Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive334

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

Noticeboard archives

Contents

User:Historiker123454 reported by User:Kansas Bear (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Russo-Turkish War (1676–81) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Historiker123454 (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]
  4. [5]


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7],[8]

Comments:
User:Historiker123454 has been edit warring, since 19:48, 31 December 2016‎, their interpretation of the result of the Russo-Turkish War (1676–81). As shown on the talk page, Historiker has stated certain sources(with no quotes) support their opinion, which on the contrary the sources in question do not. Historiker has also posted this website;

Which appears to be a mirror site of Wikipedia. --Kansas Bear (talk) 08:19, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 31 hours. The user has continued to revert on 3 January and has not taken any notice of the sourcing problems that people pointed out. This is a brand new account, created on 31 December. EdJohnston (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

User:24.215.116.113 reported by User:WayeMason (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page: CKDU-FM (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 24.215.116.113 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [9]


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [10]
  2. [11]
  3. [12]
  4. Suspect same user as last edit war, new IP though, same content.


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [13]


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Attempt to resolve, last round - [14] Copied this old warning onto new IP page [15]

Comments:

User:70.122.135.104 reported by User:Marchjuly (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page: Baby, It's Cold Outside (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 70.122.135.104 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [16]


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/754299161 -- December 12, 2016
  2. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/756565786 -- December 25, 2016
  3. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/757169037 -- December 29, 2016
  4. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/757505951 -- December 31, 2016
  5. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/758134571 -- January 4, 2017
  6. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/758179226 -- January 4, 2017
  7. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/758179226 -- January 4, 2017
  8. Special:diff/70.122.135.104/758217890 -- January 4, 2017


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

  1. Special:diff/Marchjuly/757172502 -- December 29, 2016 by Marchjuly
  2. Special:diff/ThePlatypusofDoom/757506087 -- December 31, 2016 by ThePlatypusofDoom
  3. Special:diff/ThePlatypusofDoom/757507092 -- December 31, 2016 by ThePlatypusofDoom
  4. Special:diff/GliderMaven/758181395 -- January 4, 2017 by GliderMaven


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Encourage editor to engage in article talk page discussion to seek consensus for removal.

  1. Special:diff/Marchjuly/757171449 -- December 29, 2016 in edit sum by Marchjuly
  2. Special:diff/Marchjuly/757172502 -- December 29, 2016 on user talk page by Marchjuly
  3. Special:diff/Marchjuly/758218378 -- Janaury 4, 2017 in edit sum by Marchjuly

Comments:

IP 70.122.135.104 has been removing sourced content from the article since early last month. The removal has been reverted each time by multiple editors, including myself. IP 70.122.135.104 has been warned multiple times on both their user talk page and in edit sums to not engage in edit warring, but to seek a consensus for this change on the article's talk page. Despite all of this, IP 70.122.135.104 has continued to engage in edit warring and even violated WP:3RR earlier today with four consecutive reverts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:59, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

User:68.184.153.171 and User:Slavuta33 reported by User:Ymblanter (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page: Ilya Repin (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 68.184.153.171 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) and Slavuta33 (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. [17]
  2. [18]
  3. [19]
  4. [20]


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: first edit at User talk:68.184.153.171


Talk:Ilya Repin#Nationality in the lede

Comments:
This is obviously the same user, as seen from the diffs and also suggested by Antandrus at the talk page of the IP. The user/IP are not just edit-warring, their edits are obviously disruptive and include removing a reference to Britannica which they do not like with the reference to an obscure Ukrainian cite of unclear notability.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:58, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

The IP is now edit-warring at Igor Stravinsky as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:28, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Also at Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, and this needs to be stopped.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:52, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Pinging User:Antandrus for comment, since he has posted on the IP's talk page, and he has stated that the IP is the same person as User:Slavuta33. EdJohnston (talk) 20:43, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Ed and Ymblanter ... yes, it's the same person, with no doubt whatsoever. Since they were new I was more-or-less assuming good faith they were inadvertently editing logged out, not evading my copyright warning, placed earlier this morning (Slavuta33 copied and pasted directly from www.encyclopediaofukraine.com; see here). That's a separate issue from the edit warring and nationalist POV-pushing, of course. Appreciate your help. Antandrus (talk) 21:23, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

User:TheBellaTwins1445 reported by User:DantODB (Result: No violation, Semi)[edit]

Page: Alexa Bliss (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: TheBellaTwins1445 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [21]
  2. [22]
  3. [23]

Comments:
User refuses to collaborate with a handful of other users. I've seen that most of their edits have to do with not matching the information presented on the article with the proper citation, claiming "more sources" are needed when there's already properly cited reliable citations provided, as well as reverting edits that make information more cohesive. DantODB 23:14, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Result: No violation of 3RR, but the editing of this article is very confused. There has been IP vandalism and possible sockpuppetry. See also the closure of a previous AN3 report in which DantODB was blocked. I've semiprotected the article for two months. EdJohnston (talk) 23:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Contentcreator reported by User:Chrissymad (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page
Hydraulic fracturing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Contentcreator (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 01:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758019152 by Chrissymad (talk)"
  2. 00:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 757975452 by Dmartin969 (talk) the source says the information directly and does not "directly link" anywhere please provide more information before reverting"
  3. 00:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC) "/* Environmental impacts */ removing cnn story the claim was not supported by the source and not enough info to reword. Went to AP and US news could not get additional information for claim"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 00:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC) "General note: Removal of content, blanking on Hydraulic fracturing. (TW)"
  2. 00:54, 3 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Hydraulic fracturing. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:


Repeatedly removing sourced claims as IP and under username. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 01:06, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Reply
The cnn story is seperate and I was going to talk about it on the user talk page(758017259) I did not revert that I was discussing it with another user from earlier on their talk page that took issue that I removed it.Someone reverted a separate change without an explanation. So I reverted it. She then reverts mine again without reason but with a claim that I am engaging in an edit war. This is incorrect as I just wanted an explanation. My reasoning is justified she is without justification.I reverted once when the person made a revert without a response and a second time when she reverted my revert with an unfounded claim. I also cited the line from the source in my change.
The source says directly "USGS studies suggest that this process is only rarely the cause of felt earthquakes."
My line read "Hydraulic fracturing has been rarely linked to induced seismicity or earthquakes."
The line before said "Hydraulic fracturing has been directly linked to induced seismicity or earthquakes."
The line before the previous person edited which was accurate "Hydraulic fracturing has been sometimes linked to induced seismicity or earthquakes."
  • Result: Warned for edit warring. You have a surprising number of talk page warnings for a person who has only been here for two days. Your behavior on this article looks like a crusade to make fracking seem as harmless as possible. If you continue to make controversial changes (such as removal of references, and removal of negative statements about fracking) without first getting a consensus on the talk page you may be blocked for disruptive editing. EdJohnston (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

User:HornetsMike reported by User:GeneralizationsAreBad (Result:Blocked)[edit]

Page
WITS Academy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
HornetsMike (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 00:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "/* References */"
  2. 00:47, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758367774 by Adam9007 (talk)"
  3. 00:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "/* References */"
  4. 00:39, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "/* References */"
  5. 00:32, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "/* References */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 00:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on WITS Academy. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 60 hours. I usually block shorter, but here we've got unsourced additions, and some might be hoaxes (I mean Fox logos that I've deleted). Materialscientist (talk) 01:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

User:2602:306:301E:E2F0:8CF:2CFF:F72C:D114 reported by User:North Shoreman (Result:Blocked)[edit]

Page
Operation Barbarossa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
2602:306:301E:E2F0:8CF:2CFF:F72C:D114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Barbarossa&curid=22618&diff=758358346&oldid=758358285
  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Barbarossa&diff=758358087&oldid=758356931
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Barbarossa&diff=next&oldid=758352357
  4. 21:51, 4 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  5. 21:40, 4 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  6. 21:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  7. 21:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC) "Nazis don't exist, and this word does not make reference to the name of the party and ideology. Every German at the time lived through Communist terrorism and attempts to overthrow the government with the terrorists shooting in cities."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 21:44, 4 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Operation Barbarossa. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Barbarossa&diff=758343269&oldid=758343112


Comments:

IP has attempted to remove the word "Nazi" from the article and insert additional language unrelated to the battle. IP was asked to make case on discussion page but instead continued edit warring. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 22:18, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

PS Three additional reverts were made after filing this. I have updated these above but don't intend to any further. At least five editors have been reverted by the IP.

I am providing context of the time period with feelings towards soviet union. I have given nothing but facts and concrete justification for the war on Soviet Union. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:301E:E2F0:8CF:2CFF:F72C:D114 (talk) 23:27, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

User:2600:1017:B41F:AAC4:6530:A482:4E74:A987 reported by User:JFG (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page
International reactions to the United States presidential election, 2016 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
2600:1017:B41F:AAC4:6530:A482:4E74:A987 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 06:50, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "These are well-established facts beyond rational dispute, as shown in the reliable sources. The fact that you dispute them merely indicates your own bias and manifest inadequacy as a thinker."
  2. 06:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Revert edit warring vandal who keeps deleting references sans edit summary. Undid revision 758406917 by Supergodzilla2090 (talk)"
  3. 06:35, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Restore unexplained deletion of well-sourced, much-needed content. Undid revision 758406697 by Supergodzilla2090 (talk)"
  4. 06:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "tweak"
  5. 06:23, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Restore well-referenced, highly relevant background to the international reaction; namely, the Russian interference in the 2016 election with the aim of electing Donald Trump as U.S. president so as to promote their interests, via international espionage."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Edit warring by IP to insert POV material which is unrelated to the article subject, reverted by multiple users — JFG talk 08:30, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Result: Semiprotected three months. EdJohnston (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

User:JonSonberg reported by User:Sabbatino (Result: Protected)[edit]

If this needs to continue it should do so elsewhere. EdJohnston (talk) 18:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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


Previous version reverted to:


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. 19:42, 4 January 2017
  2. 19:44, 4 January 2017
  3. 19:45, 4 January 2017
  4. 19:46, 4 January 2017
  5. 19:52, 4 January 2017
  6. 23:00, 4 January 2017
  7. 09:15, 5 January 2017


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: This warning was given after this revert.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Some other user tried dealing with this situation, but JonSonberg just showed hostility (1 and 2).

Comments:

  • He was blocked not long ago for the same behavior on other articles. – Sabbatino (talk) 09:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Jon:

Read your own links. "Some other user" was the person deleting the content. And another person supported me on the talk page. JonSonberg (talk) 10:22, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
1) This was reverting content deletion not edit warring. 2) Why are you not reporting the other user who deleted large amounts of content that had been on the page for over half a year? 3) You gave a warning after all the reverts had already happened. But you are displaying it here like you have given a warning and then I proceeded to revert the other user's edits. This is immoral. 4) The other user was deleting massive amounts of content from the page, which I reverted. I was not adding content. 5) It's immoral that you are reporting me not the other user. 6) There are other users who have supported my reverts in this case on the talk page. JonSonberg (talk) 10:14, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
article, as a single article for a single sentence not in plural. Which I accept and have not done anymore. This has nothing to do with it. And you were the one reporting me. JonSonberg (talk) 10:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I added this on the Talk page: The time in history from 540 to 1050 AD is defined as "The Estonian Viking Age" in Estonia by the University of Tartu and it's also included in the school curriculum. Referenced here. Specific details on what to write and display there can be debated. But users are not to delete this section from history. It covers 500 years of AD history of Estonia. JonSonberg (talk) 10:36, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Discuss the changes there and not here. Just let the admins decide what to do, because you are not helping yourself by posting information, which does not belong here. – Sabbatino (talk) 11:39, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Uninvolved ed here; the first five diffs in the report are an uninterrupted series, which usually is counted as a single revert. Note to anyone verifying what I just said - the time stamps in the report are two hours off what appears in the version history. So the list of Diffs shows 3 reverts, just shy of 3RR. That said, re-reverts without meaningful discussion are edit warring except in clear cut examples of policy violations and this looks like a content dispute dressed up as anti vandalism. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Footnote to initial closing
A. WP:ARBEE is explicitly about Russia-Estonia conflict (see motions section defining scope). There is another ARB ruling about Eastern Europe generally Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern European disputes
B. @EdJohnston: I don't understand why JonSonberg's prior history merits alerting him and no one else. Please recall that when we revamped DS in 2013-2014 a H-U-G-E amount of discussion went into termination of "cause" factors for these alerts. The idea was to reduce their perception as badges of shame and use by one side against another. I know you don't mean them like that, but this is besides the point.As I understand the new DS alert policy, anyone including involved eds are welcome to give these no-fault/no-shame FYI alerts about DS to anyone working in that area, so long as they haven't already been alerted in the last 12 months. When I enter one of these areas I usually alert myself, just to help people I subsequently alert can relax about it. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – 2 weeks. This seems to be a complex dispute about article quality. Consider opening up an WP:RFC on the talk page to resolve the content issue. JonSonberg states "you cannot DELETE content that other users have created and is historically correct." That is NOT part of Wikipedia policy. If material is considered excessive or if someone wants to locate it on a different page (such as History of Estonia), it can be removed. But these removals depend on editor consensus. Since JonSonberg was previously blocked for Baltic-related edits I am alerting him to WP:ARBEE. EdJohnston (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I support the decision. But Estonia is in Northern Europe, not Eastern Europe as your WP:ARBEE tag links to. Enjoy january. JonSonberg (talk) 18:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Nice try. Search the WP:ARBEE case for the word 'Estonia'. EdJohnston (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Which shows that someone has previously included Estonia as an eastern european country, nothing else JonSonberg (talk) 18:10, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment - involved editor here, so take it with all the necessary grain of salt, but frankly to me it seems that User:JonSonberg has some basic competency issues. I have hard time seeing other reason for repeated insertion of unsourced trivia despite objections, especially then he is sometimes duplicating facts that are already in the article.--Staberinde (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I might not be as eloquent in wording as you are, but I love my country and care about the historical accuracy of the page. You, on the other hand, seem to have an agenda that is equal to that of russian propaganda trolls JonSonberg (talk) 18:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:Edwtie reported by User:Jytdog (Result: Warned)[edit]

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

Previous version reverted to: diff

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: diff; see also OR warning here and notably their response here (I am expert of Cochlear implant. Don't use editing war. It's NO research but it's facts of cochleair implants.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Cochlear_implant#History

Comments:
This article of cochlear implants is NPOV because deaf comunnity were very anrgy to Jytdog. I will try rewritten this article but Jytdoy do attrack to this. Edwtie (talk) 19:50, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

For info, the text being added by Edwtie appears to be WP:COPYVIO from Infogalactic !! Roxy the dog. bark 20:01, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
And, in addition, he is a COI editor. I revision-deleted copyvio; the next revert by Edwtie will result in a block.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:10, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
I am not COI editor. Cochlear implant is NPOV article. I have many sources. it has in another sources from science. It will added soon in this articles. I have read this articles Edwtie (talk) I have checked a article from infogalactic but they have copied this article from wikipedia. They have created this text from wikipedia. See: (cur | prev) 04:28, 4 February 2016‎ MediaWiki default (talk)‎ . . (592 bytes) (+592)‎. And This article has been created already in 2012.
See now: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cochlear_implant&diff=prev&oldid=526254369 Edwtie (talk) e 20:18, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Nice catch, User:Roxy the dog and thanks Ymblanter. Jytdog (talk) 20:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
It looks however that you indeed removed this content earlie from the article. Whereas still a copyright violation (we are not allowed to copy text without attribution) it is not as bad as just copypasting a non-free text.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I have found this: https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Cochlear_implant&action=history . This user have created this article in janaury 2016. Edwtie (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Result: User:Edwtie is warned that further reverting, or addition of copyrighted content, may lead to a block of their account. EdJohnston (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
EdJonston, you will not understand. I have founded sources but content was from old versions of Cochlear implant from wikipedia. but it has no sources. it will be rewritten from old versions. It will be rebuild from old versions and it will added sources into content. This content is almost good but it will added more courses to clear. Edwtie (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Edwtie, with a limited grasp of English I'd advise you to stay away from controversies. ("it will added more courses to clear"?). It is hard to perceive your point. Anyway, you were edit warring on 3 January and could have been blocked then. The next time you make a large content change at Cochlear implant without previous consensus you may be blocked. EdJohnston (talk) 20:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
word courses is wrong. I means sources (from research or other) I have putted now in sandbox of Cochlear implant to rebuild. I know about cochlear implants. It must balance between two communieties. but nobody have asked to rewritten or added more sources. sandbox is a good solution for rewritten content. And I have found archive from consesus. nobody have added commented to proposal of Jytog. [24] I think that nobody have rewritten. I added sandbox of cochlear implant to rewritten Edwtie (talk) 20:16, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Jytdog reported by User:Ibadibam (Result: No violation)[edit]

Page
South Beach Diet (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Jytdog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 01:13, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758371021 by Ibadibam (talk) again,. I look forward to your comments on the dispute on Talk."
  2. 01:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758370336 by Ibadibam (talk) if you have something to say, say it on talk. this is lame."
  3. 01:02, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758365813 by Ibadibam (talk) there is no valid dispute of this passage."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 01:09, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "/* Removing maintenance templates */ new section"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

User is removing maintenance template related to a dispute in which that user is involved. Ibadibam (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Ay the OP parachuted from ANI where they made a clueless !vote, and into a behavior issue (not a content dispute), and is blindly tagging the article, which is WP:DISRUPTIVE. There is no content dispute - there is only disruptive editing by an editor about be topic banned at ANI. Why Ibadidam has chosen to actually pretend that there is a valid content dispute, I have no idea; no one who has looked at this sees a content dispute, except Amnccaff who as I said is on the edge of a TBAN. I have asked the OP three times to state their position on the "content dispute" - diff, diff, diff at the article Talk page. no response. Again there is no valid content dispute. Jytdog (talk) 01:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
I see 3 reverts, so it is not a 3RR violation. I just took a quick look at the page and the ANI, and I think that Jytdog's description is accurate. That said, Jytdog, it would be no big deal to have just left that small inline under discussion tag there. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
in the big picture that is true indeed. things will work themselves out. Jytdog (talk) 01:48, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

User:CWJakarta reported by User:Adamfinmo (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page
Sultan Aji Muhammad Sulaiman Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
CWJakarta (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 03:31, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "A little edit"
  2. 03:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted edits by 202.67.39.21 (talk) to last version by CWJakarta"
  3. 02:59, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted edits by 202.67.39.21 (talk) to last version by CWJakarta"
  4. 02:57, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted edits by 202.67.39.21 (talk) to last version by CWJakarta"
  5. 02:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by 202.67.39.21 (talk) to last revision by CWJakarta. (TW)"
  6. 02:54, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted edits by 202.67.39.29 (talk) to last version by CWJakarta"
  7. 02:48, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted edits by 202.67.39.29 (talk) to last version by CWJakarta"
  8. 02:45, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by 202.67.39.29 (talk) to last revision by AirEnthusiast. (TW)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 03:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "/* Please stop edit warring */ new section"
  2. 03:41, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "/* Edit warring */ new section"
  3. 03:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "/* January 2017
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

This user has engaged in massive edit warring and continued to do so after having been warned twice and acknowledged those warning. A block is in order here. Adam in MO Talk 03:43, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "

Look here. I acknowledge that I have done edit warring. But after you warned me. I just did something to the article just what Zupotachyon said to me in the article talk page. I did not revert the article again. CWJakarta (talk) 03:49, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Here you reinserted the word "international" and then gave a misleading edit summary.--Adam in MO Talk 03:52, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes. But I was doing what Zupotachyon said. This is what he said: "'I would recommend including the official name and the common name (where it does not have "International") afterward. An example could be "Sultan Aji Muhammad Sulaiman International Airport, known as Sultan Aji Muhammad Sulaiman Airport," then referring to the airport later in the article without the "International'". That's all what I did. I do not have the intention of starting another edit war. As for the previous edit warring, I just want to say that I deeply apologise for what I have done. CWJakarta (talk) 03:57, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
As for the edit summary, I agree that it was misleading. If it is possible, I really hope that it could be changed. CWJakarta (talk) 04:07, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

 Administrator note:I granted rollback to this user on the 4th, and due to the fac that they almost immediately abused it in an edit war I have now  Revoked it. Beeblebrox (talk) 05:08, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Result: User:CWJakarta is warned for edit warring, and another admin has suspended their rollback. I'm also semprotecting the article to stop the IP-hopper. EdJohnston (talk) 17:08, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

User:202.67.39.21 reported by User:Adamfinmo (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page
Sultan Aji Muhammad Sulaiman Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
202.67.39.21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 04:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC))"wrong edit by that user again"
  2. 03:16, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "revert wrong edit by another user"
  3. 03:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  4. 03:00, 6 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  5. 02:57, 6 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  6. 02:57, 6 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  7. 02:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. [25]
  2. [26]
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

IP is edit warring over the word "International" in the lede. Adam in MO Talk 03:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Continuing the edit war as 202.67.39.28 (talk). Range block may be required. —Farix (t | c) 16:59, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: Semiprotected six months. This article has had socking problems in the past. There is endless dispute about the correct name of the airport. See the article talk page for more. EdJohnston (talk) 17:14, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Bigbaby23 reported by User:Jytdog (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page: Influenza vaccine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bigbaby23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: diff

Diffs of the user's reverts, picking up from the last EWN notice I filed here, which had a last diff dated Dec 26:

  1. diff 06:23, 30 December 2016
  2. diff 02:34, 31 December 2016
  3. diff 08:32, 31 December 2016 (tagging article)
  4. diff 03:17, 1 January 2017 again tagging
  5. diff 01:06, 2 January 2017 back to trying EW content in
  6. diff 03:18, 3 January 2017
  7. diff 22:54, 3 January 2017
  8. diff 03:45, 4 January 2017

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: several

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See Talk:Influenza_vaccine#Lead_recommendation_summary and subsequent sections.

Comments:

Prior report here. BigBaby23 actually complained that I filed that here but they moderated their behavior a bit (note no edit warring diffs from Dec 26 (end of last report) an Dec 30, but when it was allowed to drift off the page with no action, they just picked up where they left off, trying to force content into the article that is not accepted by any other editor at the page.

here they accuse User:Doc James of advocacy, for pete's sake. And most recently here they "threatened" to start a criticism section.

Again, their last block for edit warring fringe-y content on a health article led to a 2 week block. More is needed. Jytdog (talk) 04:29, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes would be useful to have a brief block IMO. They need to wait for consensus and have been at about 3 reverts a day for the last week. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:31, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
  • So after I filed the first EWN case linked above, they stopped edit warring and tried to seek consensus on the Talk page with a series of drafts for the content. I filed this one, and they again actually used DR. This editor understands exactly what they are doing, and they are gaming the system, edit warring to try to force their content in and only resorting to DR when a block is imminent. Bad news. Jytdog (talk) 15:10, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
I left a note for User:Bigbaby23 and hope to get a response before an admin closes this. EdJohnston (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: In lieu of a block, User:Bigbaby23 is warned for edit warring. He may be blocked if he makes any further reverts at Influenza vaccine that don't have a prior consensus on the talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 16:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Sro23 reported by User:209.2.60.96 (Result: Nominator blocked 1 week)[edit]

Page: List of Power Rangers Ninja Steel episodes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Sro23 (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. [27]
  2. [28]
  3. [29]
  4. [30]


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


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

Comments:

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 1 week Widr (talk) 18:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Scurrilous Knave reported by User:GeneralizationsAreBad (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
First 100 days of Donald Trump's presidency (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Scurrilous Knave (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 18:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "Stop your edit warring. This is quite due. Whatever the Russians are paying you, I'll double it. Just st are your Undid revision 758804859 by GeneralizationsAreBad (talk)"
  2. 17:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "Clearly neutral.Undid revision 758803215 by GeneralizationsAreBad (talk)"
  3. 17:50, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "More neutrl Undid revision 758791023 by GeneralizationsAreBad (talk)"
  4. 16:26, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "Passrs NPOV. Exisitng version fails. Undid revision 758758996 by IgnorantArmies (talk)pas"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 17:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on First 100 days of Donald Trump's presidency. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

This is political POV-pushing extending to more than this article: [31]. I've never been called a Russian stooge before; this is new. GABgab 18:10, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Samsara 19:39, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Sleyece reported by User:Sunshineisles2 (Result: Blocked)[edit]

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

Previous version: 14:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. 16:17, 5 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758368538 by Sunshineisles2"
  2. 01:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "Recognized as De-Facto President (Official edit, DO NOT REVERT)"
  3. 15:27, 6 January 2017 (UTC) "This is an OFFICIAL edit (See talk page)"

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [32]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [33]

Proof of notification: [34]

Comments:
User has repeatedly reverted edits on this and other pages of similar nature (see Dick Cheney), has not justified decisions, regularly removes relevant discussion from user pages, and offers no comments other than claiming his edits are "Official." Discussion is fairly hard to impossible to initiate. --Sunshineisles2 (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

NOTE: Sleyece has just attempted to delete this report in order to prevent a discussion from taking place: 12:03, 7 January 2017 (UTC) --Sunshineisles2 (talk)17:11, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

I have counter reported this user. This user is constantly harassing me. This user is VERY abusive. -- Sleyece (talk) 12:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Besides edit warring Sleyece has been doing all sorts of other goofy-but-obnoxious stuff such as thanking me for an edit which he deleted, erasing messages to others [35], and saying in edit summaries that his are OFFICIAL EDITS which must not be reverted. Weird. Motsebboh (talk) 18:13, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
This warm and welcome "Testimonial" has been displayed @ Sleyece -- Sleyece (talk) 14:16, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
@Motsebboh: -- Sleyece (talk) 16:13, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 31 hours for long-term edit warring on this article, trying to make Edith Wilson be the 'de-facto' President of the United States. Five times since 13 December. Nobody else on the talk page supports this. EdJohnston (talk) 21:56, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Sunshineisles2 reported by User:Sleyece (Result: No action)[edit]

User has consistently harassed me. User follows me from page to page constantly threatening me. User abuses the report system. --Sleyece (talk) 13:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Result: No action. The filer has been blocked per a previous edit warring report about Edith Wilson. EdJohnston (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Motsebboh reported by User:Sleyece (Result: Malformed)[edit]

Page: (talk) User being reported: {{User:Motsebboh}}

User is harassing me. This user has established a conspiracy to get me blocked because I made an info box edit they do not like. (talk) shows a clear abusive collaboration against myself as a user. This user clearly states that it may be possible to use resolved conduct issues as a weapon to make me suffer. There has been no attempt by these two to resolve conflict with me. The user follows me from page to page. Please, block me if you have to, but at least warn them against this toxic and distressing abuse. --Sleyece (talk) 13:16, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Result: Malformed report. Please see the instructions at the top of this page for how to submit a 3RR report. EdJohnston (talk) 22:03, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:173.169.42.82 reported by User:Favonian (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page: Malinois dog (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 173.169.42.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [36]


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. [37]
  2. [38]
  3. [39]
  4. [40]
  5. [41]


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [42]

Favonian (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Result: Page semiprotected two months. EdJohnston (talk) 22:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

User:LibertyDash reported by User:Grayfell (Result: 1 week)[edit]

Page
Peter Thiel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
LibertyDash (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 07:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  2. 01:34, 8 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  3. 19:31, 7 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  4. 11:56, 7 January 2017 (UTC) ""
  5. 03:48, 7 January 2017 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 02:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Peter Thiel. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Something strange going on, but I'm not sure exactly what. This is the same content as was pushed by a sock, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sleeping is fun/Archive, but a checkuser cleared this editor. Regardless, edit warring is edit warring. Similar behavior at Palantir Technologies over the same issue. Grayfell (talk) 07:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 1 week. Clear 3RR on BLP, 07:42, 01:34, 19:31, 11:56. Obvious longer term pattern. Kuru (talk) 14:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Gekhoor reported by User:Wolbo (Result: 48 hours)[edit]

Page
Michael van Gerwen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Gekhoor (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 20:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC) to 20:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
    1. 20:52, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "/* Performance timeline */"
    2. 20:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "/* PDC major finals: 29 (21 titles, 8 runner-up) */"
  2. 19:10, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "/* PDC major finals: 29 (21 titles, 8 runner-up) */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 19:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Michael van Gerwen. (TW)"
  2. 20:44, 7 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Michael van Gerwen. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Continuous edit warring. Editor has been reverted at least 15 times by several editors and asked to take discussion to talk page. Editor does not proved explanation of edits via edit summary, does not discuss changes on article talk page as requested and does not respond to numerous user talk page notifications/warnings. Wolbo (talk) 21:18, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Editor continues edit-warring after notification (1).--Wolbo (talk) 23:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Since Gekhoor has no contributions outside van Gerwen and PDC articles, I suspect we have a WP:SPA / WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT case, and when the 48 hours is up, they'll go straight back to the article. If that happens, ping me and I'll make the next block indefinite. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:23, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Kellymoat reported by User:86.178.110.23 (Result: Page protected)[edit]

Page: The Very Best of Fleetwood Mac (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Kellymoat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [43]


Diffs of the user's reverts:

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


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: edit summary

Comments:Persistent edit-warring by User:Kellymoat. Although s/he reverted this particular article only three times in a 24 hour period, it was done at a time when s/he had also been reported for similar behaviour on another article by another user on the same day (for which Kellymoat had broken 3RR). Both article pages have now been protected, but this is an ongoing problem with Kellymoat who has a vast history of edit warring and his/her talk page history is filled with warnings about such behaviour. Possible tag-teaming issue with Kellymoat and User:331dot which is already being investigated. Action required please. 86.178.110.23 (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

  • The record will clearly bear out that there is no coordinated "tag teaming" of anyone nor am I a sock as the IP user has also alleged. The IP user seems to consider any edit they disagree with as "vandalism"; I am still willing to discuss any disputed edits with them if they wish. In making this report, they should watch out for the boomerang. 331dot (talk) 01:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
The original "edit war" earlier today was brought on by a sock puppet who has since been blocked. In fact, one of those 3 reverts to the Fleetwood Mac page was from him specifically targeting my edits. Did I mention - he is now blocked!
As to the "page protection", I requested -- let me repeat that -- I REQUESTED page protection on numerous pages to prevent that same sock from continuing to vandalize. So, you can hardly use that against me, lol. However, it was not me that requested page protection on the Fleetwood Mac page. It was 331dot, and he requested it from you and the sock.
But, let me clear something up for you. My page is not "filled with warnings". My page is filled vandals (most of whom eventually get blocked) complaining about me not allowing their vandalism. For example, of the 17 issues currently on my talk page, 4 of them were from that same sockpuppet.
Kellymoat (talk) 01:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected for 2 months by EdJohnston Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Casper Catch reported by User:JDDJS (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page
Samantha Bee (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Casper Catch (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 22:21, 8 January 2017 (UTC) "How do you know her residences is in NY? And citizenship is redundant"
  2. 17:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC) "This format doesn't belong there and is redundant to add"
  3. 17:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC) "This information is irrelevant"
  4. 05:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 758876170 by TonyIsTheWoman (talk)"
  5. 01:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 757832587 by JDDJS (talk)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 01:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

He has been warned on his talk page about violating the three rule revert, but has continued to revert. JDDJS (talk) 02:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting wait.svg Warned The issue is now stale, so a warning will suffice. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Motthoop reported by User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (Result: No action)[edit]

Page
Keddie murders (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Motthoop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 15:15, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "uncited sources WIKI RULES 101"
  2. 15:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 759154739 by Silverfish (talk)"
  3. Consecutive edits made from 14:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC) to 15:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
    1. 14:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "No sources cited. This entire page is BS. NO SOURCES CITED. ERASE IT. IT NEVER HAPPENED ACCORDING TO WIKI RULES."
    2. 14:49, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "removing non-cited sources. Wiki Rules are FUCKED but follow them to the letter. Let's clean this up. Did it ever happen? Ask an expert? NO! Go only by NEWSPAPER ACCOUNTS."
    3. 14:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "Geez, so amny unreliable sources stated, and so many sources NEVER cited? Did this ever happen according to wiki rules?"
    4. 15:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "no source cited. WIKI RLES"
    5. 15:02, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "no source cited. Geez!"
    6. 15:04, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "source never implies "several other bones"! Geez! Wake up wiki muckers! FOLLOW THE RULES"
    7. 15:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "don't ever associate this page to the TRUTH of the case. FUCK OFF WIKI"
    8. 15:08, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "uncited sources. The sourced articles don't reflect such information, as they SUCK ASS, just like wikipedia does."
  4. 14:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "Replaced content with 'Re-write this entire article from scratch as only "reliable sources" such as newspaper accounts are valid. That way, we'll know for sure that the victims are...'"
  5. 14:26, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "Replaced content with 'RE-WRITE THIS WITH ONLY NEWSPAPER ACCOUNTS, AS IT'S ALL A FUCKING LIE. EAT SHIT AND DIE, BLACK AND WHITE NEWSPRINT LIES IS ALL ALLOWED ON WIKIFUCK? PLUMAS...'"
  6. 07:09, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "Tony Garedakis is a suspect, not a POI and not a nobody. Get over it."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 15:17, 9 January 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Keddie murders. (