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:Hope3606 reported by User:Czello (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: List of professional wrestling attendance records (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Hope3606 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:33, 11 October 2024 (UTC) ""
2. 01:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1250483569 by HHH Pedrigree (talk)"
3. 17:48, 10 October 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1250480039 by HHH Pedrigree (talk)"
4. 16:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 07:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on List of professional wrestling attendance records."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours User's edits seem timed meticulously to avoid any three reverts falling within a 24-hour period. Sorry, no sale. Another example of breaking the spirit of the rule in the hopes of claiming to be blameless for violating the letter. Daniel Case (talk) 22:00, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

User:Loodog reported by User:Geogene (Result: Page protected)

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

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [8]

Comments:

This is a selective reading of events. My friend Geogene here left one comment on the article's talk page, which I then replied to, making new suggestions and soliciting for feedback, but never received another reply. Geogene's only further actions were to revert my subsequent changes which incorporated their concerns expressed on the talk page. My last edit, reinstating my last revised edition, again entreated Geogene to bring it to the talk page and I warned Geogene to be mindful of WP:3RR. Notably, somehow my warning to Geogene is being cited above as Geogene's warning to me. Geogene did not issue any such warning.

Now, given that my second edit was a completely different change to my first, based on Geogene's concerns, I count only 2 reversions on my part, while for Geogene, I count 1, 2, 3 reversions, none of which were iterative or different, and were literally just reversions of anything I added, no matter what it was, while (seemingly) refusing any further discussion on the article's talk page. Louiedog (talk) 14:54, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I linked to Louiedog's 3RR warning because it proves they have some level of awareness of edit warring policy. Continuing to reinstate edits that I have already opposed both in edit summary and on the talk page on grounds of primary, and undue, is edit warring. Including new changes that I'm also opposed to (moving controversy from the lead to the body) at the same time as re-adding the disputed content does not mean it's not edit warring. Demanding that I return to the talk page to repeat previously stated objections before re-reverting the disputed additions does not justify edit warring. It is just possible that Louiedog does not understand the objections I made, but that doesn't justify continuing to re-add the disputed content. Geogene (talk) 17:18, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Great! Would you please return to the talk page and write back to me so we can establish a consensus going forward on what to be included in this article, rather than carrying this out as a zero-sum debate? WP:3RR explicitly says don't rely on the edit summaries.

My latest edit that you removed was entirely different than my first, including a change to reflect your objection that the newer source only discussed Staffordshire Terriers. Further, my latest edit includes all the temperament information from the 2008 Duffy paper, both that which is favorable and unfavorable to Pit Bulls (that they are not more aggressive toward owners or strangers but that they are more aggressive toward other dogs), so this seemed neutral to me. Had you partially reverted some part of that edit to address specific concerns (as I had solicited for on the talk page), we would be making progress, but instead you wholesale removed even my revised edit. All this to say, I have been offering iterative attempts toward your concerns, rather than simply reverting to what I had earlier. Louiedog (talk) 20:15, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:17, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

User:130.113.151.234/18 reported by User:Hemiauchenia (Result: Page protected)

Page: Salim Yusuf (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 130.113.151.234/18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [9]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [10] 20:18, 11 October 2024
2. [11] 22:28, 11 October 2024
3. [12] 22:51, 11 October 2024
4. [13] 23:03, 11 October 2024

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [14]

Demonstration of attempt to resolve dispute: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Salim_Yusuf

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [15]

Comments:

This user is claiming that the comments are libellous, but this is not supported by the consensus of commenters at BLPN. The IP user geolocates to where the subject works, suggesting a conflict of interest. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:08, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:20, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

User:2003:DF:7F2D:6F00:4862:A106:2B60:7045 reported by User:CurryTime7-24 (Result: /64 blocked 3 months)

Page: Symphony No. 13 (Shostakovich) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2003:DF:7F2D:6F00:4862:A106:2B60:7045 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC) "Reverted"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:27, 12 October 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Symphony No. 13 (Shostakovich)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 21:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC) on Talk:Symphony No. 13 (Shostakovich) "/* IP edits to lead, etc. */ new section"

Comments:

Persistent edit-warring from German IP user. Although they were temporarily blocked earlier this week, they returned to edit war as soon as it expired. Invitations to discuss their edits posted on the article's and their IP's talk pages have either not been seen or simply ignored. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 3 months ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:56, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

User:Inquisitor Shadowlord reported by User:MichaelMaggs (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)

Page: And Then There Were None (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Inquisitor Shadowlord (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1248566111

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1250226973
2. Special:Diff/1250249900
3. Special:Diff/1250309205
4. Special:Diff/1250450068
5. Special:Diff/1250839774

Diff of edit warring: Special:Diff/1144701136/1250848007

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Special:Diff/1249909812/1250756854

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1250849271

Comments:
Repeated reverts to re-add item of video game trivia after removal by multiple other editors, warnings on user talk page, and discussion on article talk page. User continues to edit war without any engagement at either location. MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:04, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

User:73.172.168.34 reported by User:OXYLYPSE (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Fresh and Fit Podcast (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 73.172.168.34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1250784385 by OXYLYPSE (talk)"
2. 14:16, 12 October 2024 (UTC) "Re-written to provide a non-racist, balanced perspective. Alot of you biggots are showing hate, while critique is fair, bias is not welcomed on this platform."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:21, 12 October 2024 (UTC) "General note: Not adhering to neutral point of view on Fresh and Fit Podcast."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 23:48, 12 October 2024 (UTC) on User talk:OXYLYPSE "/* fresh and fit page */ Reply"

Comments:

I am attempting to avoid becoming involved in an edit war with users 73.172.168.34, Xlifter9000, and 2601:153:900:3C9:0:0:0:1009.

They are continuously attempting to remove cited material from Fresh_and_Fit_Podcast in favor of their opinion/original research. This appears to have been ongoing since at least 25th Sept: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fresh_and_Fit_Podcast&diff=1247713138&oldid=1247712669 OXYLYPSE (talk) 23:58, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that all of the "users" are the same person, but I didn't technically check. They just behave the same. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Fairly sure they're the same person based off the replies. OXYLYPSE (talk) 00:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)