Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule. See this guide for instructions on creating diffs for this report. If you see that a user may be about to violate the three-revert rule, consider warning them by placing {{subst:uw-3rr}} on their user talk page. You must notify any user you have reported. You may use {{subst:An3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so. You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format. Additional notes When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first. The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from. Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection. Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed. Definition of edit warring Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring. Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR) An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions. Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Click here to create a new report

User:MrOllie reported by User:GreatBigCircles (Result: Page protected)

Page: Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: MrOllie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts: These four were in a period of 24h 43m:

1. [2]
2. [3]
3. [4]
4. [5]

Earlier:

1. [6]
2. [7]
3. [8]
4. [9]
5. [10]
6. [11]
7. [12]
8. [13]
9. [14]
10. [15]

... there are more. Every one of MrOllie's edits on the page in the last two months has been a revert, except one, when reverting again would have been a violation of 3RR.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [16] Immediately reverted by MrOllie: [17]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [18] [19]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [20]

Comments:

The fourth revert was 43 minutes outside the 24-hour window. One of the four reverted two unrelated changes in one revert. MrOllie is blocking all attempts by multiple editors to improve the article in good faith, posting false and inflammatory attacks and comments on the talk page, and refusing to engage in constructive discussion or compromise. There is also a larger conflict involving more editors, which I intend to post on another appropriate noticeboard. This report is just about what appears to be a violation of 3RR by MrOllie. GreatBigCircles (talk) 23:03, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

• Page protected for 3 days. Figure it on the talk page please and note that the WP:BURDEN is on the editor adding or restoring content to get consensus for its inclusion. Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:08, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for responding and taking action. But I'm confused. There will be more investigation, right? This report is about a particular editor violating the 3RR, not an ongoing edit war. Can you explain the utility of protecting the page? GreatBigCircles (talk) 02:36, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  As an uninvolved admin passing by, I took a look. MrOllie's four reverts to the article over the past day or so take place just outside a 24-hour period, as indeed you admitted above, so it does not violate 3RR. Now if he were doing this regularly every few days, or on multiple articles during this same time period, that might well merit a block for edit warring, as such behavior has in the past. But one time like this, particularly by an editor known for his diligence in patrolling and reporting disruptive editing, is not an issue.

  The point of the full-protect is to spur discussion on the talk page, which Ponyo judged to be the action likeliest to produce a desirable outcome. I hope it does. It is remedy particularly well-suited to the kind of behavior MrOllie imputes to you here, and you would do well during the next three days to take his advice. Daniel Case (talk) 06:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  You seem to be confusing me with someone else. The diff you linked is another editor's post on MrOllie's talk page warning MrOllie about edit warring behavior.

@GreatBigCircles: You are partially correct in that I pasted in the wrong link. I have replaced it with the one I meant to include. The rest of my comment still stands. Daniel Case (talk) 20:32, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

• From WP:3RR: Fourth reverts just outside the 24-hour period will usually also be considered edit-warring, especially if repeated or combined with other edit-warring behavior. GreatBigCircles (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

@GreatBigCircles:The last clause is a qualifier not present here, as I have noted above: "Now if he were doing this regularly every few days, or on multiple articles during this same time period, that might well merit a block for edit warring, as such behavior has in the past." If we routinely blocked for every single time someone did a fourth revert just outside of 24 hours, well, what would be the point of calling it the three-revert rule (which, to be fair, is as noted at that page not a license for three free reverts per day, either)?

Honestly, I have to ask, wouldn't your energies be better spent trying to get consensus at the talk page for your edits rather than arguing this here? Daniel Case (talk) 20:32, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I am surprised and disappointed that you are blaming me for behavior imputed to me by the subject of this complaint. Do you think I have been trying to use discussion as a "filibuster"? If so, can you explain why you think that, besides the fact that MrOllie said so?

I have been trying to get consensus at the talk page for weeks. I have offered compromise after compromise after compromise. I have listened to other editors' issues and changed my contributions to try to meet their standards. Some of my edits have been accepted. But MrOllie has done nothing but revert. I came here hoping someone could help, perhaps by encouraging him to offer anything at all constructive. This whole process is very disappointing and frustrating. Will someone please help? GreatBigCircles (talk) 01:42, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@GreatBigCircles: Please see WP:DR for the processes to follow in order to resolve the dispute, if the editors currently involved in the discussion cannot reach a consensus on their own. This board is for a very narrow purpose of stopping edit-wars, which has already been achieved by Ponyo's (correctly, IMO) protecting the page since the material being added/removed was clearly disputed. Abecedare (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

"Do you think I have been trying to use discussion as a "filibuster"?". And then just in the very next paragraph:

"I have been trying to get consensus at the talk page for weeks. I have offered compromise after compromise after compromise. I have listened to other editors' issues and changed my contributions to try to meet their standards." Maybe, just maybe, you have gotten everything you could out of the discussion and should accept that and move on. The point of seeking consensus is that you may not be as right as you think you are; other editors' input is valuable.

"I came here hoping someone could help, perhaps by encouraging him to offer anything at all constructive." Well, as Abecedare ably points out below, that's really not what we do here. If you came here seeking some sort of assistance in dispute resolution (which, honestly, you did), you came to the wrong place, and again there are other places you could have been steered to (as, again, Abecedare notes) if you were honest with yourself and us about what you really wanted.

What you have done is the equivalent of going to the police hoping they'll talk some sense into the neighbor you're having a property dispute with and then being utterly surprised when they decide to cordon off the area on both sides a certain distance from the property line. Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I have corrected the header of this report. 'Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing' is the page where the dispute occurred. EdJohnston (talk) 20:17, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Anujkumar1 reported by User:Bbb23 (Result: Blocked Indef)

Page: Pankaj Jha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Anujkumar1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Consecutive edits made from 14:05, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 14:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 14:05, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */"
   2. 14:33, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
   3. 14:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
   4. 14:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */"
2. Consecutive edits made from 13:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 13:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 13:44, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
   2. 13:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
3. 13:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */added profile picture."
4. Consecutive edits made from 12:23, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 12:37, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 12:23, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */added other details also."
   2. 12:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */"
   3. 12:29, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */"
   4. 12:37, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
5. Consecutive edits made from 11:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 12:08, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 11:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */"
   2. 11:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */"
   3. 12:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
   4. 12:08, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
6. 10:55, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "/* top */added profile picture."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:01, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Pankaj Jha."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

New user who is not only edit-warring but also making unconstructive edits to article. Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of Indef Courcelles (talk) 14:55, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

User:172.116.29.35 reported by User:Escape Orbit (Result: Blocked, 31 hours)

Page: Yuka Masaki (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 172.116.29.35 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Consecutive edits made from 16:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 16:52, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 16:48, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160463010 by Geraldo Perez (talk)"
   2. 16:52, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
2. 16:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 16:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 16:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 16:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "I added a valid source."
   2. 16:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
4. 16:37, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
5. 16:27, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Stop disrespecting my Japanese culture you fat greedy American Geraldo. read the Japanese wiki please if you delete this I have so many friends and other people in the Wikipedia in Japan and the U.S. that can help out when it comes your vandalism. Take your time to read this page in my native language: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%9C%9F%E5%B4%8E%E3%82%86%E3%81%8B"
6. 16:24, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Stop disrespecting my Japanese culture you fat greedy American Geraldo. read the Japanese wiki please if you delete this I have so many friends and other people in the Wikipedia in Japan and the U.S. that can help out when it comes your vandalism. Take your time to read this page in my native language: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%9C%9F%E5%B4%8E%E3%82%86%E3%81%8B"
7. Consecutive edits made from 16:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 16:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 16:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""
   2. 16:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Conducting a revert vendetta across a number of articles Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:57, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 31 hours by ScottishFinnishRadish.

• Comment It is possible, but not probable, that there may also be block evasion in play. 17:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC)—C.Fred (talk)

User:45.50.164.192 reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Nellie massacre (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 45.50.164.192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Consecutive edits made from 21:28, 16 June 2023 (UTC) to 21:28, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 21:28, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160405221 by ComparingQuantities (talk) learn basic spelling"
   2. 21:28, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160405287 by ComparingQuantities (talk) Civilians is fine"
2. Consecutive edits made from 23:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC) to 23:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 23:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160256928 by ComparingQuantities (talk) No explanation"
   2. 23:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160256945 by ComparingQuantities (talk) No explanation"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 21:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Nellie massacre."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:35, 17 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Unsourced Edits */ new section"

Comments:

Make sure to check this ip's edit history for Nellie massacre, ip might been edit warring on Nellie massacre Untamed1910 (talk) 02:47, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

This ip just made it's third revert on Nellie massacre [21] Untamed1910 (talk) 05:08, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:29, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Shinakho reported by User:Serralia (Result: Page protected)

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

Previous version reverted to: [22]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [23]
2. [24]
3. [25]
4. [26]

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [28]

Comments: The user is engaged in an edit war with multiple editors on the article Islam in India. Edit warring and deletion of sourced information is also happening on other Wikipedia articles.[29]. The user is also deleting the warnings posted by other editors on their talk page.[30]Serralia (talk) 05:09, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion was already taking place in the talk page you had no right to revert edits that were already explained in the talk page abd I also explained the edits in your own talk page which you seemed to ignore until now? Yoir also edit warring without even using the talk pager to voice your objection you didnt even state a clear reason why in your edit history. Also I deleted a old one from march the one you gave still remains and I have full rights to do that on my talk page.

Shinakho (talk) 08:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Please see [31]. JimRenge (talk) 08:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:26, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

User:JeffreyPrestonBezos59 reported by User:CT55555 (Result: Blocked)

Page: Family of Jeff Bezos (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: JeffreyPrestonBezos59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Family of Jeff Bezos [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [diff]
2. [diff]
3. [diff]
4. [32]

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: diff (I tried to resolve this on the users talk page, no replies)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff]

Comments: First an IP editor tried to add someone as the wife of Jeff Bezos. That person's name doesn't appear in any sources, they appear to be made up. User:Discospinster reverted those IP edits before this new user appeared and made the same edits. The "citations" added are just "Amazon's Alexa" and "Amazon.com". Of course, this is a WP:BLP article, and I've reverted three times, so I'm here due to lack of other options. As I make this, my first report here, I see the preference for raising this on the talk page of the article, instead I went for the talk page of the user, hope that's OK. CT55555(talk) 18:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• Blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

User:SpaceEconomist192 reported by User:SLBedit (Result: Both partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Derby de Lisboa (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: SpaceEconomist192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [33]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [34]
2. [35]
3. [36]
4. [37]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [38]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [39]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [40]

Comments:
The first edit wasn't a revert, it was a visual edit as tagged by Wikipedia. SpaceEconomist192 ✐

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 2 weeks, from editing this specific article only ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• Why such an harsh period of time, if I may ask? SpaceEconomist192 ✐

• SpaceEconomist192, please make sure that your signature (~~~~) contains a date. Harsh? This has been going on for far longer than two weeks now ([41] [42] [43]), and the block is even limited to the one page it happened on. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:56, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

• So I assume that blocks are made according to how long the edit-warring has been occurring. Thanks for the clarification. Naturally the block is only for the article itself, due to declining userbase that Wikipedia has, blocking two active users website-wide for such a minor infraction wouldn't be very wise indeed. SpaceEconomist192 ✐ 01:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

User:97.94.230.26 reported by User:Wikipedialuva (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Twink (gay slang) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 97.94.230.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [44]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 04:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Once more removed politically motivated racism which provides nothing but vitriol and bias to the article."
2. 04:15, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Removed kafkaesque bureaucratic racism"
3. 04:11, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Removed politically motivated and university backed racism."
4. 04:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Continued to stand against politicized tyranny presenting itself as universal morality."
5. 03:41, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Removed politically motivated racism"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 04:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Edit warring and changing IP to remove paragraph user doesn't like Wikipedialuva (talk) 04:35, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

You are engaging in the defense of institutional racism and are an extreme hypocrite. 97.94.230.26 (talk) 04:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Endorsed. They don't want to use the talk page because they assume what the consensus will be, and don't want to waste their time. [45] Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 04:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

You are endorsing institutionally backed racism. 97.94.230.26 (talk) 04:48, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

It would drive me insane to see all of you justify institutional racism while saying you fight against it, and by god you will not have the power to memory hole things much longer. 97.94.230.26 (talk) 04:57, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Pretty clear case. 5 reverts. 97.94.230.26, if you continue editing after your block, please familiarize yourself with WP:3RR, and when you find yourself in a dispute with other editors, please use the talk page, in this case Talk:Twink (gay slang). Thank you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Cwacommunications reported by User:Scaledish (Result: Already blocked)

Page: Charles Wright Academy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Cwacommunications (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "added CWA mission to short description"
2. 05:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160688749 by Scaledish (talk)"
3. 05:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Added mission statement to the short description."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 05:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Caution: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Charles Wright Academy."
2. 05:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Welcome to Wikipedia!"
3. 05:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Disclosure requirements for paid editing under the Wikimedia Terms of Use on Charles Wright Academy."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User is evidently a brand account who will not adhere to NPOV. I'm not sure the proper way to report this given all the circumstances, but I'm doing it here. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish. 05:18, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

 Comment: The user reported has been indef. blocked. 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:7580:2AB6:654D:D95B (talk) 07:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

 Comment: Re:Question -> Specific for this case, since the user both has a username representing an organization/company and has done edits that make it clear what "cwa" means - you could have reported this at WP:UAA. If all edits were obviously promotional you could have reported it at WP:AIV as well. – 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:7580:2AB6:654D:D95B (talk) 07:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

What 2804:F14:80B3:CB01:7580:2AB6:654D:D95B said. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

• Already blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Terfslayer reported by User:HaeB (Result: )

Page: Jesse Singal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Terfslayer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 01:19, 19 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160825071 by HaeB (talk)"
2. 23:22, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160812190 by HaeB (talk)"
3. 18:53, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160765417 by HaeB (talk)"
4. 15:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1160750597 by Discospinster (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Jesse Singal."
2. 01:15, 19 June 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Jesse Singal."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

First edits of this user; the username (context) and this reaction to an attempt at explaining the relevant Wikipedia policies to them indicate a WP:NOTHERE issue. Regards, HaeB (talk) 01:31, 19 June 2023 (UTC)