Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 19:50, 27 October 2015 editEdJohnston (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators71,236 edits →User:HughD reported by User:Springee (Result: Protected): Closing← Previous edit		Revision as of 20:37, 27 October 2015 edit undoClpo13 (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,652 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 470:		Line 470:

	The user adopts disruptive behaviour constantly. Earlier he did on article ], where he wanted unsourced inclusion of Jatav community among descendants of Yadu. Now he is constantly removing the facts from the page ]. Seems to be a simply caste promotional account. ] ] 18:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)		The user adopts disruptive behaviour constantly. Earlier he did on article ], where he wanted unsourced inclusion of Jatav community among descendants of Yadu. Now he is constantly removing the facts from the page ]. Seems to be a simply caste promotional account. ] ] 18:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

			== ] and ] reported by ] (Result: ) ==

			'''Page:''' {{pagelinks\|Ryōtarō Okiayu}} <br />
			'''Users being reported:''' {{userlinks\|AKS.9955}} and {{userlinks\|Unbuttered Parsnip}}

			<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

			Previous version reverted to:

			<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need 4 reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
			Diffs of the user's reverts:
			; Unbuttered Parsnip
			#
			#
			#
			; AKS.9955
			#
			#
			#

			<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
			<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
			Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:
			; Unbuttered Parsnip
			*
			; AKS.9955
			*

			<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
			Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: No attempts made by either editor

			<u>Comments:</u> <br />

			<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

Revision as of 20:37, 27 October 2015

v t e Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard Shortcuts

Update this page

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.

Twinkle's ARV can be used on the user's page to more easily report their behavior, including automatic handling of diffs.

Click here to create a new report

Noticeboard archives
Administrators' (archives, search)
349	350	351	352	353	354	355	356	357	358
359	360	361	362	363	364	365	366	367	368
Incidents (archives, search)
1157	1158	1159	1160	1161	1162	1163	1164	1165	1166
1167	1168	1169	1170	1171	1172	1173	1174	1175	1176
Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
472	473	474	475	476	477	478	479	480	481
482	483	484	485	486	487	488	489	490	491
Arbitration enforcement (archives)
328	329	330	331	332	333	334	335	336	337
338	339	340	341	342	343	344	345	346	347
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

User:Anmccaff reported by User:DissidentAggressor (Result: 24h)

Page: Disappearing gun (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to
Diffs of the user's reverts

- a reversion of
- a revision of

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: , , , , - apparently a chronic problem.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Disappearing_gun#Installations

Report filed: 19:51, 24 October 2015‎ DissidentAggressor

Comments:
As the user's own diffs will show, he attempted to add a minor, barely notable subject to a list of significant examples of the type. As the talk page and history will also show...well, take a look for yourself: Particularly note the poisoning the well throughout. Note that the editor listed a number of accusations on edit-warring which were -all- shown to be unfounded, including a couple by a tag team now involved at Arbcom. Anmccaff (talk) 21:15, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Anmccaff is continuing to unilaterally revert any and all edits I make to that page - even after I filed this report. WP:OWNership is blatant. The Dissident Aggressor 12:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours. When I first looked at this report, it was apparent to me that both DissidentAggressor and Anmccaff were edit-warring. However, I also noted that DA had failed to notify Anmccaff of this discussion, which is required. Because it wasn't an open-and-shut case (meaning obvious breach of 3RR by the accused and clean hands by the filer), I notified Anmccaff myself but took no other action. Although in some ways DA should still be blocked for edit-warring, at this point their role has become stale, whereas Anmccaff pointedly reverted yet again, even though this report was still pending. @DissidentAgressor, be aware that if you revert Anmccaff now that they are blocked, you run the risk of being blocked as well. As you correctly state at the article Talk page, there is no consensus for either user's version. Although not relevant to my decision, I have no idea what Anmccaff's reference to ArbCom means.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Zzz369 reported by User:Philip J Fry (Result: )

Page: List of programs broadcast by Telemundo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Zzz369 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

Consecutive edits made from 22:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC) to 22:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
1. 22:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 687337327 by Philip J Fry (talk) por favor no vandalizes"
2. 22:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 687337327 by Philip J Fry (talk) por favor no vandalizes"
3. 22:55, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 687338231 by Zzz369 (talk)"
Consecutive edits made from 22:39, 24 October 2015 (UTC) to 22:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
1. 22:39, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "mi edicion es 100 % correcta, los datos hablan por si solos, primero informate y entonces actua"
2. 22:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "/* Soap operas */"
22:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Undid revision 687334095 by Philip J Fry (talk)"
Consecutive edits made from 09:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC) to 21:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
1. 09:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "/* Currently broadcast */"
2. 21:58, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "/* Soap operas */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

22:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "/* List of programs broadcast by Telemundo */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

While leave you a message in your discussion and I got rid your edits 3 times, the user wants to impose its editions, asking me who do not vandalism. You wrote in Spanish is the only language this user speaks. Whenever I leave messages to this user on their discussion refuses to answer them and instead, prefers to fall in war of editions. Philip J Fry 23:03, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry, I will write in English from now on. I was saying that what I edited is correct and I do not know why the user Philip J Fry keeps undoing my edits with the false ones. The information I put can be easily checked by opening any program table from Telemundo. Nevertheless, I will also add some references that further prove what I am saying. Please do not permit user like Philip J Fry to vandalize good work.--Zzz369 (talk) 08:40, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

The way the table was layed out before looked better and was clearer, also in your edits you added in other shows without actually citing a source for the additions, and as such would be reverted anyway.--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 08:53, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Do not agree with the current table, first because it doesn't fit with the rest of the article, so that a table of colors, when the rest of the tables are in grey. Second if I got rid its Edition was a clear reason. First because "El Señor de los Cielos" and "Señora Acero" are not TV series. and they have always been. And when I told him this, not followed and in return for that, added a color chart more clear. Is it really necessary?. The only words that has user whenever it directs to me, it is to "stop vandalizing" and so has always been. Ignores messages that left him in his discussion and prefers to fall in wars of editions.--Philip J Fry 21:58, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

User: SPECIFICO reported by User:Ogreggy

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Keynesian_economics&diff=687357590&oldid=687336303

Comments:

While there is debate within the academic community about the accuracy of keynesian economics (and for that matter, ALL economic models), there is no tolerance on wikipedia for any other viewpoint. The economics pages read like they were written by a high school clique of Keynesians, and their viewpoint is enforced with "undo" and rollbacks even for a request for discussion (whether that request is on the article page or the talk page -- debate gets squashed immediately).

Discussion or debate is not possible when even requests for discussion are undone, and personal attacks made against anyone who dares to challenge the cliques opinion. Administrators told me last week to request a discussion (which I did now, on two separate occasions) and twice my request for discussion was quickly undone and dismissed. Ogreggy (talk) 02:36, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked Ogreggy for 72 hours for resumption of edit warring after recent block.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

User:166.175.191.200 reported by User:Ryk72

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/687111688 (Talk page consensus for removal of unsourced or poorly sourced information)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

(edit summary claims "unexplained removal of content", despite extensive Talk page discussions)
(restore substantially the same information; edit summary claims "negotiated clarifications"; no Talk page consensus for inclusion)
(edit summary claims "unexplained removal of content", despite extensive Talk page discussions)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/687471990

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

NB: 3 intermediate reverts to remove the poorly sourced information are mine, and (I believe) in line with previously established Talk page consensus. I will not further revert. I have also raised an AIV report here.

Editor appears to be IP hopping, may now be at 166.175.57.226. - Ryk72 20:35, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Page protected Swarm ♠ 08:11, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Karah kenze reported by User:LjL (Result: Blocked indef)

Page: Jay Ward Productions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Karah kenze (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

15:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Leve it alone you moron"
15:21, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Don't worry I'm the right one I know about the company thanks to a to bill Scott who I talked to before he died"
16:26, 24 October 2015 (UTC) "Let's keep the page the way it looked a year ago since the other guy has no proof"
20:04, 25 October 2015 (UTC) "don't worry I left a message on the other users talk page plus it says on the Misplaced Pages pages witch years the shows ran"
20:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC) "I said I took care of the editing war plus you didn't have a reason for deleting my version (the right vision)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: None by me, but edit summaries show editor was well aware of rule breaches

Comments: I am re-reporting this after User:McGeddon withdrew the original report on the basis that "the talk page agreed with the edits", because there is only one thing on the talk page, while there were several editors reverting Special:Contributions/Karah kenze, whose user contributions show is being quite litigious (i.e. edit warring, removing content) on other articles as well, with no talk page justifications. So I think this does need to be brought to attention.

LjL (talk) 20:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Also note this threat to an anonymous editor. clpo13_(talk) 21:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

See also AN/I thread. BMK (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Disruption and reverts are continuing by User:Iloveyoooou, which I suspect is a sockpuppet (SPI filed). LjL (talk) 23:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely as a sock. Swarm ♠ 08:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Ans2015kivanc reported by User:Vacio

User Ans2015kivanc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is engaged in excessive edit warring and continues to do so after being warned by an admin. He reverted edits in the article Ganja, Azerbaijan 5 times in 24 hours:

In total he reverted the same edits 17 times since October 9. Thank you for your attention. --va c io 20:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours NeilN 22:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Persecution from Collect and McGeddon

Hello. I'm here to talk you about the incorrect actions of other Wikipedian. There are two users that are percuting me. They delete, change or undo everything I add to Misplaced Pages pages. They have voted negatively in a AfD debat without reason. User Collect and McGeddon are persecuting me. He voted negatively in the AfD debat of the Internet Horror Movie Database, they are persecuting me in the page and in the page where I added some titles. He have segnaled me here and here where the debat was archived. They continue to change all I do. Plus, Collect, for what i see in his talk page has various problems with Wiki like sock and blocks. This is why yesterday I afded some of his pages. Please help me stop this persecution. Please verify.Pizzole (talk) 23:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

See WP:BOOMERANG at this point. As well as all the AfDs and Prods he made against editors who !voted Delete for his "horror database" article. And for him to accuse me of socking is so perverse as to beggar the imagination. Now he posts an ill-formed edit war complaint - with the sole reason being, frankly, to harass any who disagree with his position. Will no one rid ... etc. Collect (talk) 23:25, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

You are wrong. I need admin attention about you and your behavior. Yes, you were investigated for sockpuppetry. Stop persecuting me. Pizzole (talk) 23:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

How on earth is this an edit warring report? Did you notice there's a form to fill? LjL (talk) 23:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm new but in good faith. Can you provide me the correct address to find someone helping me? I'll delete this if is the wrong place. Pizzole (talk) 23:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

You want WP:ANI. clpo13_(talk) 23:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you!Pizzole (talk) 23:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Declined redirected to appropriate forum Swarm ♠ 08:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Sakultah reported by User:Tradedia

Breaking 1RR twice:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
The article on which the edit warring occurred is subject to Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Syrian Civil War and Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. And the user being reported has been placed on notice of the remedies in place 4 days before he engaged in 1RR violation. In addition, you can notice a large number of warnings in edit summaries by frustrated users reverting his unsourced edits over a period of 1 week. Tradedia 01:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Swarm ♠ 08:15, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

User:RioHondo reported by User:Josedecura

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Placed the edit warring notice in User:RioHondo talk page but the user removed it. Appealed in article's talk page to discuss and reach consensus ignored. This fellow, RioHondo continues with his blatant and un-Wikipedian Edit Warring behaviour.Jose de Cura 02:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC) -->--Jose de Cura 02:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. Swarm ♠ 08:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
You were not ignored on the article's talk page. Your conduct seemed condescending, uncollaborative and unhelpful. Just saying. Swarm ♠ 08:23, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Petalcorin reported by User:331dot (Result: Blocked)

Page: Philippine Senate election, 2016 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Petalcorin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

23:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC) "←Replaced content with 'See [http://www.comelec.gov.ph/uploads/Archives/RegularElections/2016NLE/Candidates/COCFiled2016NLE/Senator_Filed_2016NLE.pdf COMMISSION ON ELECTION official...'"
09:19, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""
09:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""
09:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""
09:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""
09:43, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

09:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "General note: Removal of content, blanking on Philippine Senate election, 2016. (TW)"
09:34, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "/* October 2015 */"
09:38, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Philippine Senate election, 2016. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

09:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "/* Edits by Petalcorin */ new section"

Comments:

User is attempting to add a comment that really should go on the article's talk page; has blanked the article to do so but is now simply adding it to the top. Has not replied to any inquiries. 331dot (talk) 09:45, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

The user also seems to be involved in the election somehow based on this edit. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

"Somehow" indeed. DMacks (talk) 13:55, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours – If this behavior continues, the next step is probably an indefinite block. EdJohnston (talk) 16:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

User:HughD reported by User:Springee (Result: Protected)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Editor was warned about 3RR rule and asked to self revert the 4th edit here Discussion regarding the content as well as the reverted edits here.

Comments: HughD is an experienced editor and should know better regarding the 3RR violation. All 4 of the listed reverts were "undo" reversions rather than back and forth edits. He was given a chance to self revert and ignored the request while continuing to edit the article. His interactions on the talk page, initiated after the 2nd revert, are confrontational. The listed previous reversion is simply the last stable version before the recent article edits. The reversions represent four editors, myself (the IP edit), Safehaven86, Capitalismojo, and Champaign Supernova. Springee (talk) 18:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Comment: Note that 2 of the diffs are Hugh reverting a blank-and-redirect of the page, which was done out of process and without consensus - there was no merge/AFD or other discussion that established consensus for replacing the page with a redirect. At best, it was a WP:BOLD change that should not have been re-done once it had been reverted. Fyddlestix (talk) 20:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually, there had been merge thread going back to June, with no disagreement. Capitalismojo (talk) 19:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Comment HughD is continuing to edit war including re-adding material that was previously twice removed over objections of other editors. Removal of material: ] Reinsertion of material: ] No talk page justification for reinsertion

Removals of material related to Columbia Journaism article (note two of these removals are the ones listed as part of the 4RR complaint): ] ] Re-insertion: ] Discussions that HughD partook in after adding material that had previously been removed more than once. ] HughD has added 70 edits to the article in the last 4 days. Springee (talk) 19:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Result: Article protected three days. I don't see four explicit reverts by HughD but he is keeping up a rapid pace of edits, and one could argue POV-pushing. Please follow WP:DR for the disputed items. It is not 100% clear that HughD is banned from editing this article due to the Koch brothers restriction, but he would be wise to check with the banning admin, User:Ricky81682. EdJohnston (talk) 19:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Greengauge121 reported by User:Ivanvector (Result: Blocked)

Page: Movement for Socialism (Britain) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Greengauge121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

17:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""
Consecutive edits made from 18:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC) to 18:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
1. 18:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC) ""
2. 18:44, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "No evidence on the internet or elsewhere that this organisation actually exists."
19:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "←Blanked the page"
19:11, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "NO EVIDENCE ON THE INTERNET OR ELSEWHERE FOR THE ACTUAL EXISTENCE OF THIS TINY GROUP"
20:01, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "No evidence that this organisation exists. However, it may exist so I am deleting content but leaving the header in tact and will not be requesting deletion of the whole page"
20:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "Content is not verifiable by evidence. Hence deletion of content."
20:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC) "invalid content"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Twinkle won't let me link to diffs of warnings since the user has blanked their talk page, but they're there. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked – 31 hours by User:Liz. EdJohnston (talk) 15:46, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Adir Bar Yohanan reported by User:Huldra (Result: Blocked)

Previous version reverted to: link

Diffs of the user's reverts:

00:15, 26 October 2015 changes "About|the major Palestinian city in the West Bank" to "About|the city in the West Bank"
20:44, 26 October 2015 the same
22:37, 26 October 2015 the same

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: link

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See Talk:Ramallah#."Palestine" & "Palestinian"

Comments: Article is under 1RR, see Talk:Ramallah. And editor does not self-revert after being asked to do so, but instead continues editing. Huldra (talk) 23:20, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Blocked – 48 hours. Violation of WP:1RR on article which is in the domain of WP:ARBPIA. User was asked to self-revert but would not do so. EdJohnston (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Huldra & User:Nableezy & User:Al Ameer son reported by User:Adir Bar Yohanan (Result: Filer blocked)

Users being reported: Huldra (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) & Nableezy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Al_Ameer_son (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Diffs of the user's reverts:

: This article is about the major *Palestinian* city in the West Bank
: Ramallah (Arabic: رام الله‎, pronounced Rāmallāh About this sound (help·info)) is a *Palestinian* city
: others, same

Tried to resolve this at User talk:Huldra#Ramallah

Comments:

These three users have engaged together in reverting changes I have made to the article by reinserting contentious and confusing language.

a) "Palestine" is repeatedly used without clarification to what entity this word refers to. "Palestine" is not a current administrative entity with clear and unambigous meaning and hence leads to confusion in reading and the need to resort to context for clarifications. This context is not provided and hence the confusion persists.

b) "Palestinian" is repeatedly used without clarification to what entity this word refers to. "Palestine" is not a current administrative entity with clear and unambigous meaning and hence leads to confusion in reading and the need to resort to context for clarifications. This context is not provided and hence the confusion persists.

Clarifications need to be inserted in text as follows

a) either a removal of these words where not warranted and cofusedly employed - as I tried to do or b) by clear reference to what they mean which could be accroding to the disambiguation

These users have worked in consortium as to not break the 3RR rule any of them individually but have done so collectively in a concerted action to maintain incorrect language and hence confusion.

Later edit: adter Nableezy's comments on Ybna / Yavne it becomes apparent this is done as political activism against Wimipedia's rules for neutrality - please see below.

Please investigate this and for the avoidance of doubt reccomend guidelines that will prevent politicised language to be used.

Thank you

Adir Bar Yohanan

https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Adir_Bar_Yohanan Adir Bar Yohanan (talk) 00:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC) -->

Just a note, the same issue with the same user at Yibna. Adir Bar Yohanan is apparently under the impression that the words Palestine and Palestinians are verboten on Misplaced Pages. nableezy - 01:35, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

ABY: No words are prohibited and no words have preference. Language needs to reflect reality. Yibna is not an actual city but a medieval one; for the modern, contemporary city there is the page for Yavne which seems far more comprehensive with ample references to both Arab and Muslim cultural elements. The Yibna page is an attempt by activists to abuse Misplaced Pages to pass their fictions for reality against Wiki's standard of neutrality. I strongly advise you to refrain from political activism on Misplaced Pages and use other forums to voice your opinions.

Please enforce neutrality and demand these users to cease their political activism on Misplaced Pages.

Thank yo

ABY

Almost all the edits of Adir Bar Yohanan have been reverted, and a cursory look at them shows how inevitable that was. Consider this massive POV push for example. Now he wants to remove the attribute "Palestinian" from one of the largest Palestinian cities, on purely spurious grounds, and thinks that the page should be protected to preserve his version. This sort of WP:NOTHERE behavior should not be tolerated. Zero 10:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Result: Filer blocked for 1RR violation on Ramallah per an earlier report. EdJohnston (talk) 16:10, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Ifzam2003 reported by User:Bgwhite (Result: )

Page: Jalan Pantai Barat Kedah, Jalan Lembah Bujang, Jalan Tandop and Jalan Rekreasi Tupah
User being reported: Ifzam2003 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User talk:Ifzam2003 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgwhite (talk • contribs)

Comments:

I changed the header to show that Ifzam2003 rather than Bgwhite is the person being reported. Otherwise the content of the report doesn't make sense. EdJohnston (talk) 16:16, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

EdJohnston What doesn't make sense? There are 4 articles involved. I gave the history of all four articles to show the reverts. Ifzam2003 writes in ALL UPPER CAPS as is stated on the talk page. You've warned them for writing in all upper case.Bgwhite (talk) 18:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

What didn't make sense was your original header, 'Bgwhite reported by Bgwhite'. You are not requesting a block of yourself, so far as I can tell. If there is no response from Ifzam2003 a block seems likely. EdJohnston (talk) 19:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

User:Jatav123 reported by User:Mahensingha (Result: )

Page: Jatav (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Jatav123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

17:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "/* History */This is wrong"
17:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "/* History */Where is this stated.don't enter unsourced info"
Consecutive edits made from 09:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC) to 09:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
1. 09:01, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "/* History */"
2. 09:03, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "/* History */"
3. 09:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "/* History */This is the real informain.many books state this info"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

06:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "Caution: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Yadu. (TW)"
13:23, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "Warning: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Jatav. (TW)"
18:47, 27 October 2015 (UTC) "Final warning: Removal of content, blanking on Jatav. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

The history topic is under discussion on the talk page of the article here, but the user did not turn up there. He is only interested in making reverts/blanking the contents from other editors.

Comments:

The user adopts disruptive behaviour constantly. Earlier he did on article Yadu, where he wanted unsourced inclusion of Jatav community among descendants of Yadu. Now he is constantly removing the facts from the page Jatav. Seems to be a simply caste promotional account. MahenSingha (Talk) 18:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

User:AKS.9955 and User:Unbuttered Parsnip reported by User:Clpo13 (Result: )

Page: Ryōtarō Okiayu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Users being reported: AKS.9955 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Unbuttered Parsnip (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Unbuttered Parsnip

AKS.9955

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Unbuttered Parsnip

AKS.9955

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: No attempts made by either editor

Comments:

Categories: