Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive53

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

Noticeboard archives

Contents

User:Chensiyuan reported by User:Brave warrior (Result:protected)[edit]

Chris Bosh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Chensiyuan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks like multiple parties did 3RR so I locked it, since it doesn't seem to be a sustained problem.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay but what about the 3RR violations. And no, I didn't violate it I reverted 3 times and stopped because I don't want to get blocked like him. Brave warrior 02:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Also Block User:Chensiyuan because the user violated the 3RR. Brave warrior 03:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Neutralhomer reported by User:Calton (Result:Page protected)[edit]

September 1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Neutralhomer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Edit-warring to insert reference to founding of small town in Virginia (population 1,146) into September 1, despite clear guidelines and opposition of at least two editors. Shows no sign of letting up.
Calton, you have been involved in the Edit War also.--trey 04:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
What part of "enforcing guidelines" and "opposition of at least two editors" is giving trouble to the Peanut Gallery? --Calton | Talk 14:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Calton reported by User:Neutralhomer (Result:Page protected)[edit]

September 1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Calton (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  • This user is guilty on more than one day, I have not broken the more than 4 a day rule. - NeutralHomer T:C 02:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
You know, you have to provide actual dates and times instead of sputtering. Also, you left off the other editor reversing your insertion of this minor factoid. --Calton | Talk 02:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
You want times, you get times. This isn't about me, this one is yours Calton. - NeutralHomer T:C 02:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Nope, it is all about you, and your unilateral edit-warring against multiple editors, against clear guidelines, and against, really, common sense. --Calton | Talk 02:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
I have not broken the more than 4 a day rule
The key thing is the revert-warring, but even this bit of Wikilawyering is wrong. From the above report on yourself, annotated:
  • 7th revert: 19:40, July 3, 2007 - Time difference from 4th previous: 19:32
  • 8th revert: 01:09, July 4, 2007 - Time difference from 4th previous: 24:02
  • 9th revert: 02:12, July 4, 2007 - Time difference from 4th previous: 22:14
Two blatant violations, one borderline bit of gaming. --Calton | Talk 02:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Calton, self control, you talk about it, now exercise it. I did not break the more than 3 (my mistake above) rule, you did, twice in fact. Now, do me a favor, crack a beer, set off some fireworks and relax. - NeutralHomer T:C 02:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
"Self-control"? What are you gassing on about?
I did not break the more than 3 (my mistake above) rule -- You did, twice unambiguously and once borderline, as I annotated above. The rule's been explained to you more than once, so where's the part giving you difficulty? --Calton | Talk 03:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Calton, can you tell that, one, I am ignoring you and two, I am actually doing things. That whole self-control thing again. I think you last 6 or 7 edits were to this page and about me. Now, if you would excuse me, I have more pages to fix. You know, that whole working for the greater good of Wikipedia thing you forgot how to do back in 2005. - NeutralHomer T:C 03:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Calton, can you tell that, one, I am ignoring you... - I've demonstrated -- not claimed, demonstrated -- that you've violated 3RR at least twice, and sputtering and handwaving doesn't change reality, no matter how desperately you ignore it.
...I am actually doing things - Yeah, edit-warring, which you just did on Jews because you couldn't be in the least bothered to actually read what you were reverting -- pretty much what you were doing here, come to think.
I think you last 6 or 7 edits were to this page and about me - There's that weird pseudo-math-based claim of yours, again. I think of my last 26,000 or so edits, very few of them had bupkis to do with you. But you just keep thinking there, Butch, it's what you're good at.
You know, that whole working for the greater good of Wikipedia thing you forgot how to do back in 2005. You know, as a general policy, it's best not to Make Shit Up. I will put up any two random months of my contribution history against your entire contributions to Wikipedia and come out on top.
Oh, and to the admin who protected the page -- a DAY OF THE WEEK PAGE -- how's about dealing with the violator/edit warrior instead of punting? --Calton | Talk 14:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
To the admin, many thanks for actually putting the page on protect and no indulging this poor, diluted fool. Many thanks. - NeutralHomer T:C 14:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

User:24.168.39.49 reported by User:DLand (Result:24h Block)[edit]

Staten Island (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 24.168.39.49 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 02:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Previous version reverted to: [1]
  • Comment:Editor doesn't seem to know English very well, so it could be that he doesn't understand what is going on here.--DLandTALK 02:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Considering his/her responses on his/her talk page, he/she knows enough English to understand the warning and the possible ramifications of his/her actions. The case is pretty obvious - 24h block. Signaturebrendel 03:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Altruism reported by User:Sarvagnya (Result:Page protected)[edit]

Telugu script (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Altruism (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 06:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment

  • This user has been on wikipedia for a long time and certainly should have known better.
  • The reverting centers around replacing "Old-Kannada script" with "Telugu-Kannada script" which not only is OR but also not supported by the non-RS citation he is providing. Sarvagnya 06:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
The same S. M. R. Adluri in his detailed chart here on how the different scripts evolved makes no reference to the so called Telugu-Kannada script. If there are contradicting paragraphs in the referred material indicating the existence of a Telugu-Kannada script and the non-existence of the same, then the page is in clear violation of WP:RS, just my two cents... -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 06:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Plz. refer to possible Wikipedia:Sock puppetry as reported here and the page for reports, for checking User:Sarvagnya.
Also, kindly refer to my request for immediate protection of article Telugu script, several hours before my inadvertent violation of WP:3RR took place. Thanking You, AltruismTo talk 10:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: I have followed the Telugu related disputes, but did not participate in the edits because I'm not very knowledgeable in this area. However, let me add that the only sane voice among all the involved editors is Altruism (talk · contribs), proof of which can be found in this compromise he helped reach on a disputed article and the goodwill he strives to maintain, as he had done with Dineshkannambadi (talk · contribs) some time back. He may have possibly violated the 3RR rule by the letter, but I'm sure he has stuck to the spirit of the rule. He probably got a bit carried away in this instance, but any action against him would be unfortuanate given that this is his first offence and he is the one who tries to keep the Telugu articles stable. Lotlil 14:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Why hasnt Altruism not been blocked? This has to be a first with someone getting away with a 5RR! Not only is he vandalising with non-RS sources, he also gets away with a 5RR! Who is the admin who closed this? I need an explanation. Sarvagnya 02:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Chensiyuan reported by User:Brave warrior (Result:Page protected)[edit]

Chris Bosh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Chensiyuan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

But what about the 3RR violations. And no, I didn't violate it I reverted 3 times and stopped because I don't want to get blocked like him. Brave warrior 02:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Also Block User:Chensiyuan because the user violated the 3RR. Brave warrior 03:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

User:EliasAlucard reported by User:Itaqallah (Result:Page protected)[edit]

Al-insan al-kamil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). EliasAlucard (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 12:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Warning unnecessary, but user was offered to self-revert, which he rejected. ITAQALLAH 12:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


User:Giovanni Giove reported by User:No.13 (Result: 72 hours)[edit]

Marko Marulić (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Giovanni Giove (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 14:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Giovanni Lucio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Giovanni Giove (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 15:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

User:VanTucky reported by User:Calton (Result:12 hours)[edit]

Mike Godwin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). VanTucky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 03:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

title=Mike_Godwin&diff=142582500&oldid=142582369 02:17, July 5, 2007]


  • Repeated adding of {{unreliable}} tag. Removed by more than one editor over the last couple of days.
Of course you're not, but you put you put your oar in anyways. Say, don't you have some "productive work" to be doing elsewhere instead of stalking my edits? --Calton | Talk 03:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
  • CommentI reverted more than thrice only intending to reinsert the legitimate tag calling for citations of unreferenced facts per the guidelines of WP:CITE after it was removed by an anon IP. I see those reversions as reversions of vandalism. Not once ever have I been attacked so for reverting what is clearly to me, simple blanking by a rude anon. I did not intend ever to engage in edit warring with editors with legitimate, polite concerns about the tag. After users objected to the tag, I have stopped reinserting it at all, and am discussing it properly. VanTucky (talk) 04:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I wasn't aware of a "sincerity" exception clause in the prohibition against edit-warring. You may not have "intended" to engage in edit-warring, but, you know, you did, no matter what adjectives you insert to attempt to mitigate your actions. After all, if it's open-and-shut, someone else will add the tag, and if it's not, hey presto, you're edit-warring to add it back and you did after you were warned. [Whoops, edit conflicted] --Calton | Talk 04:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
First violation; 12 hours. Jayjg (talk) 04:10, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


User:PHG reported by User:Eiorgiomugini (Result:Page protected)[edit]

Ordos culture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). PHG (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 05:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment

Removal of material after new source was added[2]. Unable to wait for consensus before making his removals. Eiorgiomugini 05:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Page protected. Evilclown93(talk) 12:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Meowy reported by User:Grandmaster (Result:60 hours)[edit]

Comment: This user is aware of 3RR rule, as he was previously blocked for its violation: [4] Grandmaster 07:04, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Preventative block (had 48 hour block previously for incivillity). Evilclown93(talk) 12:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:HeadMouse and User:TREYWiki reported by User:HiDrNick (Result:Page protected, 99 hours for HeadMouse)[edit]

Walt Disney World Monorail System (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). HeadMouse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log), TREYWiki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 07:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

This revert war centers on three content issues:

  1. What color was the monorail that caught fire and made the news, silver or gold?
  2. Should we include a fair use scan of a newspaper article about the fire in an article about the monorail system?
  3. Should the monorail color names actually be displayed in that color?
  • HeadMouse silver to gold: [5]
  • HeadMouse Adds colors: [6]
  • TREYWiki Rm colors, change gold to silver: [7]
  • User:Metros rm image:[8]
  • HeadMouse Adds colors: [9]
  • TREYWiki rm colors: [10]
  • HeadMouse re-adds image: [11]
  • HeadMouse adds colors: [12]
  • TREYWiki rm colors: [13]
  • HeadMouse silver to gold: [14]
  • TREYWiki gold to silver: [15]
  • HeadMouse silver to gold: [16]

HeadMouse (talk · contribs) has been blocked for editing warring on this article several times before, and in fact just came off a week long block a few hours ago. TREYWiki (talk · contribs) has posted on the 3RR noticeboard as well, and is aware of the rule. Thanks, ➪HiDrNick! 07:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm protecting the page for now, and I might hand out more preventative blocks, due to circumstances described here. Evilclown93(talk) 11:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Looking at what happened, I've blocked HeadMouse for 99 hours due to his history of edit-warring, incivility, and it looked like he was starting a second one. Evilclown93(talk) 12:00, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
TREYWiki is discussing on the talkpage, no block. Evilclown93(talk) 12:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Beyond silence reported by User:Kissl (Result:Page protected)[edit]

Ferenc Gyurcsány (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Beyond silence (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 08:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User was blocked as recently as two days ago for a 3RR violation on another article, thus must be aware of the rule. KissL 08:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Page protected Evilclown93(talk) 11:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:203.164.98.121 reported by User:Pak21 (Result:31h)[edit]

Three Alls Policy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 203.164.98.121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 15:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for 31h for 3RR, and for incivility. Accusing other editors of being "a fucking racist"-Andrew c [talk] 17:48, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Xotheusedguyox reported by User:Dark jedi requiem (Result: 24 hours)[edit]

Template:The Used (edit | [[Talk:Template:The Used|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Xotheusedguyox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 17:17, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been quite some time since the user's latest revert. If s/he persists, however, a block may be warranted. -- tariqabjotu 18:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
S/he's continued reverting, so 24 hours. SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 03:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Godzilla Boy reported by User:Just64helpin (Result:48hrs)[edit]

Godzilla: Unleashed (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Godzilla Boy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 17:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Blocked for 48hrs. Crum375 23:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:TipPt reported by User:Avraham (Result:48hrs)[edit]

Circumcision (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). TipPt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 18:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Comments: Reverts include both full and partial. User is well established and cognizant of 3RR. User has been engaged in trying to push particular POV into article for over a year now, consistently replacing consensus test with own personal text. User also engages in soapboxing, in the article itself, in the talk page (check the voluminous archives), as well as on personal "soap" page User:TipPt/Circumcision. I am recusing myself from blocking in this particular instance, although blocks as a result of clear violations of 3RR are not considered misuses of admin ability, even in the event of participation in the revert stream, from what I understand from discussions with ArbCom. -- Avi 18:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Blocked for 48hrs. Crum375 21:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Setanta747 reported by User:Barryob (Result: Protected)[edit]

Template:Northern Ireland infobox (edit | [[Talk:Template:Northern Ireland infobox|talk]] | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Setanta747 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

There has been a long disupte over wether the Ulster Banner should be included in the Northern Ireland infobox there was several polls taken on the article talk page with the results that the flag should not be placed in the infobox but several editors kept reinserting it, the above template was created so that the Northern Ireland article did not keep getting locked Setanta747 (talk · contribs) has been been pushing for the Ulster Banner to be in the infobox and has been edit warring.
The template has been protected by Andrwsc (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). -- tariqabjotu 21:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Two comments — First, there was never any consensus, which is why the edit-warring has never stopped. There is approximately the same amount of support for the flag to be included versus not. Second, it was pointless of me to protect the infobox and not the parent article, as another editor simply edited the article to use his preferred POV version of it. Therefore, I have removed the template transclusion from the main article, and simply copied the infobox transclusion inline. (Presumably, the edit-warring will continue there.) Andrwsc 02:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

User:TharkunColl reported by User:G2bambino (Result:Page protected)[edit]

British monarchy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). TharkunColl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 21:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The user has been attempting to push a personal POV on Wikipedia articles related to the Commonwealth Realms monarchy for at least a year, each time causing disruption in both the talk page and the article. Though he has been rebutted each time, he periodically resurfaces to make another attempt; the most current is at British Monarchy, along with placing {{fact}} tags throughout articles to make a point. This user has previously been blocked three times.

The user has been notified of, and acknowledged notification, here.

The POV is that of the above editor, not me. It is he who has broke 3RR, more than once - and on each occasion I have given him a friendly warning, without resorting to reporting him. On this particular occasion it was just the same - an examination of the edits will reveal that it was he who broke 3RR, not me. As for his allegation that I am just trying to make a point, that isn't so. I have legitimate concerns over the use of the term "personal union", and simply asked him to supply a citation. TharkunColl 21:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Here are his 4 reversions:
Here is my warning to him:
  • [21] (note that a previous warning I gave him some time ago is also to be found further up the page). TharkunColl 22:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I have protected the page. There is basically equal edit warring on both sides. Please discuss your differences on talk. If you some to an agreement before 3 days, feel free to contact me or request unprotection. -Andrew c [talk] 22:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Sosomk reported by User:Tamokk (Result: blocked for a month)[edit]

Georgia (country) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Sosomk (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 05:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


Persistent edit warrior unwilling to go to the talk page. Tamokk 05:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Only three reverts SosoMK 08:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

In fact far more then 5, but 4 within 24 hours.

Blocked for one month Spartaz Humbug! 08:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

That's very bad. We were intimidated before by an admin who's against our version, he didn't present his sources, he didn't talked on talk page. The result is now that the people who actually worked are now blocked. Please look into details and revise the block.--Tones benefit 10:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Sosomk reported by User:Tamokk (Result: SosoMK blocked, then unblocked)[edit]

War in Abkhazia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Sosomk (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 07:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

(this is an edit rather than a reverts) SosoMK 08:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

POV reverts. Tamokk 07:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Mkhedrioni was a paramilitary Georgian organisation which counted tens of thousands members in Georgia. It was anti-Gamsakhurdia but by no way was it anti-Russian. Karkarashvili was a minister of defence of Georgia during the war, and now he is a member of a Georgian political party New Right (Georgia). Tamokk 08:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

There are only three reverts there, thanks SosoMK 07:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Result: SosoMK was blocked for 1 month for continued revert-warring. He has been unblocked subsequently with a promise of good behavior, to be supervised by User:Mikkalai. MastCell Talk 23:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

91.104.5.79 and 91.104.18.220 and 91.104.21.250 reported by User:Benjwong (Result: Semi-protected)[edit]

..


This user keeps returning from the 91.104 subnet. He/she is adding simplified characters into the Hong Kong page which has been disagreed on in the discussion. This user has been doing this for quite some time. And returns hourly with different IPs as sock puppets. The users' entire contribution history is filled with adding these simplified characters into every page in HK. The user needs to be banned as he/she is wasting wikipedia resources and many editors time.

I have semi-protected the article; there are too many IP addresses to block w/o causing collateral damage. -- tariqabjotu 18:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

User:WinSmith reported by User:Jauerback (Result:24 hrs for two users)[edit]

Garry Meier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). WinSmith (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 2:20 CST 19:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


  • Diff of 3RR warning: 14:06
Both the IP and User:WinSmith have been blocked for 24 hours. GDonato (talk) 20:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ethnic minorities in Iran (Result:No violation)[edit]

This article is a bit of an odd case. As it at least partially fits under the heading editwarring I put it here.

TBH I am not exactly sure what is going on - several groups of editors are fighting over the article by essentially adding ever lengthening lists of long and not always so relevant quotations - rather than simply referencing the article At least one editor keeps reverting and throwing stuff out added by others, while continueing to add his own stuff. The overall process is relatively slow (days and weeks rather than hours) making it impossible to assert a 3RR and editwarring, though I think if I could ignore the 24 hour rule this is exactly what is happening in stretches. I have tried to create some movement forward by hinting at various policies etc on the talkpage, but have only achieved that i am now accused of being an involved editor (In fact I wrote the original stub and kept editing a bit here and there until sometime in 2005 (+one further uncontroversial minor edit a couple of weeks ago) . The article has long outgrown that original stub. Anyway, the accusation is made and I am probably not anymore the person to use admin powers. Could I therefore request that someone else has a look at the article and possible comments/enacts some order?

Thanks Refdoc 00:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

This should be reported to the protection noticeboard - let me take a look at the article though to see if protection is needed. Signaturebrendel 07:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Update: I just checked the article's history - there's nothing to warrant protection. Please take this to the general admins noticeboard as we are not dealing with a 3RR vio as far as I can see. I understand that you are confused and feel in need of help - so please take this issue to a noticeboard where it can be dealt with properly. Thank you, Signaturebrendel 07:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Creation science (Result: protected 1 week)[edit]

Possible three revert rule violation and possible sock puppetry by User:F00188846, anon User:67.82.117.129 and User:Matthew J. Theriault on creation science article.

  • First edit: [26] 14:02 July 7, 2007
  • First revert: [27] 14:21 July 7, 2007
  • Second revert: [28] 16:41 July 7, 2007
  • Third revert: [29] 17:59 July 7, 2007
  • Fourth revert: [30] 18:17 July 7, 2007

The individual appears to be using multiple accounts to circumvent the 3RR rule and was warned at 14:08 and 18:08 formally, and informally at 18:13, 18:16 and 18:23.--Filll 18:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I have now received a communication ([31]) from this editor on my talk page which I take as evidence that this author intends to violate the three revert rule and engage in edit warring.--Filll 19:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


  • Fifth revert: [32] 19:18 July 7, 2007 --Filll 19:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

User again formally warned (on pages of all alleged sock puppets) at 19:23, 19:24 and 19:25. --Filll 19:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Protected one week due to edit warring. If you suspect sockpuppetry, please feel free to put together a case, it's not obvious enough to presume out of hand. In the meantime, hopefully the matter can be discussed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:32, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

User:TJ Spyke reported by User:The Evil Spartan (Result: 250 hours)[edit]

WWE One Night Stand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). TJ Spyke (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 20:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


  • Hang on there. The issue was this other user kept reverting and saying that only Bobby Lashley was on the poster. That 4th edit was a compromise, and was after I provided him the proof that he kept asking for. The issue should be solved now because I gave to him on his talkpage the proof that he wanted. I also can't afford another 3RR block and I think we have solved this issue already. TJ Spyke 21:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Solving the issue is one thing, but a violation is another. You know the policy, you shouldn't have violated it again. RobJ1981 20:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
The 4th one wasn't really a violation though. He wanted proof, and I gave him the proof when I made the edit. TJ Spyke 20:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes it was: there was nothing extra added in that instance. The Evil Spartan 21:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Persistent edit warring again from TJ; sometimes he's even mentioning that if he does one more revert, he's breaking the 3RR (and then precedes to do a somewhat different edit). 250-block (just under a week and a half). -- tariqabjotu 23:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Camptown reported by User:Salaskan (Result: 24h)[edit]

Live Earth (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Camptown (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 23:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


User:Justin A Kuntz reported by User:Rebelguys2 (Result: 24 hours)[edit]

Falkland Islands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Justin A Kuntz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 01:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Previous version reverted to: [33] at 22:01, 7 July 2007
24 hours. -- tariqabjotu 00:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

User:208.104.45.20 reported by User:Dogru144 (Result:24 hours)[edit]

North Central American English (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). 208.104.45.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)Dogru144 02:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

  • 1st revert:

[34]

[38] User has virtually blanked the article page.

One can read, in the Talk Page of the anonymous editor, that s/he has a history of such vandalism. Dogru144 03:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

This user should not be blocked for 3RR, he should be blocked for vandalism. 3RR is for editors of good-faith that make too many reverts, which this user is clearly not. — Moe ε 03:54, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, he did try to explain himself afterwards at Talk:North_Central_American_English#Anonymous_Editor_Response. Carson 04:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for all of yoru responses. I have filed an appeal for intervention, for the reason of vandalism. Dogru144 13:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

2nd request for blocking, for 3RR violation[edit]

New reverts: 6th revert: [39] 7th revert: [40] 8h revert: [41]

Both User:Moe_Epsilon and the WP vandalism page indicate that the action upon User:208.104.45.20 should be over the 3RR edits, and not over vandalism. The user's talk page indicate that he has had a history of (a) blanking pages, and (b) 3RR edits without explanation prior to the current dispute. Also, please note that after this User's requests and those of other parties on the Talk:North Central American English page, the 3RR anonymous editor refuses to sign with the four tildes.

Thus, I'm making a second request for blocking of the user for 3RR violations. Dogru144 18:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Halaqah and confirmed sockpuppet User:RastaRule reported by User:Strothra (Result:1 month)[edit]

Slavery in Modern Africa (edit |