 reported by User:xtremedood (Result: protected)[edit]

Page: Punjab region (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Human3015 (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:

[121] - 03:47, 8 August 2015‎

[122] - 06:02, 8 August 2015‎ - Also, what Human3015 says in this is blatantly false, since the data shows that the Punjab region in Pakistan alone is Pakistan has 205,344 km^2, while the entire area of the Punjab region is 355,705 km2.

[123] - 06:16, 8 August 2015‎

The previous three are a total of three revisions within a 24 hour period, whereas I reverted only 2 times within 24 hours. This is a clear violation of the 3RR by user:Human3015

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

[124] - up until August 9th.

[125] - Human3015 failed to get back to me in about 2 days, here is a new one after about 2 days.

[126] - My warning to Human3015

Comments:

Human3015, keeps on changing his reasons as to why India should be listed first, when clearly Pakistan has more people and more territory in the Punjab region. He previously stated it should be population, but Pakistan clearly had more people in that area, he than changed it to according to land area, when I explained to him that Pakistan has more land in that area, he then he changed his reason to simply being alphabetic. You may see the talk page discussion we had here: [127]. I waited approximately 2 days for him to respond, however he did no such thing. He is unwilling to properly communicate his ideas, but rather flip flops to maintain his biased idea. He even tried to explain that the reason why the Indus Valley Civilization article should utilize the one sided and biased term of Indian Subcontinent over the more neutral and impartial South Asian Subcontinent term is due to Al Qaeda calling it is such [128].

Human3015 has a history of edit warring and flip flopping. He is certainly not an effective communicator on Wikipedia. Xtremedood (talk) 02:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment: The diffs shown above not really shows diff of my reverts. This editor reverted two editors for just simple fact that name of which country should be above in infobox. We follow alphabetical order, if you click on those sections of "India" and "Pakistan" in that infobox then you will see names of sub-national territories written in alphabetical order in same infobox. I was just simple fact which countries name should be above, but this editor is on Wikipedia for "some reasons". You can see his contribution. He has been given notifications of discretionary sanctions several times. --Human3015Send WikiLove  02:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment on Human3015's history of plagiarism: Also, on top of edit warring and flip flopping, Human3015 also has a history of plagiarizing. Human3015 claims to have wrote about a particular battle here [129], however, this is entirely plagiarized from this source [130] on page 948. Over here [131] he claims to have read a source and "kept it", however, this is entirely plagiarized from here: [132]. Xtremedood (talk) 02:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – there appears to be a content dispute on the page. Consider dispute resolution. --slakrtalk / 06:27, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:The Buddhism City of Myanmar reported by User:Ogress (Result: Blocked 31 hours)[edit]

Page
Aung San (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
The Buddhism City of Myanmar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 01:52, 11 August 2015 ""
  2. 05:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  3. Consecutive edits made from 05:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC) to 05:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
    1. 05:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
    2. 05:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
    3. 05:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  4. Consecutive edits made from 03:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC) to 03:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
    1. 03:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
    2. 03:09, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  5. 09:33, 10 August 2015 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 05:23, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Aung San. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 05:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Recent edits */ new section"
Comments:

No edit summaries, no discussion at talk, just endlessly reverting uncited information to a level-4 vital article. Ogress smash! 05:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • User has ignored the 3RR warning, the ANI report, and continues to add uncited materials while ignoring talk and not using edit summaries. Ogress smash! 08:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 31 hours Bishonen | talk 09:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:92.149.192.237 reported by User:Asher-of-Locksley (Result: 72 hours)[edit]

Page: Colin Morgan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 92.149.192.237 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [133]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [134]
  2. [135]
  3. [136]
  4. [137]
  5. [138]
  6. [139]
  7. [140]
  8. [141]
  9. [142]
  10. [143]
  11. [144]
  12. [145]
  13. [146]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [147]

[148]


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [149]

Comments: Many users have tried to reason with this IP user but to no avail. To them, it's only their way. Other users besides this IP have discussed this information many times and there is consensus since it's verified and is a vital career moment for the actor. This IP user has admitted that they used to be the user "Smaugh"/other aliases who used to do the same thing months ago. This user will never cease this behavior. In addition to edit warring in Colin Morgan, she/he has been causing grief in other articles like The Fall (TV Series), Humans (TV Series), Quirke (TV series), and Legend (2015 film), changing cast list orders so as to promote Colin Morgan, thereby causing a bad reputation for not only fans but Colin Morgan himself. -Asher-of-Locksley (talk) 08:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The IP has now admitted on the talk page that he will continue his deletion of content, without reason or consensus. Maproom (talk) 10:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 72 hours --slakrtalk / 10:57, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:SigungSanders reported by User:Ogress (Result: declined)[edit]

Page
Bak Mei (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
SigungSanders (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 09:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Added information about Hakka Chinese and Bak-Mei. This is accurate information."
  2. Consecutive edits made from 08:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC) to 08:30, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
    1. 08:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675546501 by Ogress (talk)"
    2. 08:28, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* External links */"
    3. 08:30, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Historical Bai Mei */"
  3. Consecutive edits made from 05:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC) to 06:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
    1. 05:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Cleared up inaccurate information about Shaolin being connected to Bak-Mei. This is important as Shaolin can be considered a religious institutional link as well as a martial one."
    2. 05:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Historical Bai Mei */It is inaccurate to quote a research year and proceed to place Bak-Mei in a questionable catagory. Other styles of martial art listed on Wikipedia are not subjected to this."
    3. 05:56, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Jeung Lai Chuen branch */Unlike many karate styles, Bak Mei has yet to be formalized by a main branch or organization. It is misleading to put no disclaimer or mention that there are other forms."
    4. 05:58, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* External links */Link to Hakka information for accuracy"
    5. 06:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Listed additional headings."
    6. 06:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
    7. 06:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
    8. 06:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Bak Mei Pai */"
    9. 06:11, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Historical Bai Mei */"
    10. 06:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Historical Bai Mei */"
    11. 06:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Historical Bai Mei */"
    12. 06:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Historical Bai Mei */"
    13. 06:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "/* Jeung Lai Chuen branch */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Absolutely zero citations, absolutely zero talk. user is clearly intimately familiar with Wikipedia. Ogress smash! 10:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting x.svg No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. --slakrtalk / 11:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:173.71.50.211 reported by User:NickW557 (Result: Blocked 1 week)[edit]

Page: Nanak Shah Fakir (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 173.71.50.211 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: 21:25, 20 July 2015‎ 173.71.50.211

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. 08:41, 11 August 2015
  2. 10:48, 10 August 2015
  3. 16:52, 6 August 2015
  4. 14:32, 28 July 2015
  5. 07:45, 28 July 2015
  6. 12:06, 26 July 2015
  7. 09:37, 25 July 2015‎
  8. 16:33, 24 July 2015‎
  9. 17:46, 23 July 2015

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: initial edit warring note (custom) by Jayron32 and second edit warring warning (template) by me

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: attempt by involved user Rock39 to discuss on talk page

Comments:

Obviously this is not close to being a 3RR violation as all the reverts are spread out over multiple days, but it is still a disruptive and drawn-out edit war over the last several weeks that I feel violates WP:EW at this stage. Other editors involved initially were just as blatant, but edit warring warnings all around seems to have gotten the others to try to discuss their disagreements about the names of the creators of this film, whereas this IP just keeps reverting and reverting without any attempt at discussion. A look at Special:Contributions/173.71.50.211 shows only edits to this article, the majority of which are reverts using the undo feature, and no edits to talk/user talk pages. Attempts to inform/warn with regard to EW policies have been ignored. --Nick⁠—⁠Contact/Contribs 16:36, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 1 week ceradon (talkedits) 16:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

User:PrimeNotice reported by User:NickW557 (Result: Blocked 24 hours)[edit]

Page
Sylvester Turner (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
PrimeNotice (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 19:59, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675638995 by Bog5576 (talk)"
  2. 19:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675638640 by Bog5576 (talk)"
  3. 19:48, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675637803 by Bog5576 (talk)"
  4. 19:40, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  5. 19:30, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  6. 19:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  7. 19:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675634450 by Bog5576 (talk)"
  8. 19:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "No section is blanked. Bog5576 (talk)"
  9. 19:19, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Opinion pieces are not fact Bog5576 (talk)"
  10. 19:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675633319 by Bog5576 (talk)"
  11. 19:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Bog5576 continuously vandalizes through citing opinion pieces, work proven false and misinterpreting readings. Bog5576 (talk)"
  12. 19:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC) "Bog5576 continuously vandalizes through citing opinion pieces, work proven false and misinterpreting readings. (talk)"
  13. 19:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
  14. 19:07, 11 August 2015 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

warning

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Some discussing going on at User talk:Bog5576, but the revert war continues just as strong. That user has now been given an EW warning as well.

Comments:

Going on almost 15 reverts today... --Nick⁠—⁠Contact/Contribs 20:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


Why am I the only one with this possible ban? I am doing my best to show the errors and discrepancies. I am engaging an a productive discussion on clearing up the issues with this page.PrimeNotice (talk) 20:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

2 reasons.

1. I stopped when I was warned. 2. You've been consistently deleting cited material and lying about what you deleted. You said it was from opinion articles (none were opinion articles). Then you blatently lied about what the articles contained. Wikipedia needs to be about citing sources material, not protecting elected individuals from their past. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bog5576 (talkcontribs) 20:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 24 hours MusikAnimal talk 21:46, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

David Souza is unfairly editing sentences and phrases from other contributors like a newspaper editor! (result: declined)[edit]

Comments:Dear Wikipedia Administrators,

I suggest that you deal with David Souza's continual interferences on your various pages that he edits because he is undermining the freedom that Wikipedia offers and not only that but the whole function of Wikipedia as a dependable source of information. It is laughable how David Souza can get away with making editing changes as if he were a newspaper editor with a particular political slant. David Souza, it can be seen on Patrick Matthew page in particular, makes alterations to the wording of sentences of other contributors in a reckless manner so as to alter the sense or relevance of the material contributed. Harmless! Think again, Wikipedia. Your Ward Cunningham has already said it is not his concern. It should be. there should be some code introduced that forbids any tinkering of wording of contributions made by others done by your Administrator/Editors. fair enough if your Administrators/Editors have found some information that is completely false then remove it all but not tinker with the expression of the piece.

Furthermore, it should not be the preserve of Administrator/Editors to issue intimidations on Talk where they have introduced an editing war on a contributor such as I who provided factual information which cannot be disproved as it is a published book. David Souza is a Darwinist and therefore does not want any such entry on Correspondences of Darwin that will upset other Darwinists or maybe draw their attention to this calculated error on the part of Darwin to discredit Patrick Matthew's origination of 'the natural process of selection' in his book in 1831. It stands to reason that this date is 28 years earlier than Darwin's publication in 1859! It should be highlighted on Correspondences of Charles Darwin page so that there is balance.

Otherwise, Dear Wikipedia Administrators/Editors you will find that Wikipedia will be a laughing stock.

Clear it up, Wikipedia, please!

A contributor PS I know you know who I am that's why I've done it this way!!
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.13.98.109 (talk) 00:14, 12 August 2015‎ (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, Slakr, you've covered the issues well. The contributions of both Matthew and William Charles Wells are recognised appropriately in the various articles, as covered by reliable sources. . . dave souza, talk 06:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

User:68.231.26.111 reported by User:Garchy (Result: Closing this report)[edit]

Page
Gemma Chan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
68.231.26.111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 01:12, 13 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675837541 by Flyer22 (talk)"
  2. 00:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 675833514 by Flyer22 (talk)"
  3. 22:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Multiple warnings about vandalism AND edit warring have been given. User is not willing to work with other editors. Garchy (talk) 01:35, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

"multiple notices of vandalism" is your statement Garchy?! - that alone is a violation of wiki policy - you cannot prove anywhere I have been a vandal - all my changes have been too ASSIST wiki - you full well know that calling me a vandal is violation of wiki rules - should I know open a admin review for you?!--68.231.26.111 (talk) 01:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
After you were reverted a second time, why didn't you take your concerns to the talk page to hash it out? If you would have provided a reliable source for the information you were attempting to add, there wouldn't be an issue. It seems you've been notified on your talk page multiple times for disruptive editing. Please remain civil and not threaten to "open an admin for review", we all know that is not necessary. Meatsgains (talk) 02:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
  • OK, I'm closing this--it's already been talked about onWP:BLPN. If the IP continues they'll be blocked. Drmies (talk) 03:27, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

User:Js82 reported by User:Onel5969 (Result: Page protected)[edit]

Page: Sardarji joke (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Js82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log ·