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.
You must notify any user you have reported. You may use You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
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.
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.
| ||
User:DoubleChine reported by User:SarekOfVulcan (Result: )
- Page
- Wonder Woman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- DoubleChine (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 18:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "i did not gut the lead. there to much in it"
- Consecutive edits made from 17:43, 30 July 2018 (UTC) to 18:06, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- 17:43, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "removing unnecesary fluff"
- 17:47, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "lead to big, timming unnesecary info"
- 17:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "simplifying lead. no need to describe every tv shwo ovie and actor involved with the character. that's the job for the main article"
- 17:53, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "this is a wonder woman article, this belongs on the marstons page. lead to big as it is already"
- 18:06, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "adding links"
- 14:29, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "re adding relevant information"
- 08:50, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "lead to big. rearanging"
- Consecutive edits made from 18:21, 29 July 2018 (UTC) to 18:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
- 18:21, 29 July 2018 (UTC) "lead is simply too large, with a lot of trivia and worse, unsourced content"
- 18:25, 29 July 2018 (UTC) ""
- 18:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC) "re adding relevant information"
- 18:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC) "re shuffling lead"
- 15:27, 29 July 2018 (UTC) "lead to big. rearanging"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 18:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Wonder Woman. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 18:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "/* Lead to big. */ sanger mention should stay"
- Diff of 3RRNB notice on user's talk page
- Comments:
Also edit warring on Hyperion (comics). --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- leads are massively bloated with too much data(every tv show, every actor who played the character, etc) and trivia, some not even relevant to the characters. in the case of hyperion article, the lead is used as the bio section with every minor character having it's bio in it making the main page reduntant. lead is for summary, not a main page duplicate or for trivia information. thank you. DoubleChine (talk) 18:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- While SarekOfVulcan was typing out this report, I was also filling one out. Have attempted to engage this user, have advised them of the edit warring guidelines, repeatedly (as they are also at 3RR on Hyperion (comics) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)) but they just continue reverting-at-will. They also received numerous warnings from multiple editors, but just ignored it all and continued pushing their "I'm right and everyone else is wrong" edits. This disruption needs to stop. (And their continued defence of their edit-warring here shows no intent to change) - wolf 18:51, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
User:178.164.105.70 reported by User:SWL36 (Result: Semi)
Page: Harald Fairhair (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 178.164.105.70 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=852726632 Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 1 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=852718457
- 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=852719534
- 3 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=852720366
- 4 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=852720845
- 5 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=852723904
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]
Comments:
Stumbled across this edit war in recent changes, the single-purpose IP has blanked a section on the existence of a disputed 10th century king of Norway five times in a few hours. Another user might have also violated 3RR while attempting to remove the edits, but the edit summaries suggest that the IP was not editing in good faith: "Removed absolute shite" was the first edit summary of the blanking and then they were not provided for several later reverts.
Also, this user received a final warning against reverting content on their talk page 90 minutes ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:178.164.105.70.
- Result: Semiprotected two weeks. The IP editor has never used a talk page, so it's hard to tell what their concern is based on. The skepticism about the existence of Harold Fairhair seems to be based on scholarly sources. Notifying User:Alarichall since they are the editor who added the skeptical material. EdJohnston (talk) 04:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
User:HistorianM reported by User:Moxy (Result: )
- Page
- Brazil (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- HistorianM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 02:06, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 01:49, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "/* Economy photos */ too the image spammers"
- Comments:
Edit war over the past 5 days.... Editor warned....zero attempt at further talk since last revert and warning.Moxy (talk) 04:02, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
User:D.Creish reported by User:Volunteer Marek (Result: )
Page: Peter Strzok (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: D.Creish (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [1]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
The page is under a 1RR restriction and discretionary sanctions
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [4]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [5]
Comments:
Straight forward violation of 1RR. The user is very well aware that discretionary sanctions are in effect on the article since he references them in his first revert [6]. So he basically blatantly WP:GAMES DS in his first edit, then quickly violates them in the next.
See also [7]. The edit summary claims to have found a source for a statement which previous source did not support (hence the failed verification tag) however, the new source does not support the text either. AGF as you like.Volunteer Marek (talk) 06:30, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
User:Wayn12 reported by User:Innisfree987 (Result: )
- Page
- Zinzi Clemmons (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- Wayn12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 18:04, 31 July 2018
- 07:54, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 852771979 by Innisfree987 (talk)"
- 07:39, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 852769477 by Innisfree987 (talk)"
- Consecutive edits made from 06:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC) to 06:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- 06:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 852763652 by Innisfree987 (talk)"
- 06:43, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Undid revision 852763764 by Innisfree987 (talk)"
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- 07:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Zinzi Clemmons. (TW)"
- 08:00, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Zinzi Clemmons. (TW)"
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- 07:13, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "/* Due weight */ new section"
- 07:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "/* Not Informative Enough */ reply"
- 07:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "/* Not Informative Enough */ elaborating"
- 08:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "/* Not Informative Enough */ reply"
- 08:03, 31 July 2018 (UTC) on User talk:Innisfree987 "Editor is disallowing cited edits"
- 15:32, 31 July 2018 "reply to first comment"
- 17:00, 31 July 2018 "Out of WP:PROPORTION to published RS coverage"
- 17:16, "agreed with Sangdeboeuf"
- 18:34, 31 July 2018 "please revert"
- Comments:
I would very much prefer not to be here but Wayn12 has not engaged my substantive concerns about his additions to this page and instead repeatedly restores his version, so I’m not sure where else to turn. Innisfree987 (talk) 08:21, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Despite the substantial engagement on the talk page, a second editor becoming involved, and Wayn12's indication they would change only syntax in the most recently proposed version, Wayn12 again restored their original version. The consensus process just isn't happening here and instead there are personal attacks and false allegations (1, 2). Assistance would be greatly appreciated. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:53, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Wayn12 has continued to revert others (with a misleading edit summary) at 18:04, 31 July 2018 (this diff shows the actual changes better), along with stonewalling talk page discussion: "This is the information that needs to be there. You haven't added anything helpful so far", etc. Some kind of action is needed to draw Wayn12's attention to what edit warring and No Personal Attacks means, especially in an WP:ARBBLP area. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 20:13, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- What's transpiring at Ijeoma Oluo has become pertinent as well. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:46, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Svengalista (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a brand-new account, appearing to be a sockpuppet that Wayn12 is using to get around 3RR at Ijeoma Oluo specifically, since they are signing their comments "Wayn12" (diff 1) (diff 2). —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:13, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
User:213.254.88.156 reported by User:Impru20 (Result: )
Page: Equo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 213.254.88.156 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to:
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- 10:27, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- 10:44, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- 10:52, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- 11:01, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Not on the article's talk page itself (as there has been basically no time for it before the violation) but yes in our user talk pages (diff1 diff2)
Comments:
User has been repeteadly adding either uncited or poorly sourced content (random sources being added which do not justify the added ideologies in what could constitute a case of WP:SYNTH) with no explanation in edit summaries (except in last edit where user claims that his edits must prevail due to he "not making any change", despite content already having been deleted several days previously due to it being usourced (see diff)). User has engaged in similar editing behaviour in other articles such as European political party (diff1 diff2 diff3 diff4), European Green Party (diff), Podemos (Spanish political party) (diff1 diff2 diff3 diff4 diff5), Syriza (diff1 diff2), Génération.s (diff) and La République En Marche! (diff1 diff2), albeit without violation of 3RR. I tried to politely convince the user to initiate discussion in the article's talk page and even suggested him before the 3RR violation to create a thread myself if that helped (diff), but continuous edit-warring behaviour in this and other articles related to the imposition of unsourced or badly sourced ideologies to political parties, as well as this highly POVish remark in Talk:European political party with unsourced claims about parties' ideologies, makes me wonder whether this could be a situation of WP:NOTHERE. Impru20talk 11:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note that I have reverted the newly POV edit at European political party (the diff of which I provided above as "diff4" next to the mention to the proper article) as a note for other users seeing this behaviour to also check the user's comment in the talk page, but that it is unlikely that I keep reverting this user from now on and until this report is addressed, as it seems obvious that it would only develop into further edit-warring behaviour. Impru20talk 11:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
User:MilosHaran reported by User:Ktrimi991 (Result: )
- Page
- Skanderbeg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User being reported
- MilosHaran (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Previous version reverted to
- Diffs of the user's reverts
- 21:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "If you undo again, I will have to report you for vandalism."
- 14:33, 31 July 2018 (UTC) "That's why it is a theory."
- 17:27, 30 July 2018 (UTC) "Okay then"
- 17:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC) ""
- Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning
- Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page
- Comments:
The same editor was warned for warring on the same POV some time ago. Ktrimi991 (talk) 22:29, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Why were my edits removed? I just don't understand, you just remove it without any reason, so how can I be Vandal? It also had sources AND the same sentences are on this page and this. MilosHaran (talk) 23:13, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- WP:UNDUE. But this isn't the place to argue about content. Take it to Talk:Skanderbeg if you feel so inclined.--Calthinus (talk) 01:40, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Calthinus: MilosHaran account will not be able to discuss their views [9]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 09:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Svengalista reported by User:Dennis Bratland (Result: )
Page: Ijeoma Oluo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Svengalista (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [10] (or consensus version after discussion)
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [15]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [16]
Comments:
This is an obvious sockpuppet of Wayn12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), as mentioned above. Both are likely socks of Philly2166 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), pending at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Philly2166. There's page protection pending as well. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:06, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
User:Adamstom.97 reported by User:Aeusoes1 (Result: )
Page: Ant-Man and the Wasp (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Adamstom.97 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [17]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
- [18] 17:23, July 29, 2018
- [19] 21:45, July 29, 2018
- [20] 21:59, July 29, 2018
- [21] 22:26, July 29, 2018
- [22] 14:55, July 31, 2018
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [23]
Comments:
I first noted reverts over understandable content dispute regarding the names of characters, but when I made other edits to the plot, I was reverted without explanation. When I used the talk page to ask why they reverted all of my edits, they said that I did not have permission to change the plot ("You can't just show up and completely change the plot summary"). Looking even further back in the edit history, I now realize that they have been reverting all edits to the plot without explanation for at least a week. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 02:59, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- That "you" was a generic you, it was not a pointed attack of any kind. And my regular reverts to the plot are for vandalism. It would be good if you could allow the talk page discussion to actually take place before going this far in future. - adamstom97 (talk) 10:54, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Is this reverting vandalism? What about this?.This? This? These are all good faith edits to the plot that you reverted without explanation. An AGF interpretation would be that these were minor wording changes that you oppose because you felt the wording was better already. But combined with your more recent behavior with my edits, where you've reverted more substantive changes with no indication as to why, it is becoming apparent that you are displaying WP:OWNy behavior and edit warring in the process. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 14:38, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
User:80.111.16.75 reported by User:Softlavender (Result: )
Page: Stalin and antisemitism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 80.111.16.75 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Previous version reverted to: [24]
Diffs of the user's reverts:
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]
Comments:
User has also been edit-warring on Leon Trotsky. In all he has received 4 usertalk warnings about edit-warring within the past 24 hours: [33]. -- Softlavender (talk) 10:53, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
As you can see I have stopped so there's really nothing that needs to be done. Also numbers 32 and 37 are not reverts. I recommend you remove them as that is inaccurate. 80.111.16.75 (talk) 11:46, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- All of them are counted as reverts; see WP:3RR: "An edit or a series of consecutive edits that undoes other editors' actions—whether in whole or in part—counts as a revert." -- Softlavender (talk) 11:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)