Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive336

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

Noticeboard archives

Contents

User:LahiruG reported by User:Dan_arndt (Result: protected)[edit]

Page: List of Mahinda College alumni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: LahiruG (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: Talk:List of Mahinda College alumni, User talk:LahiruG

Comments:

  • I am equally to blame in this edit war and accept that my behavior is contrary to WP policies. I have attempted to explain my rational for the proposed changes that I have made to the article however it would appear that LahiruG has an ownership issue with the article in question. I am prepared to accept the consequences for my actions but would genuinely like to resolve the issue without punitive action being taken. Dan arndt (talk) 10:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  • The one who has a problem with the ownership of this list is User:Dan arndt, who has made significant changes to this article without trying to discuss them in the relevant talk page. As an editor who has been involved in editing this list for some time I have tried to discuss the issues at the talk page, but his is pushing his POV without reaching a consensus in the discussion. He is trying to convert this simple alumni list into a table which has irrelevant columns in it, without giving a valid rationale for its conversion. --LahiruG talk 10:26, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't have any issue with ownership of this particular page at all. As you can see by my edit history I have been slowly working my way through a number of school alumni lists in an effort to improve then and make them consistent with 'best practice' as evidenced by other 'featured lists' of alumni. Dan arndt (talk) 10:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
@Dan arndt: I am afraid, you have a serious issue with the ownership of many Sri Lanka related articles. Many Sri Lankan users have left Wikipedia due to your dictatorial type behavior. --LahiruG talk 10:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Wow, that was completely out of the blue. I am dumbfounded by your completely unsubstantiated allegations. If you have any issue with my editorial style then this is not the forum for that discussion. Dan arndt (talk) 11:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – there appears to be a content dispute on the page. Consider dispute resolution. slakrtalk / 08:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) Possibly relevant reading? I'm seeing what would be constructive discussion from both of you but there's some sort of communication breakdown. I'd suggest WP:3O or WP:DR, but I see there's already a third opinion at the talk page, though I don't know if there's any prior interaction there and so cannot decide whether or not it's a fresh opinion. As such, I'll toss out my 2 cents here as well. This is just off the top of my head and I have no plans on getting involved beyond these suggestions.
  • Whether tables or lists are easier to read (not a biggie, I know): for what it's worth, on my laptop tables are easier to read, but on my phone lists usually win unless the table is kept narrow enough. That's just my phone using the mobile site, though; if I pull up the desktop site on my phone both of them are equally microscopic. That said, y'all do seem to agree that that's not really an issue.
  • Sourced but non-notable entries (what appears to be the crux): typically, notability only applies to whether the broader concept gets an article, not whether individual entries are to be included. Normally, as long as there's a reliable source (preferably independent and non-primary because we're not the phone book) noting something as part of a list, it's ok to include it in the list. That said, WP:LISTPEOPLE does indeed spell out that it should be limited to individuals who are either notable, or would only fail notability because of WP:BLP1E, or for completeness sake where an exhaustive list would be 99% notable anyway (e.g. I suppose a hypothetically non-notable US president would nonetheless be included at List of Presidents of the United States). So, I have to agree with Dan ardnt's point on this, though I do grant that his phrasing on the talk page could have been more succinct at time.
Now, I could block both of you, I could decide that Obi2canibe's participation on the talk page constitutes a sign of some sort of current (but not necessarily final) consensus, or I could leave both of you unblocked. If y'all are willing to keep it on the talk page and quit making accusations, I don't really see a reason to block. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:03, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Ian.Thomson I didn't think that the conversion of the list into a table was actually that controversial (apparently it is to some users). I've previously worked on numerous FLs, all of which are tables not lists. My main issue was the inclusion of significant numbers of non-notable alumni, which appears to be a case of different schools attempting to promote their superiority over other schools using Wikipedia. I reported this as I felt guilty of engaging in edit warring (contrary to WP policies) although at the same time I was trying to explain my rationale on the article's talkpage albeit generally a one sided conversation. I welcome a third party, such as Obi2canibe, participation in the discussion. However I do feel aggrieved that LahiruG is trying to make this personal by making unsubstantiated accusations against me. I will use my best endeavors to try and be as objective as possible and hopefully it can be resolved amicably. Dan arndt (talk) 09:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:176.23.1.95 reported by User:DrStrauss (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page
Yemeni Civil War (2015–present) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
176.23.1.95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 23:00, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "listen: IT'S IS MARKED AS BEING ---A PART--- OF THE POPULAR RESISTANCE. THAT'S WHY POPULAR RESISTANCE IS LISTED WITH ONE STAR AND SOUTHERN MOVEMENT 2 STARS. stop making deliberate falsehoods. rv WP:IDONTLIKEIT"
  2. 22:11, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "that's why I'm placing it under the popular resistance. you have no reason to remove it. rv WP:DISRPUPTIVE behavior"
  3. 20:06, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "mentioning it under the PR. 173.49.17.74 you've been deliberately lying"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

I personally haven't warned the user but other users have as can be seen in the page's revision history. Simple 3RR violation.DrStrauss talk 23:04, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that you don't mention User:173.49.17.74 and his sock puppet User:Chilicheese22. --176.23.1.95 (talk) 23:08, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Also, your report won't bear fruit. The rule concerns more than three reverts, three reverts is not a violation itself. --176.23.1.95 (talk) 23:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you User:DrStrauss please if you don't mind to continue to review this page because not everyone can be incorrect and him being right if you look at his last edit he basically said he changed it due to him "not liking it" which means he is just adding his opinion and not reporting the news how it should be reported. Propaganda!

  • Result: Page semiprotected three months due to the numerous IP reverts that are not discussed on the talk page. (Apologies to the single IP cited in this report who did open a discussion). Rapid-fire editing does not give any opportunity for agreement to be reached. Due to its instability, this page may eventually be a candidate for extended confirmed protection. EdJohnston (talk) 14:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:173.49.17.74 and their sock puppet User:chilicheese22 reported by User:176.23.1.95 (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page
Yemeni Civil War (2015–present) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
173.49.17.74 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) + sock User:chilicheese22
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 00:54, 1 February 2017‎ (UTC) "Congrats you just admitted that you either can't stand being wrong or you have a political agenda"
  2. 22:26, 31 January 2017 "That would be incorrect for you to put it underneath it would indicate that they are two separate entities when in reality they are the same it has to be inside the popular resistance tab.rv WP:DISRPUPTIVE behavior"
  3. 22:11, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "What are you talking about chilicheese is right it should be under the popular resistance tab stop spreading your political agenda."
  4. 01:08, 31 January 2017‎ (UTC) "Using your logic if I go to Syria or Yemen raise any random flag but have the same ideology as another group and some unreliable sources gives me attention we should listen them. Check the source under AQAP which I put."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
Unlike the other report, aimed at denigrating me while I had done no 3RR violation, this report of User:173.49.17.74 and their obvious sock puppet User:chilicheese22 (new user, no other contributions than the mentioned page, mobile edits just like the IP), demonstrates an actual violation of 3RR. --176.23.1.95 (talk) 06
56, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: Page semiprotected per another report. The diffs shown here represent a 3RR violation only if we believe your assertion that Chilicheese22 really is a sock, since you combined the edits of the IP and the account. EdJohnston (talk) 15:02, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:176.23.1.95 reported by User:chilicheese22 (Result: Semi)[edit]

Page
Yemeni Civil War (2015–present) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
176.23.1.95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 23:00, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "listen: IT'S IS MARKED AS BEING ---A PART--- OF THE POPULAR RESISTANCE. THAT'S WHY POPULAR RESISTANCE IS LISTED WITH ONE STAR AND SOUTHERN MOVEMENT 2 STARS. stop making deliberate falsehoods. rv WP:IDONTLIKEIT"
  2. 22:11, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "that's why I'm placing it under the popular resistance. you have no reason to remove it. rv WP:DISRPUPTIVE behavior"
  3. 20:06, 31 January 2017 (UTC) "mentioning it under the PR. 173.49.17.74 you've been deliberately lying"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Basically tried to meet in the middle with this person but basically said that because he "doesn't like it" the content which I put with sources he will continue to span the page also has another feud with another user about the same topic and not everyone can be incorrect and him being right

User:SuddenDeth reported by User:Flat Out (Result: Blocked 72 hours)[edit]

Page
Ride the Lightning (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
SuddenDeth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 10:22, 1 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Metallica */"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 02:58, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Ride the Lightning. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Slow burn edit warring at Ride the Lightning. I believe the previous block and warnings are sufficient to support a block, but I have added a new warning on users talk page Flat Out (talk) 03:13, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Comment @Flat Out and SuddenDeth: So like, the last edit to that article's talk page was 28 September 2016. That's a long time ago. Also, there was another user who approved of the contested change. So, can you guys please make an effort to discuss this outside of edit summaries? @SuddenDeth: multiple people disagree with your edit. If you continue making it without attempting to discuss it, you will be blocked. --slakrtalk / 09:03, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Note There is a companion AN/I thread currently open about this editor's overall pattern of behavior, mostly pushing challenged edits repeatedly and refusing to engage in talk page discussion. Laser brain (talk) 17:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 72 hours For continuing to edit war on other articles. NeilN talk to me 22:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Jedisvrais reported by User:WikiDan61 (Result: Blocked 36 hours)[edit]

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


User blanked large portions of cited text, stating that the material was being used to denigrate the subject. Material is negative in tone, but fully cited.

Blanking was reverted by Uamaol.

User re-blanked:

  1. once
  2. twice
  3. three times
  4. four times
  5. five times


User ignored warnings on their user talk page, and an invitation to discuss the matter rather than continue to blank the content.

Comments:

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 36 hours NeilN talk to me 22:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Balki Chalkidiki reported by User:McGeddon (Result: Blocked indef)[edit]

Page
Turkey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Balki Chalkidiki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 11:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Your only contribution is adding/changing pictures (the excessive references that I removed were not your contributions)"
  2. 11:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "I also reduced the number of excessive references (for example, there were 9 references in a row saying that Tayyip Erdoğan has become authoritarian. 4 references are enough."
  3. 11:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Picture galleries are forbidden in country articles"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

User was already blocked twice in December for edit-warring this article. Has been warned about 3RR in the past, and is currently ignoring an article talk page thread regarding their edits. McGeddon (talk) 11:55, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Balki Chalkidiki has gone on to revert the article about ten more times since being reported here. --McGeddon (talk) 13:13, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  1. 12:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "After your edits, it says "with Adnan Menderes as President" (Menderes was the Prime Minister). Are all Georgians this way?"

I am getting offended by his reckless edit revertions and edit summaries. I don't know what, but he is implying something to my nationality. He could've just incorporated his edits to mines but he acts like he owns the page and doesn't co-operate. Also you can check Talk:Turkey. It isn't just me but also some others. kazekagetr 12:36, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola.svg Blocked indefinitely Sockpuppet. NeilN talk to me 22:58, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:117.198.237.149 reported by User:Kautilya3 (Result: Blocked)[edit]

Page
Zorawar Singh Kahluria (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
117.198.237.149 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 12:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Kautlya or Chanakya... what is your source u r quoting? And if on Gen. Rawat's wikipedia page, we write Allegiance as Uttarakhand. Plus, it was already the Sikh Empire, some overzealous Hindus changed it to what u r saying as legal."
  2. 10:10, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763282575 by Jim1138 (talk) Zorawar Singh was the commander in chief of the Sikh Empire fighitng in the Tibet front [[7]]"
  3. 09:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763281640 by Jim1138 (talk) irrational view point, CM or any commander of Armed Forces of India (irrespective to State or Dynasty owes allegiance to Republic of India."
  4. 09:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 762564103 by Kautilya3 (talk) reverted the irrational edit."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 11:10, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Zorawar Singh Kahluria. (TW)"
  2. 11:11, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Zorawar Singh Kahluria. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 11:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Zorawar Singh Kahluria Khushwant Singh */ reply"
Comments:

Further to edit-warring, the edit summaries are WP:BATTLEGROUND. This user definitely needs to be restrained. Kautilya3 (talk) 13:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – 72 hours for 3RR violation. This edit removes the source and then the edit summary *asks* for a source. If he sincerely wants a source this is a strange way to proceed. The edit summary also speaks about 'overzealous Hindus' suggesting he will not be able to edit neutrally on this topic. We should be considering a WP:NOTHERE block if he continues with this approach. EdJohnston (talk) 04:00, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Gustont reported by User:Venomous Zeal (Result: Both editors blocked for 48 hours)[edit]

Page
Sick (CeCe Peniston song) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Gustont (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 14:28, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481980 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  2. 14:28, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481944 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  3. 14:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481875 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  4. 14:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481834 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  5. 14:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481796 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  6. 14:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481747 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  7. 14:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481720 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  8. 14:26, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481674 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  9. 14:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481624 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  10. 14:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481576 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  11. 14:25, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481533 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  12. 14:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481491 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  13. 14:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481439 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  14. 14:22, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481262 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  15. 14:22, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481172 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  16. 14:21, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763481101 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  17. 14:20, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763480921 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  18. 14:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763480854 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  19. 14:19, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763480784 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  20. 14:18, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763480733 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  21. 14:18, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763480626 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  22. 14:13, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763479938 by Venomous Zeal (talk) You will have much more to explain soon"
  23. 14:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763478284 by Venomous Zeal (talk) When you start discussion, follow the discussion"
  24. 13:10, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763443638 by Venomous Zeal (talk)"
  25. 18:34, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763342359 by Venomous Zeal (talk) Respect neutral sources as Discogs etc"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning


Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 18:17, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Disruptive Ediitng */ new section"
  2. 18:17, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Disruptive Ediitng */"
  3. 18:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Disruptive Ediitng */"
  4. 18:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Disruptive Ediitng */ link"
Comments:

Obviously both editors are massively past 3RR, and since there's been no attempt to discuss this since yesterday, it's time you both took a break. Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Both editors blocked – for a period of 48 hours Yunshui  14:52, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Wow, take a look at that article's edit history! Makes you proud to be alive. Lugnuts Precious bodily fluids 17:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

User:70.26.44.231 reported by User:JudgeRM (Result: Page protected)[edit]

Page
Panzer-Abteilung 40 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
70.26.44.231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 00:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "read talk page too"
  2. 00:28, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "both were cited THREE times to confirm the information!"
  3. 20:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "WHY? I have triple cited this stuff, how much more do you want? See talk page soon."
  4. 20:40, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "please see talk page"
  5. Consecutive edits made from 19:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC) to 19:54, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
    1. 19:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "for a small unit used in one campaign, why would you not want the exact composition of the tanks, it is not like the article is too long, same for the unique english translation - THIS IS NOT YOUR ARTICLE!"
    2. 19:54, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "The quoted text is properly cited, just like in an academic work, which makes it use fair and open!!!!"
  6. Consecutive edits made from 04:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC) to 04:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
    1. 04:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "i cited it, and cry me a river, you whiner, you don't own this article, my contributions add to its usefulness"
    2. 04:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "better"
  7. 14:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC) "citation"
  8. Consecutive edits made from 14:18, 1 February 2017 (UTC) to 14:18, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
    1. 14:18, 1 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763087019 by Dead Mary (talk)"
    2. 14:18, 1 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763086961 by Dead Mary (talk)"
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 20:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Panzer-Abteilung 40. (TW)"
  2. 20:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Notice: Avoiding copyright problems on Panzer-Abteilung 40. (TW)"
  3. 00:17, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Caution: Personal attack directed at a specific editor on Talk:Panzer-Abteilung 40. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

Despite being told many times by both me, Dead Mary, and K.e.coffman to not add certain material to Panzer-Abteilung 40, the IP continues to do so. Attempts for discussion on the talk is irrelevant, as the user just re-adds the content anyways, despite being told not to. JudgeRM (talk to me) 01:43, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Tezkiretul reported by User:JudgeRM (Result: Page protected)[edit]

Page
Presidency of Religious Affairs (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
Tezkiretul (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 22:43, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 763185507 by JudgeRM (talk) Seriously, discuss this on the talk page before removing.Reverted edits/restore, I give sources of the refutations originate fromserious/public-law sources"
  2. 17:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC) "Undid revision 762774833 by IronGargoyle (talk) Reverted edits/restore, because they not correct. I give sources of the refutations originate from serious/public-law sources."
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 19:56, 1 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Presidency of Religious Affairs. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

User has been removing sections of the page without discussion since January 3. User refuses to discuss this, instead just reverting blindly. JudgeRM (talk to me) 23:17, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

User:JAMES WILK reported by User:Bonadea (Result: Blocked 48 hours)[edit]

Page
Dmitri Patterson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
JAMES WILK (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 17:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC) ""
  2. 13:13, 3 February 2017 (UTC) ""
  3. 02:51, 3 February 2017 (UTC) ""
  4. 02:34, 3 February 2017 (UTC) ""
  5. 00:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC) ""
  6. 23:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC) ""
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 08:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Dimitri Patterson. (TW)"
  2. 17:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Dimitri Patterson. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page


Comments:

The edits are serious BLP violations, as well. The account has only ever edited this article, and has never used edit summaries or responded to warnings. bonadea contributions talk 17:57, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Stop x nuvola with clock.svg Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Next block will be an indef. NeilN talk to me 18:11, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

User:ILIRIDAproud reported by User:Iryna Harpy (Result: Warned)[edit]

Page
Republic of Ilirida (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported
ILIRIDAproud (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 00:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Explain why,there are of this page,Liberland,Azawad, Republic of Vevčani,but not and Republic of Ilirida"
  2. 22:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Vandalism please protect this page"
  3. 18:24, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Macedonia is and our please protect page"
  4. 02:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "Infobox country |autonomy = yes |conventional_long_name = Republic of Ilirida" (plus multiple uses of template markup which resulted in this report being malformed on original submission).
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. 23:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Republic of Ilirida. (TW)"
  2. 00:24, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Republic of Ilirida. (TW)"
  3. 00:50, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Warning: Editing while logged out on Republic of Ilirida. (TW)"
  4. 02:01, 3 February 2017 (UTC) "Notifying about edit warring noticeboard discussion. (TW)"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. 23:50, 2 February 2017 (UTC) "/* Why revert */"
Comments:

The user has instated, then reinstated a 'country' infobox for a non-existent state, and is edit warring the article both using their account and logged out as IP 185.13.240.53. A discussion was opened by the user here, where another editor (in Local hero, who seems to be familiar with the user) responded, but ILIRIDAproud is just WP:NOTGETTINGIT. Fundamentally, this user doesn't understand policy or guidelines, and their English is extremely poor. Judging by their commentary, it's predominantly a case of WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, and is very disruptive Iryna Harpy (talk) 02:08, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Comment I've semied the page for a month as a start. ILIRIDAproud, can you please comment on this report? NeilN talk to me 17:07, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
In my opinion User:ILIRIDAproud is risking a block. They seem to be full of nationalist enthusiasm, but due to difficulty with English their views are not easy to understand. This is not a good sign that they will be able to edit neutrally in the domain of WP:ARBMAC. They also like to use the term 'FYROM' for what Wikipedia calls the Republic of Macedonia. This is an echo of the original reason for the ARBMAC case. EdJohnston (talk) 19:13, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Subsequent to my protection I placed a DS notice on their talk page and relayed to them why using FYROM was discouraged. ILIRIDAproud is aware (I hope) that they're on very thin ice. --NeilN talk to me 20:58, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Result: Based on User:NeilN's comments I have put 'Warned' as the result of this complaint. EdJohnston (talk) 02:43, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Krimuk2.0 reported by User:Shimlaites (Result: Both warned)[edit]

Page: Untitled Sanjay Dutt Biopic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Page: Varun Dhawan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Krimuk2.0 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

The user has an abusive behavior, check this and also has a habit of pushing his POV. Reverting edits even after warning. Kindly take action. Shimlaites (talk) 10:29, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting wait.svg Warned Shimlaites, you are edit warring just as much as Krimuk2.0 (and you also failed to notify him of this report as you are required to do). Continue and one or more of you may be blocked. NeilN talk to me 14:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Wario-Man reported by User:88.251.8.4 (Result: No violation)[edit]

Page: Atabeg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Baghatur (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Wario-Man (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

This [8] arrangement violates Wikipedia:No original research rule. User ignoring to this erroneous arrangement. And User have given warning messages to other users who corrected this incorrectly. [9]-[10]. User defend this pov edit. [11]-[12]-[13].

And constantly against other users: Rough and disrespectful Claiming that they are puppet and disruptive editör. And without considering the warning messages The edit war continues.[14]-[15]. Instead of participating in the discussion, the user is requesting protection. [16]. Then the protection request was rejected [17]. And it was stated that the problem should be resolved in the discussion. By ignoring He demanded protection again.[18]. He canvassed the discussion. [19]. The lyrics are very rude and threatening.

When the user's change history is examined, He often enters into edit warfare. And constantly making Anti-Turkic changes. And he's not neutral. Often comes from ignoring the rules. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

  • Pictogram voting x.svg No violation Wario-Man has only lightly and occasionally edited the article, not coming close to breaking WP:3RR. NeilN talk to me 14:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Human like you reported by User:2003:77:4F1F:D925:28A8:F946:AC16:C8AA (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)[edit]

Page: multiple pages (see below)
User being reported: Human like you (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) aka 213.74.186.109 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Note: The user Human like you (talk · contribs) edited as 213.74.186.109 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) before (this was confirmed by the IP here, and also by user 'Human like you' here (referring in the comment to earlier edit warring as IP 213.74.186.109).


Human like you (talk · contribs) is engaged in continued edit warring with several users in order to sustain persistent POV pushing, at the moment on the following articles:


diffs: [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30].

Long term edit warring since 22 Nov in an attempt to add content violating NPOV and BLP; user was edit warring on the same content as IP 213.74.186.109 before, therefore the article was protected; when the protection was lifted the user started edit warring again which resulted in the block [31], renewed protection and revert by user:Jim1138. Then edit warring again about the same content until getting blocked by user:Black Kite (for other edit warring) and reverted by user:2A1ZA. Now edit warring again about the very same content without consensus on the talk page (so far all other users on Talk:Salih_Muslim_Muhammad were against including this content and spent time to explain why).


Diffs: [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39].

Long term edit warring in an attempt to delete the fact the Northern Cyprus is not recognized and to push the Turkish name of Morphou Bay. Both as 'Human like you' and IP 213.74.186.109. Stopped by user:Clpo13 here with comment to use talk page. Now edit warring again about the same content without consensus on the talk page.


Diffs: [40],[41].

Edit warring in an attempt to remove link to Rojava articles, first here, then stopped by user user:Wikishovel and getting blocked by user:Black Kite (for other edit warring), now again here with misleading reference to talk page (there is obviously no consensus to remove this).


The problematic behaviour of Human like you (talk · contribs) on similar issues (and partially the same pages) was discussed before: here, and here (at that time editing as IP 213.74.186.109). This user was recently warned [42] and blocked for similar edit warring and disrupting behaviour.

Also wild accusations against other users, most recently here, here, and here.

I'm responsible for the edits of the IP's 2003:77:... in this context. 2003:77:4F1F:D925:28A8:F946:AC16:C8AA (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2017 (UTC)


Comments:

  • Comment: Just my two cents. I encountered the reported user for the first time several months ago, when he did persistently put up several random warning templates on the Syrian Democratic Forces article without any serious attempt to explain, apparently with the intent to somehow taint an article the topic of which he did not like. Since then, I have faced and witnessed countless insults, slander and other forms of aggression on talk pages (and in edit summaries) from him in articles related to Middle East politics, where the reported user edits with a very narrow agenda of pushing (and frequently edit warring about) the Turkish Erdogan regime narrative with respect to topics in the news. As far as I can see, the problem with his disruptive editing style appears somewhat under control due to the attention of several editors, but his poisoning of talk page discussions still is a curse without effective cure. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I deny the slandering accusations. Some intolerant users will keep complaining and I will keep trying to contribute to Wikipedia, whether some like it or not. Anyway, editors can see all our actions and will surely decide what is best. Human like you (talk) 05:28, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, everybody can see the actions of Human like you (talk · contribs) aka 213.74.186.109 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log). Please have a look: "I did not want to respond to your above vulgar comments at first but you deserve it: you are a no good admin who abuses his powers" [43], "Are you absuing your powers? I'm pretty sure many others think the same" [44], "stalker" [45],[46],[47], "harasser" [48], "sockpuppet" [49], "vandalism by delusional user" [50], "supporters of anarchy and terror" [51], unjustified accusations of "vandalism" [52], "Where did this sock puppet come from? Are you good at yakking too?" [53], "mouthpiece of a terrorist" [54], "An evil intention hides behind your "civil" facade" [55]). 2003:77:4F1D:8A57:54AC:A508:6E93:68D1 (talk) 11:58, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
I met the folk at Salih Muslim Muhammad (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) today again as well, where he once again tried to insert the slanderous "terrorist" propaganda narrative, against the objections of the entire community on the talk page. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 16:09, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Petergstrom reported by User:Renzoy16 (Result: Protected)[edit]

Page: Religiosity and intelligence (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Petergstrom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

User:Petergstrom has a history of being blocked for edit warring, as well as making extremely offensive and contentious edits, including editing articles about Jesus and Moses to state that they both have schizophrenia (see Aricle One, Article Two). Not surprisingly, he has reverted three different editors on the topic of Religiosity and intelligence, where he has edit warred in both main space and the talk page against three different editors who disagree with him: User:Ramos1990, User:Jobas and myself despite being warned on his personal talk page and on the article's talk page.

Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts
  1. 01:15, 2 February 2017‎ "Misleading"
  2. "Relevant and important, take it to talk"
  3. "Thats 3RR, there is obviously a COI, given you user page. I don't want to have to talk this to admin board"
  4. "You are right, its not about comparison...it is about relative movement, which makes Christianity an important "landmark", as it was right above the unaffiliated group in the past."
  5. "Cleaned up"
  6. "Fixed with relevance"
  7. "took it to talk, nobody cares. In actuality you have crossed 3RR"
  8. "Really?"
  9. "Undid revision 763500726 by Ramos1990 (talk)"
  10. "[changes edit warring warning heading on talk page to accuse another editor - OP"]
  11. "[changes edit warring warning heading to accuse another editor - OP"]
  12. "[changes edit warring warning heading to accuse another editor - OP"]
  13. "[changes edit warring warning heading to accuse another editor - OP"]
Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
  1. "Edit war"
  2. "Edit Warring by User:Petergstrom"
Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
  1. "Edit Warring by User:Petergstrom"
  2. "Edit War"
Comments:
  • Comment from an involved editor. In Petergstrom's defense, this editor has made more effort to discuss the disputed content on the talk page than the other involved editors combined. There's an unfortunate dynamic that seems to be taking place in that article, with disputed content being forced in by means of editor pileup rather than consensus building. Eperoton (talk) 03:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment I initiated the discussion on the talk page and the edit warrior being reported User:Petergstrom responded by edit warring over the heading! He still continues to edit war on the article with User:Ramos1990, as demonstrated here (and just now here). A block is in order and it should be noted that he already has an extensive history of edit warning, with his account only being created in October 2016.-Jobas (talk) 17:52, 3 February 2017 (UTC
Pictogram voting support.svg Page protected – 1 week. Three different people were inviting a block for edit warring, but protection is better. EdJohnston (talk) 16:17, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

User:N-HH reported by User:JamesJohnson2 (Result: Filer blocked)[edit]

Page: Trial of Slobodan Milošević (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: N-HH (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: [58]


Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Edit warning: [63]


Attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [64]

Comments: ICTY has made a judgment about Slobodan Milosevic's involvement in 1992 to 1995 Bosnian war during trial of Radovan Karadzic. Dispute between me and User:N-HH is about ICTY judgment, if this judgment has exonerated Slobodan Milosevic from war crimes committed during 1992 to 1995 Bosnian war. He claims that insufficient evidence has been found and I claim that Milosevic has been exonerated from this acts as the court has in fact found evidence that he was in opposition to them. See talk page above for further details. He keeps reverting my edits and disrupting the facts. JamesJohnson2 (talk) 16:10, 05 January 2017 (UTC)

  • I have blocked JamesJohnson2 for one week. This user has been doing nothing but edit-warring at the article since they started editing last August, and against so many different editors I lost track.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:31, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Mewulwe reported by User:Lalichii (Result: )[edit]

Page: Alex Scott (politician) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Page: Paula Cox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Mewulwe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)


Previous version reverted to: Scott Cox


Diffs of the user's reverts:

  1. Scott #1
  2. Scott #2
  3. Cox #1
  4. Cox #2


Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

User has made the same reversions on different articles in the past and ignored talk [65] [66] [67] [68]


Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Page

Comments:

Due to the user's history of acting regardless of talk I chose to elevate this, the language was also not needed in the edit descriptions Lalichii (talk) 00:27, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, I've had trouble in the past with Mewulwe, concerning numbering of political offices in article infoboxes. Not certain why he's so against it. GoodDay (talk) 02:56, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Don't you feel silly citing talk pages where I'm discussing the issue to no end as evidence of me "ignoring talk" when it's rather evident that opponents fail to counter my arguments? Lalichii hasn't argued the point at all, *he* in fact is edit warring without talking. GoodDay, for his part, has used the old trick of, when out of arguments, just repeating earlier-made, already-refuted ones. If anyone still wants to argue the issue, I'm gladly responding to any new point. Mewulwe (talk) 10:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Out of retaliation, you're starting up the dispute again at Joyce Banda with your recent edit at that article's infobox, thus disrupting the numbering of all the Malawi presidents. GoodDay (talk) 16:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
TBH, I'd have less problems with your anti-numbering stance, if you would apply it evenly. For example: If you removed the numbering from the infoboxes of all the Malawi presidents instead of just Banda or all the Bermuda premiers instead of just Cox & Stewart, you wouldn't be creating inconsistency in each series of leader articles. GoodDay (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Winged Brick reported by User:Andy Dingley (Result: Blocked for 48 hours)[edit]

Page: Shotgun slug (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Winged Brick (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Shotgun slugs are single heavy lead slugs fired from shotguns. Shotgun projectiles normally do not rotate, rifles use rifling to rotate their projectile and cause it to be spin-stabilised. Shotgun slugs are ribbed on the surface to reduce friction and this also leads to some slow rotation, much less than a rifle bullet. Does this count them as "spin-stabilised"?

There is a robust ref from the FBI ([69], p 37) saying no, with the text, "these ribs impart no significant stabilizing spin". The editor ignores this with WP:IDHT and claims that the same ref first supports his assertion, then adds a WP:SPS source (fairly obviously taken from the FBI ref, with a wild assertion added) and finally just a blanket, "I removed the statement because it is false".

This claim is not a trivially simple matter of spin or no spin: the ribs do produce some slow spin, this slow rotation does even out some manufacturing asymmetry of the slugs, but the key point is that the slugs are not stabilised by this spin and that they are not thus comparable to rifle bullets.

The contested edits are all reversions of the same form, removing the ref and the text "it is not spin-stabilised" to replace it with the same ref (although stripped to a bare URL) and rewording to imply the opposite of what the ref states.

  1. Restoring reality. The authoritative reference wins out here.
  2. BS. My reference is authoritative and CLEARLY states that your edit (reversion) is incorrect.
  3. You are reverting referenced material. Take it to talk.
  4. Please discuss in talk and come to a consensus before re-adding erroneous information. You are arguing with yourself. I NEVER said that the spin stabilized the slug.
  5. PLEASE stop and take it to discussion.

The editor is simply hard to follow with these blanket reversions, especially for their claims "reverting referenced material" (when they're the one removing) and the call to engage at talk, where they're simply ignoring the very clear statement in the ref. See Talk:Shotgun_slug#Spin.

Although warned specifically for edit-warring on their user_talk:, they seem not to understand this, "I have not been reverting, I have been editing."

I understand that you disagree, however saying that my edits are hard to follow is immaterial. What is wrong with the current revision? You can point to specifics in the CURRENT revision and I will take them apart point by point in the talk section. I have not removed referenced, correct information and I have not added untrue, unreferenced information. Rather than edit warring, it seems you are reporting me because you cannot understand the material being discussed. Yes, this is a bit abrasive to say, but your the responses in the talk section seem to belie a basic lack of understanding of the underlying subject material. I have made edits based on statements in the discussion, however there was no reason to make blanket reversions of my work in the first place. Since there are two editors who are reverting my work and were doing so before discussing it in the talk, it makes it difficult for me to make any substantive changes. --Winged Brick (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
Bishonen has blocked the editor for 48 hours. I JethroBT drop me a line 21:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Roscelese reported by User:Azarbarzin (Result: None)[edit]

Page: [[<Reza Aslan's Page - On Ahmadinejad>]] 
User being reported: Roscelese (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user ·