Page: Bhanot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)  Comment:Now what should I say, this reckless person has crossed all limits for three revert rule and spamming on user talk with thrustful comments , and he keeps bothering me repeatedly with the same fabricated nonsense. He keeps giving those mocking statements against me for commissioning an report and is persistently stuck on the same matter over and over again. I want him to be punished for his vile actions, and for the offensive things he has said in his statements, which had a bad influence on people. He is going to everyone’s talk pages

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [4]

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

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

Comments:

I suspect a WP:BOOMERANG is coming here, but for now I'll say to OP, don't make personal attacks as you did here. Bafflingly, you linked to the NPA policy in the same edit summary. — Czello ^(music) 11:11, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The OP account has been reported to AIV by User:Ratnahastin with the suspicion that it's yet another sockpuppet account of User:Truthfindervert: diff. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:14, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, kinda funny isn't it, a sockpuppet accusing others of edit-warring after move-vandalising. OP has been reported to AIV and SPI btw, so this will just led to them being blocked faster lol. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Could somone move the page back after OP is blocked, they have done it again. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:18, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah let's give the bots that fix the double-redirects a break and stop move-warring the page until the account is blocked. It's only gonna clutter the page histories and logs more and more, and the title the person is trying to move the page to isn't an unconstructive title anyway. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, I got carried away trying to stop the bot. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:24, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Sock, not bot, sorry. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I will now direct any visiting mods to Tested account clearly edit warring, so yes, this should be a WP:BOOMERANG. I do not know this user but there are multiple accusations of this being an LTA sock. — Czello ^(music) 11:21, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The account is a suspected sock of Truthfindervert, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Summerbreakcooldown. Pinging @Ivanvector, Zzuuzz, and Izno:. - Ratnahastin (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I had said this before as well—you are the same people @Czello@DoctorWhoFan91 who want to manipulate the article in your own way and keep editing it to portray it in the same context of that past misunderstanding and conflict. So, I have nothing for you. You just keep putting in your efforts, but the consequences of your violative actions will come to you eventually. I have no answers for that, but when you are found guilty, you will have to deal with them on your own.

This is my last reply, requesting administrative intervention as the accuser under the three-revert rule. Tested account (talk) 11:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• I have indefinitely blocked User:Tested account; almost certainly a sock but even if they aren't, they're being wildly disruptive and attacking others. Black Kite (talk) 11:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The page has also been move-protected for 2 days following a request for move protection I made at RPP/I. — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:37, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Tiwana family of Shahpur (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Farshwal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: diff

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 10:20–10:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
2. 10:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
3. 13:59, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
4. 15:24, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: diff

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: diff (from User:Farshwal themselves)

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

Comments:

Hi, I'm just an uninvolved third-party editor who came across this 3RR violation involving the change of "Parmar Rajputs" to "Jats" in the article lead sentence. The editor themself has made a post on the talk page as seen in the diff above, but they continued to edit-war without getting a consensus first at that talk page discussion. Also worth noting the editor had received a prior 7-day block in Sep 2024 for similar disruption, such as this, where they also made an edit changing something to "Jats". — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:02, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: In Special:Diff/1271043038 , they are using a slur against the Rajput caste by calling it "R***put" meaning "Son of Wh***", which is also the caste they are deliberately removing from the article. That in itself merits an indef.ArvindPalaskar (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
• Blocked indefinitely.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Hindi–Urdu controversy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Augmented Seventh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271389468&oldid=1269162140

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271341767&oldid=1269162140
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271342146&oldid=1271341767
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271342693&oldid=1271342146
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271346369&oldid=1271342693
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271384695&oldid=1271346369
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hindi–Urdu_controversy&diff=1271389468&oldid=1271384695

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271427280&oldid=1271423082

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271423082&oldid=1271392849

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAugmented_Seventh&diff=1271428457&oldid=1271428288

Comments:

The article in question presents one-sided information, and that too sometimes using unsourced and questionable sources. The language Urdu is part of the Pakistani identity, and this article does not engage with the perspectives of Pakistanis who argue that the language Urdu has its own identity, distinct from Hindi. It's culturally insensitive to dismiss the cultural identity of another community and dismiss their perspecitives entirely to push one-sided claims that only serve to undermine their identity.

• No violation Bbb23 (talk) 01:00, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Left CTOPS notice on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 01:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: TIM Group (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:12, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "no wrong edits"
2. 16:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "no overlink, adding HQ and more fixes. See all edits before reverting"
3. Consecutive edits made from 11:10, 24 January 2025 (UTC) to 11:16, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 11:10, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "removed overlinks, general fixes, new HQ image"
   2. 11:16, 24 January 2025 (UTC) ""
4. 12:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC) "new HQ image; fix (there aren't overlinks)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Using misleading edit summaries on TIM Group."
2. 18:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Final warning: Formatting, date, language, etc (Manual of style) on TIM Group."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: The user has a history of edit warring.

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 18:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Deadpool & Wolverine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 190.21.176.172 (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 20:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC) to 20:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 20:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Added source, also, why are you so against what I add? You literally revert everything that I add"
   2. 20:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Fixed ortography"
2. 20:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1271585207 by Adamstom.97 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:02, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow."
2. 20:32, 24 January 2025 (UTC) "Final warning: Vandalism on Deadpool & Wolverine."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• I've blocked the IP as part of a wide range for 6 months for block evasion.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Nintendo Switch 2 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: George19980825 (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 05:13, 25 January 2025 (UTC) to 05:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 05:13, 25 January 2025 (UTC) "Stop! Stop! Stop!"
   2. 05:14, 25 January 2025 (UTC) "Shit!"
2. 05:02, 25 January 2025 (UTC) "Category:Nintendo Switch 2"
3. 04:48, 25 January 2025 (UTC) ""
4. 04:40, 25 January 2025 (UTC) "Category:Nintendo Switch 2"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 05:00, 25 January 2025 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Nintendo Switch 2."
2. 05:03, 25 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Nintendo Switch 2."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Related to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_25#Category:Nintendo_Switch_2. Previously deleted by Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2025_January_25#Category:Nintendo_Switch_2. Newest deletion due to an apparent bot malfunction by JJMC89 bot III (talk · contribs), but it qualified for CSD G4. An improperly linked category was also fixed in this report. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:00, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
• Indefinitely blocked as a sock.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:26, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Quackity (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 168.196.97.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 03:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 03:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 03:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 02:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC) to 03:04, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 02:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC) ""
   2. 03:00, 26 January 2025 (UTC) ""
   3. 03:04, 26 January 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 03:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC) "/* 3 revert Rule */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Comment:The edits appear to be simple vandalism. Just report them at AIV if they do it again since they are on their final warning. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:21, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

OK, they have continued these attempts based on their filter log, so I reported them at AIV. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:24, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

• Already blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:42, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: 45 mm anti-tank gun M1942 (M-42) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Denniss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [5]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [6]
2. [7] - note that this one is marked as a minor edit.
3. [8]
4. [9]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [10]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: None, but see page edit comments.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [11]

Comments:

This page on a WW2-era anti-tank weapon has been edited today because the gun has been seen on video in active service of the Russian Armed Forces. Note that this is a caliber which has seemingly not had munitions produced for it since the 50s, so a return to service is not something that could just happen at any time. This is clearly noteworthy, but the user in question is repeatedly reverting any discussion of it. No attempt has been made by the user to justify this on the talk page. Additionally, the user marked his third reversion as a minor edit - perhaps in an attempt to avoid automated flagging or scrutiny? Once challenged (by me, after his third revert) he again reverted, marking his fourth, and bizarrely claimed WP:OR applied because the original editor viewed a video which was publicly released by a media channel of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. I think that a 20-year user with 45,000 edits knows that this claim is ridiculous.

A review of his talk page and edit history finds lengthy and frequent issues taken with his editing, which is almost entirely composed of reverts - some of which seem opinionated and overly editorialized (example: [12]). Looking further back, this user has had repeated formal and informal warnings for edit warring, following users to revert their edits, etc. Just-a-can-of-beans (talk) 17:18, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

I have further placed the article under indefinite ECP per WP:RUSUKR. Daniel Case (talk) 05:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Elena Parent (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:55, 27 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1271864106 by TW929 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:30, 25 January 2025 (UTC) on User talk:ElectionEditorJO "Warning: Edit warring on Elena Parent."

Comments:

Editor added unreferenced content about this person standing for election on 21st January; it has been removed repeatedly by several editors, and this editor has added it back six times from the 21st. Editor has been advised three times on the Talk page about adding unsourced information, and received an edit warring warning. Tacyarg (talk) 21:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 21:28, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Edward Berger (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored revision 1272284233 by Newsjunkie (talk): He is still NOT German."
2. 23:07, 27 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored revision 1272233271 by Newsjunkie (talk): He is *NOT* German./Added extra accessible citation."
3. 17:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC) "Restored revision 1271487607 by Gorrrillla5 (talk): Not German"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I have no alternative but to report this editor. They keep reverting my changes, which have also included style fixes, citations, and another editor's additions. This is the third time and they are not discussing on the talk page. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 23:22, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

I am discussing it. I answered your questions. newsjunkie (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2025 (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. Daniel Case (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [13]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 06:48, 27 January 2025 Ixudi talk contribs 20,438 bytes +913 Undid revision 1272076216 by Orientls (talk)removal of sourced content, no consensus reached on talk
2. 19:55, 27 January 2025 Ixudi talk contribs 20,710 bytes +671 →Affinities with Bihari languages
3. 09:24, 28 January 2025 Ixudi talk contribs 21,245 bytes +880 Restored revision 1272376185 by Ixudi (talk): DRN relates to the lead
4. 13:53, 28 January 2025 Ixudi talk contribs 21,245 bytes +1,206 Undid revision 1272397888 by Chanchaldm2 (talk) it is not POV, the Charyapadas are subject to an academic debate and the article is supposed to showcase both sides of the debate.

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [15]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [16]

Comments:

Edit warring against multiple editors. Also making false accusations on talk apge such as claiming that I was "blocked for mass additions of unsourced content",[17] when it never happened. CharlesWain (talk) 15:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Page protected In full for three days, so the discussion listed at the South Asian Literature task force page can get going without the temptation to edit-war in the interim. Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [18]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [19]
2. [20]
3. [21]
4. [22]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [23]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [24]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [25]

Comments:

• No violation The first revert diff is from a week ago, so there are only 3 reverts today. In addition, they have stopped reverting and are discussing on the talk page. @Shwobopho: no more restoring of the disputed content unless there's consensus on the talk page to do so. Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:12, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Calvin Robinson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ezra Fox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [26]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [27]
2. [28]
3. [29]
4. [30]
5. [31]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [32]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [33]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [34]

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Partial block from Calvin Robinson. Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

I've also bumped the protection up to extended confirmed to drive editors to the talk page due to this being a BLP. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: United States Board on Geographic Names (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Wamalotpark (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: First edit to change the capitalization

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. First revert, using their IP, which is very obviously the same editor
2. Second revert
3. Third revert
4. Fourth revert

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: warning

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Notification

Comments:

• Wamalotpark is edit warring with multiple editors across multiple articles, and are making the same edits while logged out.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:13, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
• The charge is obviously correct. User:Wamalotpark, I reverted you because no advantage should go to the edit warrior. If you revert again you will be blocked. The logged-out editing is another matter, a more serious matter, and as it happens I can see just how much of it you have been doing. You should stop doing that esp. if, as you did here, you seem to be doing it to avoid scrutiny, because it's abusive and you are going to get blocked for it. Drmies (talk) 00:19, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
• More recent example @Drmies: In Wamalotpark's recent edit at Mariano Rivera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), reverting to restore their preferred version and putting the onus on the other editor to start a discussion, in an edit summary no less, is continued edit warring.—Bagumba (talk) 04:31, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

  I only reverted one time. No intention to edit war. Wamalotpark (talk) 04:34, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

  Many follow Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You had made a bold edit. It was reverted, showing disagreement. The ideal response is to start a discussion. Piling on with a revert when others are reverting too only stokes the fire. —Bagumba (talk) 04:40, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

User:Wamalotpark, edit warring is an attitude, a mode of behavior, and these edits exemplify that. This is also why I have no problem blocking you right now for your baseball edits in a report that started with about edits over names--admins on this board are free to investigate whether reported editors are guilty of edit warring in general. So thank you, Bagumba, for adding this; I had hoped it wouldn't be necessary. Wamalotpark, you may say it wasn't your "intention" to edit war, but your edits resulted in one, and it is not possible for you not to have seen that. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

• Ponyo, Bagumba, apparently it has started all over again and your opinion is appreciated. Bagumba, do you have any knowledge of or insight into their edit summary, "Per WikiProject:Baseball Talk and Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball/Player style advice/Sample biography, linking the more descriptive article for MLB articles"? Drmies (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Due to a typo, Drmies did not ping Ponyo successfully...now done.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:23, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
• It looks like Wamalotpark is making mass changes to articles based on this discussion.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:29, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  I simply changed the link to baseball teams in MLB based on a discussion we had? I am actually changing it to something that I was against at first... We agreed that silent consensus would be to "baseball" Wamalotpark (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball/Archive 52#Linking "baseball" vs "professional baseball" Wamalotpark (talk) 21:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  I was actually against linking to only baseball, but after a discussion where everyone agreed, I made changes. "We shouldn't do things just because that's how we've always done it. I can agree that it is the more useful link and we can change our silent consensus" Wamalotpark (talk) 21:54, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  And I made an effort to start a discussion based on the edit war that happened at United States Board on Geographic Names. Wamalotpark (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

  @Drmies: It does seem like the emerging consensus there (unless one wanted to argue to give it a few more days). @Wamalotpark: It can help to link to the specific discussion in edit summaries. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

  Gotcha. Can you teach me how? I tried and couldn't figure that out. Wamalotpark (talk) 00:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

  Actually I figured it out earlier from copy pasting someone elses link from the source editor, thanks though. Wamalotpark (talk) 00:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [35]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [36] (jan 30, immediately after the block expired)
2. [37] (jan 26, before they got blocked for 3 days)
3. [38] (Jan 25)
4. [39] (Jan 25)
5. [40] (Jan 25)
6. [41] (Jan 25)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [42]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [43] (user responded using AI)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [44]

Comments:
This SPA got WP:EW-blocked for repeatedly removing maintenance tags from the article [45]. Immediately after the block expired, they came back to edit war over the same issue [46]. This user clearly WP:DONTGETIT.

Blocked – for a period of two weeks I might have let this go as I am not sure the article will be kept (the keep !votes are in the majority, yes, but closer examination shows they are mostly from SPAs created recently that cite non-policy reasons for their !votes. Daniel Case (talk) 20:21, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Traditional Chinese medicine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:41, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272915373 by Tryptofish (talk)"
2. 20:36, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272914802 by Tgeorgescu (talk)"
3. 20:25, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272912771 by Ixocactus (talk)"
4. 20:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272910578 by Tgeorgescu (talk)"
5. Consecutive edits made from 19:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC) to 20:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 19:46, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272907651 by Hemiauchenia (talk)"
   2. 20:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Including important but curiously overlooked text from citation."
6. 19:40, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Removed dubious reference and associated text per Reliable Sources (Medicine)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:21, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Introducing fringe theories on Traditional Chinese medicine."
2. 20:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Traditional Chinese medicine."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Account ignores all warnings and edit summaries. See also Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#TommyKirchhoff Ixocactus (talk) 20:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours; partial block from Traditional Chinese medicine.Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:51, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Federal monarchy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ToadGuy101 (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 23:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC) to 23:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 23:31, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* List of federal monarchies */"
   2. 23:33, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Historically */"
   3. 23:33, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Historically */"
   4. 23:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Historically */"
2. 23:11, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Historically */"
3. 23:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272927889 by Moxy (talk) It’s not finished a"
4. Consecutive edits made from 21:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC) to 22:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 21:14, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272212745 by Moxy (talk) No reason was given for removal there is currently a lack of info on this subject on Wikipedia thus it is appropriate"
   2. 22:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* List of federal monarchies */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:18, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Federal monarchy."
2. 23:26, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Notifying about edit warring noticeboard discussion."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• [47]

Comments:

Editor unfamiliar on how to format charts or basic copy editing.

Keeps restoring basic errors like " Historically, the most prominent examplesexample of a federal monarchiesmonarchy " and unable to edit chart properly. Has been asked to do this in a sandbox and to provide sourcing for these changes before submitting for public view. Perhaps an article block or a block from article namespace?Moxy🍁 23:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:43, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

  Thinking we have a big OR problem in general here....as seen at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flag for the Confederation of the Rhine. Lack of sourcing all over on top of formatting problems. Moxy🍁 00:19, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [48]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [49]
2. [50]
3. [51]
4. [52]
5. [53]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [54] and [55] and [56]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [57]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [58]

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Page: Bangladesh Chhatra League (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 11:16, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "Chhatra League have militant factions, provided enlugh sources for it"
2. 12:39, 30 January 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 16:44, 29 January 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 09:28, 26 January 2025 (UTC) on User talk:Sinnarmaile "/* January 2025 */"

Comments:

The user constantly added unsourced material as shown in their edits. Even though, the user claims to have added citations. I am unable to find any related to the subject the user is using for supporting their claims. Warned the user once but it seems did not collaborate with it. Aaaas216& (talk) 12:53, 31 January 2025 (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. Daniel Case (talk) 18:55, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Here's another recent one which i reverted just now. Bruno pnm ars (talk) 11:05, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Korean New Year (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Lnydcs (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [59]
2. [60]
3. [61]
4. [62]
5. [63]
6. [64]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [65]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [66][67][68]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [69]

Comments:
The persistent disruptive edits while refusing to provide the sources and engage discussing at the article's talk page. I tried to persuade him to refer to online sources, but given that he argues Google to be a a bribed propaganda machine, I'm starting to feel less confident in the user's ability to constructively engage in Wikipedia.

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:36, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: John Belushi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 74.104.110.86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1273102252 by CurryTime7-24 (talk)"
2. 18:38, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1273102352 by CurryTime7-24 (talk)"
3. 18:29, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Tributes, legacy, and popular culture */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "General note: Formatting, date, language, etc (Manual of style) on Milton Berle."
2. 18:33, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Billy Crystal."
3. 18:37, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Dick Ebersol."
4. 18:40, 31 January 2025 (UTC) "Final warning: Formatting, date, language, etc (Manual of style) on John Belushi."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Editor was warned not to add unreferenced and trivial pop culture references in articles. Multiple warning, including for edit warring, were ignored. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:44, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

They haven't edited since you gave them their last warning (otherwise, I agree that this user has crossed the EW line without violating 3RR). Let's see if this situation holds. Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Already blocked  for a period of 31 hours by EvergreenFir for adding unsourced content. Daniel Case (talk) 20:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: 2025 Potomac River mid-air collision (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2604:3D08:6E7D:2100:7563:6E02:139B:165 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 01:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"
2. 01:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"
3. 01:26, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"
4. 01:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"
5. 01:22, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"
6. 01:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"
7. 01:11, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* See also */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 01:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "/* January 2025 */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Bishonen | tålk 20:29, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sinfest (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Le Blue Dude (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272910490 by Traumnovelle (talk)"
2. Consecutive edits made from 19:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC) to 20:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
   1. 19:59, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Later shifts in tone */ This is a subject matter expert in line with Kleefeld. Finally got the quote we needed! Horray!"
   2. 20:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Later shifts in tone */"
   3. 20:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "/* Later shifts in tone */"
3. 01:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272733631 by Hydronium Hydroxide (talk)"
4. 00:42, 30 January 2025 (UTC) "It’s a direct quote. I’m not breaking the rules. We can debate this with a RFC or arbitration"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Things have settled down somewhat since earlier in the week, noting that the latest diff posted above is 4 minutes prior to Tiggerjay's warning, and LBD made no edits to the article in the 27 hours between that and this report. The horror that is Sinfest does look like it wanders the borders of five or six Wikipedia:Contentious topics, however. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 09:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Declined Per above. Daniel Case (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sambhaji (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Kiranpawar3210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Previous version reverted to: [70]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:28, 27 January 2025 "Undid revision 1272117316 by Ratnahastin (talk)"

1. 18:13, 27 January 2025 "Undid revision 1272169548 by Ratnahastin (talk) "

1. 22:19, 31 January 2025 "Undid revision 1273079605 by Ratnahastin (talk) This specific sentence is not found anywhere in the given reference"

1. 00:16, 1 February 2025 "Undid revision 1273091307 by Dympies (talk) The exact sentence is not found in any source. Some sources do not even exist"

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [71]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [72]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [73]

Comments:
Edit warring with multiple editors in order to glorify this king by either adding honorifics or censoring content he doesn't like. Dympies (talk) 04:14, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours User also alerted to CTOPS; will leave notice of same on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 23:35, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Korean calendar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2A00:20:7:6ADE:2158:8D15:DBCD:A40E (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [74]
2. [75]
3. [76]
4. [77]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [78]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [79]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [80]

Comments:
Shortly after Lnydcs[81] was permanently blocked from persistently adding the unsourced disruptive edits and edit warring while refusing to engage in the talk, the new IP user 2A00:20:7:6ADE:2158:8D15:DBCD:A40E[82], likely Lnydcs's block evasion IP, is continuing the edit warring with the similar contentious and disruptive edits, violating WP:PROXYING. I think the page may need the protection given that the user is potentially keep changing the IP to evade the block and continue the edit warring.

Update: The likely same user is now using a new IP to continue the behaviours [83], which seems to be a VPN IP [84] — Preceding unsigned comment added by JollyJelly425 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks The range 2A00:20:7:6ADE:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) Daniel Case (talk) 23:48, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Also blocked 2A02:6B67:D050:2A00:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) for the same time, Daniel Case (talk) 23:51, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Zellij (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 03:09, 2 February 2025 (UTC) "False information removed, zellige is a safeguard registered art"
2. 03:04, 2 February 2025 (UTC) "Fake information removed"
3. 02:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC) "Zellige is a safeguard Moroccan heritage and it’s explicitly Moroccan. No other country should claim or lie on history on Wikipedia."
4. 02:53, 2 February 2025 (UTC) "False information removed"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 03:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Zellij."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:54, 2 February 2025 (UTC) on Zellij "Please use the talk page to explain why you think this sourced information should be removed."

Comments:

Yes, and again just now. These are his only edits. Johnbod (talk) 03:18, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Note: I have also requested page protection for the article ([85]), if approved, that might solve the problem. Otherwise, I would push this further: this account is an obvious WP:NOTHERE. It's obviously related to the IP user(s) who has been making POV vandalism (pro-Morocco, anti-other North African countries) for several days: [86], [87], [88], [89], [90], [91], [92]. The username and this logged-out edit in response make it clear they're just here for one disruptive purpose, related to political disputes between Morocco and Algeria. R Prazeres (talk) 03:24, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely Acroterion (talk) 03:39, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Hrvatinić noble family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Santasa99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hrvatini%C4%87_noble_family&diff=prev&oldid=1272499357

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hrvatini%C4%87_noble_family&diff=prev&oldid=1272448682
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hrvatini%C4%87_noble_family&diff=prev&oldid=1273089289
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hrvatini%C4%87_noble_family&diff=prev&oldid=1272585409
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hrvatini%C4%87_noble_family&diff=prev&oldid=1272584856

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [93]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [94]

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

Comments:

The user has displayed continuously irrational and unscientific behavior through edits, by using sources with no scientific basis or consensus. Having gone through the users post history, I have found that this has not been only an issue I noticed, but it is a pattern that has been pointed out to the user by several other people over the years.

• No violation. The 4 reverts listed above are incorrect as some of the edits are consecutive. Santasa99 has made two reverts, one on January 31 and one on January 28. Bbb23 (talk) 00:54, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Comment Just a short comment in case someone from ANI gets interested, as the link for this report is posted there: as Bbb23 correctly noticed, I reverted on 28 and 31 Jan, two reverts of replacement of sourced with unsourced content,.--౪ Santa ౪^99° 10:31, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Pseudohistory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 151.251.252.85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [95]
2. [96]
3. [97]
4. [98]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [99]

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

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

Comments:

Very much a wp:nothere SPA. Slatersteven (talk) 15:01, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 15:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Lenny Kravitz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 13enedict (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [100]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:01, 16 January 2025
2. 22:18, 17 January 2025
3. 10:56, 18 January 2025
4. 14:22, 30 January 2025 (logged out)
5. 14:27, 30 January 2025 (logged out)
6. 20:04, 30 January 2025
7. 10:33, 1 February 2025
8. 19:10, 1 February 2025
9. 12:40, 2 February 2025
10. 17:59, 2 February 2025

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [101]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [102]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [103]

Comments:

SPA. Slow edit warring over ancestry. They were also warned about WP:RUSUKR but they do not seem to have paid attention to this. Mellk (talk) 12:55, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

The IP is also clearly the same person as they referred to the talk page discussion started by 13enedict in the edit summary, plus 13enedict logged back in to leave this message on my talk page 10 minutes after I reverted the IP. Mellk (talk) 13:06, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I think this is not the first vexatious attack on me. I have consistently sought dialogue on the subject, following Wikipedia's policies. I have received a rather perplexing barrage of attacks which I don't think are merited. I am proposing well-sourced changes and no-one has expressed any coherent opposition to the content as far as I'm aware. People seem to want to avoid this content regardless of its veracity and relevance. A careful reading of Wikipedia:RUSUKR leads me to believe that it does not apply in this case, only a casual reading of the policy would support that conclusion. If this policy were to apply, then almost any subject however tangentially related would be subject to it. The behaviour of others is not in the spirit or, I fear, the rules of Wikipedia and are frequently discourteous. I believe a careful reading of the situation will demonstrate my vindication. 13enedict (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 18:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Hurry Up Tomorrow (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 109.76.175.107 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:08, 1 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 18:48, 1 February 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 13:53, 1 February 2025 (UTC) ""
4. 13:40, 1 February 2025 (UTC) ""
5. 11:56, 1 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 19:11, 1 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Hurry Up Tomorrow."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Obviously edit-warring against different users. -Lemonaka 19:12, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Declined As I wrote yesterday, he appears to maybe have gotten the hint and hasn't edited the article in over 24 hours. Daniel Case (talk) 03:44, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: The Orangutan Project (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 76.65.5.144 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 03:14, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "CEO is lying to people. I’m fixing it. As many times as it takes. Money laundering thieves. (allegedly)"
2. 03:03, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Partnerships */"
3. 02:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "Correcting misinformation for the second time."
4. 01:55, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "Correcting misinformation and removing references that do not relate to the organization. I removed references that cannot be corroborated or are misleading."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 03:08, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on The Orangutan Project."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 03:09, 3 February 2025 (UTC) on The Orangutan Project "Restored revision 1273591930 by ClueBot NG (talk): These changes need discussion and consensus. Use the talk page."

Comments:

Tendentious editing, including BLP violations. Jfire (talk) 03:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Daniel Case (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: 764 (organization) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts: [104] [105] [106] [107] [108]

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [109]

Comments:

Edit warring with multiple people to introduce version that has no consensus PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:22, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Daniel Case (talk) 21:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Antifeminism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Johnnybgood999 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:19, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "Rather than deleting entire sections, editors should aim for targeted, precise edits that align with Wikipedia’s content policies. Please discuss in talk page before deleting."
2. 23:01, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1273767321 by Grayfell (talk) Please discuss this on the talk page. Only edit those messages that you believe do not meet the criteria, but do not delete the entire section (in fact, there is content prior to my edits that you also deleted)."
3. 22:53, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "WP:PRESERVE, WP:CONSENSUS, WP:EDITWAR - see talk page"
4. 21:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "WP:WAR – see talk page"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 23:09, 3 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Recent additions */ Reply"
2. Consecutive edits made from 19:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC) to 23:03, 3 February 2025 (UTC) on Talk:Antifeminism

Comments:

slowburning edit war - user continues to edit and war after warnings and unproductive talk page discussions. --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 23:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours, partially blocked from Antifeminism and Talk:Antifeminism, warned for overall pattern of conduct and potential topic ban. Acroterion (talk) 00:12, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Melhem Zein (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Omar7575 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [110]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [111]
2. [112]
3. [113]
4. [114]

Other pages exhibiting similar behavior after warnings

1. [115]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [116]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Multiple attempts beyond warnings, including: diff diff diff diff

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [117]

Comments:
Attempted good faith conversations on talk page, a new user posting in contentious areas, with borderline WP:ARBPIA implications. Primarily trying to introduce unsourced lineage of people, which cannot be verified in reliable sources. Continued posting implicates WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and talk page replies convey WP:BIT. I reverted their content three four times, and they've re-added it four five times total, multiple edits after engaging on talk page discussions, which shows that they've decided that the rules do not apply to them. Updated to 5th time re-adding the content after being reverted four times. Now a bright line violation. TiggerJay (talk) 07:32, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

@Tiggerjay: It's not a bright-line violation as the 4 reverts did not occur in a 24-hour period. Nonetheless, I would have blocked the user it if it weren't for the fact that you too have been edit-warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:11, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

@Bbb23 - the only thing I've been doing is reverting their unsourced additions which appear to be vandalism and/or POVPUSH back to the most stable version of the article[118] [119] [120] [121]. With regards to other pages, with the exception of a single errant partial revert, all other pages have also been reverted to their stable versions. Last time I checked that was not a criteria of edit warring on my part. However I will agree that it looks like their most recent (4th revert) occurred within 31 hours, so I would agree with perhaps not bright-line. TiggerJay (talk) 16:30, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Your edits are not exempt under WP:3RRNO; your interpretation of what constitutes vandalism is incorrect.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:32, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

The continued addition of an unsourced nationality, especially to the lead, violates not only MOS:NATIONALITY (not good), but also WP:BLP (double plus ungood). I've removed the content as a BLP violation, plus the related categories which run afoul of WP:BLPCAT. If they're restored, a block is in order.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:41, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

@Ponyo: If you think that the user's edits are WP:BLP violations, the reversion of which is exempt under 3RRNO, you should really block the user indefinitely. AFAICT, that's all they've been doing on Wikipedia since they started editing a few days ago.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I didn't want to be a toe-stepper, isn't Tuesday your swing dance lesson night? I gave them a final awarning and a CTOPs notice and am monitoring. Plus cleaning up the mess.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

It was canceled because of snow. They didn't want to rename it to slip dancing. I'm crushed (ice) and am trying to comfort myself by twirling in the living room to Strauss waltzes.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Omar7575 continued to restore the BLP-violating content despite my final warning, so I've blocked. In this case it's indefinitely as, per this statement, they have no intention of abiding by our policies.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:49, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: June Foray (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2601:404:D000:B915:6415:F05B:3466:AF1B (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 2601:404:d000:b915:faef:f666:eba8:5265 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 2601:404:d000:b915:bacf:9cae:c0a5:b205 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 2601:404:d000:b915:8951:55d3:6c83:506f (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 2601:404:d000:b915:95fe:45c7:d42:8bce (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:11, 2 February 2025 by 2601:404:d000:b915:bacf:9cae:c0a5:b205
2. 12:36, 3 February 2025 by 2601:404:d000:b915:8951:55d3:6c83:506f (already warned)
3. 20:46, 3 February 2025 by 2601:404:d000:b915:faef:f666:eba8:5265 (already warned)
4. 23:32, 3 February 2025 by 2601:404:d000:b915:6415:f05b:3466:af1b
5. 23:35, 3 February 2025 by 2601:404:d000:b915:6415:f05b:3466:af1b
6. 02:17, 4 February 2025 by 2601:404:d000:b915:95fe:45c7:d42:8bce

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 05:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC) I undid their edit of changing the infobox image without consensus. I added a note suggesting "Create a talk page discussion"
2. 13:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC) Undid their edit again with the note: Once again, there was no issue with this image being on the infobox before and it does follow precedent with other deceased celebrities. ONCE again, discuss this in talk page and do not engage in an edit war
3. 20:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC) User Freedoxm undid the edit again suggesting the unregistered IPs edit is not needed
4. 23:34, 3 February 2025 (UTC) I once again undid the unregistered IP's edits with the note: Please stop engaging in this edit war. Please discuss your thoughts on the talk page
5. 23:36, 3 February 2025 Once again undid the unregistered IPs edits.
6. 11:40, 4 February 2025 Unregistered IP said "Just let the most recent picture be at the top, please" to which I reverted the edit and once again kindly asked them to create a talk page discussion

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Unregistered IPs, possibly the same user, have been continuously undoing edits without proper justification or disregards suggestions to start a talk page discussion. Two of the four unregistered IPs had been warned for undoing the infobox image, which had no issues before and follows precedent for some deceased celebrities in terms of using black and white images. Would it be possible to block these IP users or at the very least protect the page? Thank you. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of two weeks From article. The range 2601:404:D000:B915:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)). Daniel Case (talk) 19:03, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Isimmons1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

First addition: [122]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [123]
2. [124]
3. [125]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [126]

No discussion has taken place on the article talk page; however, the user has discussed the issue on User:Redrose64's talk page

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [127]

Comments:
Long term edit warring - user has tried four times to add content which goes against established consensus to a page, and has been reverted by two users already - three now including myself. No attempt by the user to start a discussion until the post on Redrose's talk page. Danners430 (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2025 (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. Daniel Case (talk) 23:36, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I’m not asking for the 3RR to be applied in this case - I’m asking for it to be reviewed as to the concerns around edit warring, which is clearly happening here. This is the edit warring noticeboard is it not? Danners430 (talk) 07:56, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

We do block people for making single reverts repeatedly without violating 3RR, but usually when they've done it a lot more than this. If this continues, take it back here, or to AN/I. Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: - I disagree. Saw the report at WT:UKT and I have partially blocked the editor in question from editing the list, a fairly mild sanction which stops the disruption in question. there is no evidence of any other disruption requiring a stronger sanction. The talk page remains open to him to present his case. Mjroots (talk) 11:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

That's your discretion, then. Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Just a heads up @Mjroots - I noticed that the block on the page is indef but you’ve posted the block notice listing it as “temporary” - don’t know if that’s intentional or not, just wanted to let you know :) Danners430 (talk) 19:29, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

@Danners430: - unintentional, but Redrose64 has sorted it. Mjroots (talk) 07:14, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Kevin Roberts (political strategist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and Project 2025 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Summerfell1978 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [128] and [129]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [130]
2. [131]
3. [132]
4. [133]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [134]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [135]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [136]

Comments:

User is doing essentially the same conduct on both the Kevin Roberts and Project 2025 pages. Warring with multiple editors across the pages. Most of the explanations were done on the P2025 talk page, but the diff links/3RR violations I used were on the Roberts page, I can add the Project 2025 ones as well if need be. Reverted them twice on both pages, but am stopping now to prevent edit warring/3RR. Also, just being generally uncivil on the talk pages. Just10A (talk) 18:38, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Regarding Kevin Roberts page: A single sentence was added in the lead paragraph of the Kevin Roberts page. I find this information to be crucial, relevant, and significant, especially considering the real-time changes occurring rapidly in the United States. I provided citations. User reverted it without cause, without modification of text, and threatened me with a block.

Regarding Project 2025 page: I initially added in the lead paragraph that it is currently being implemented by President Trump. Another user reverted it and recommended that I add citations. I added citations, prominent ones such as from MSNBC, Politico, and USA Today. Another user reverted and recommended that I address this in the Talk page. Several users complimented my work and said I should work on adding the information first to the Implementation section before adding that sentence in the lead paragraph. User @Just10A became hostile and reverted my edits without reason. He has made zero attempts to "refine" my sentences as he recommended, and is instead deleting them without cause. I am a new user but I feel that I'm being bullied. Summerfell1978 (talk) 18:44, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you feel bullied, that was never my intention. I merely asked you to draft and discuss on the talk page so that we could refine it instead of just forcing it in the main article,[137] but you refused. I don't want to comment anymore to muddy the waters, I'll let the admin sort this out. Just10A (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – 31 hours for edit warring. EdJohnston (talk) 20:38, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

  @EdJohnston I don't know if this post is the appropriate place to raise this, but the user immediately returned to posting the same content on the Kevin Roberts (political strategist) page again. As well as seemingly lead-bombing Curtis Yarvin. Just10A (talk) 15:18, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Just10A is being disingenuous. These are not sincere or honest remarks.

  Regarding Kevin Roberts: I started a discussion on the Talk page and another user opined, and they took my idea into consideration and they edited the paragraph to make all parties happy.

  Regarding Curtis Yarvin: Lead-bombing is not true. I added new citations, something I hadn't done before. I also began a talk discussion to which no one has responded to, so I'll wait. Summerfell1978 (talk) 15:44, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  No, that was after you immediately edit warred it back in, without discussing on talk. Here's the link: [138]. Just10A (talk) 15:47, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  Well it was a mistake and there's a talk discussion, so please contribute. Summerfell1978 (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: 2025 Risbergska school shooting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2A02:2F0C:C207:C000:54A6:FCA1:1156:2E2B (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:06, 4 February 2025 (UTC) "there are about 60 gun related murders in sweden every year and 60 murders by other means. only referring to the gun violence gives a false impression of the level of violence experienced in sweden"
2. 19:59, 4 February 2025 (UTC) "homicides by gun isnt in any way more important than homicides without guns. either put overall homicides in or neither"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Repeated removal of sourced content for some kind of POV pushing. I understand they technically haven't done much, but these are the user's only edits; it's painfully obvious that they are NOTHERE. — Anonymous 20:15, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

• The article is semi-protected.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:27, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sino-Vietnamese War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2601:80:4803:8d60:18b:d03a:b090:5aa2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Older IPs:
2601:80:4803:8d60:20d2:d3c0:f457:b2bd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
2601:80:4803:8d60:51ff:287c:880f:a0da (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
2601:80:4803:8d60:dd44:833:e6fb:6ebb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
2601:80:4803:8d60:68e0:666a:8f7b:bb63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:
4 February:

1. [139]
2. [140]
3. [141]
4. [142]

5 February:

1. [143]
2. [144]
3. [145]
4. [146]
5. [147]
6. [148]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [149]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [150]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [151]

Comments:

• /64 range blocked for 3 months.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:32, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Now there's another similar IP repeating the same edits: 2600:1002:B12B:A77B:0:58:FA06:5701. It may be the same person, the locations are similar but they don't match. RobertJohnson35 – talk 16:43, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

lol it's obviously him and he is at it again.[152] He has gone on a reverting rampage and it seems the block failed to stop him. 49.186.230.86 (talk) 16:53, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

I have requested protection of the article, I don't want to report him again if he's going to do the same thing all the time. RobertJohnson35 – talk 16:57, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Law of cosines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Jacobolus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [153]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [154]
2. [155]
3. [156]
4. [157]
5. [158]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [159]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [160]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [161]

Comments:

Few days ago, I edited the law of cosines' article, my edits were reverted by Jacobolus. I tried to find a compromise with that editor, but each time I edited the article, trying to take their comments into account, they reverted me. First, they said that the explanations were not correct, then I made an edit, taking into account much of what Jacobolus said, but they reverted me again. Then, they criticized the quality of the source, but when I added more sources, they reverted me again. Then I took the sources at WP:RSN, where they were dubbed reliable and a proposal from a third party was made, however, when I edited the article accordingly, Jacobolus reverted me again. It seems quite clear that this editor will not stop reverting my edit to that article, no matter if they are sourced, no matter if a third party opinion has been given. Also, as anybody can see at Talk:Law of cosines, Jacobolus constantly makes their own analyses of the works of al-Kashi or al-Tusi, blatantly ignoring what the sources say. Also, I'm a bit surprised to see XOR'easter intervening on the talk page, with a small and quite vague comment, while they had never edited that article before (WP:MEATPUPPETRY ?) ...---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:55, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

• No violation, and Wikaviani, stop with the personal attacks. Bbb23 (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks for your swift response, however I must confess that I don't get your point about personal attacks. You mean the comment about possible meatpuppetry ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:06, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  Yes...obviously.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:12, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks for clarifying. As an admin, I would appreciate an advice, I feel like I tried to solve that dispute, even checking WP:RSN, what else can I do to solve this ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:16, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikaviani: Please try to resolve content disputes on the discussion page instead of repeatedly edit warring in the article text to force in material that other editors are opposed to. My position was, and continues to be, that the article as it stands clearly describes al-Kashi's work and its relation to prior work; indeed I would say Wikipedia's text does a better and more complete job of this than other sources I have seen. (Unfortunately the article does a poor job describing later work, though that is not relevant to this dispute.) We don't need to add vague or inaccurate non-factual sentences further promoting that work, especially not if they are based on off-hand mentions in tangentially-related sources. Your goals here seem to me to be largely political/ideological rather than factual/historical, and your discussion style is frustrating because you don't engage with comments you disagree with, but just ignore them and move back to your same (still insufficiently substantiated) point every time. If you can just straight-forwardly explain what you are trying to do and why, it might help people to either more easily reject it or to figure out how to compromise with you.

Also: You think XOR'easter is a "meatpuppet"? Seriously? If you want we could try to get some more involvement from other editors at WT:WPM or a similar place. –jacobolus (t) 17:18, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

How exactly my goals could be politica/ideological ? You say al-Tusi, I say al-Kashi, they are both Iranian scientists. are you serious ?---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:23, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Have you two considered WP:DRN? Simonm223 (talk) 17:25, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:23, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

No, I say "Scholar A directly did X, here is a quotation of their text. Scholar B directly did Y, here is a quotation of their text, here is how it relates to X, here is how you would write it in modern notation, and here is a picture." This lets readers compare and draw their own conclusions.

You say "Scholar B was the first person to do «named statement» in a modern way.^{[footnote with a link to a half-sentence of fluff with no concrete detail in a big pop math book.]}" This doesn't really tell readers anything except the unsubstantiated opinion of the author of the pop math book, and is confusing and potentially misleading to readers because it involves undefined and ambiguous language whose meaning would be interpreted differently by different readers, and some inferences reasonable readers are likely to draw from this statement are incorrect: what the scholar actually did is not identical to «named statement» as presented commonly today, and is part of a historical process of changing priorities and presentations that doesn't have clear boundary lines, so that claims about who was "first" are inherently subjective and often political. Can you see the difference between these two approaches? The goal of the former approach is to share factual description, while the goal of the latter approach is apparently to promote a particular scholar's work. –jacobolus (t) 17:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Maybe Wikipedia rules have changed, but I don't remember which parts of our guidelines say that we, as editors, can make the job instead of secondary sources. And, again, in the thread, you give the credit of the use of trigonometry and the study of a random triangle to al-Tusi while I give the same credit to al-Kashi, both are Iranian scientists, there is no politics here, my goal is to fairly represent the history of that law. Anyway, if I'm in the mood for that, I will try Simonm223's proposal, otherwise I won't and the article will remain just as it is, who cares after all.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

No, this is a gross misstatement of my claims. I didn't "give credit" to anyone for anything. I just quoted and explained both texts. (If you want my opinion: I think it is almost certain that authors earlier than al-Tusi gave similar methods for finding the third side of an SAS triangle, possibly many centuries earlier, but I am not personally aware of those texts. Neither al-Tusi nor al-Kashi makes any claim about novelty of their method for solving SAS triangles, but just present it among a list of methods for solving various types of triangles which were presumably already known to contemporaries. Even if we restrict ourselves to something recognizable as "trigonometry" specifically, I would not be at all surprised if equivalent expressions relating the sides to one angle of a general triangle turned up in the extensive but now-lost treatise of Hipparchus about that subject. But my speculations are an appropriate topic for a blog post, not for Wikipedia.) The purpose of Wikipedia articles is not to "give credit", and even quoting secondary sources which give credit is often problematic because those sources are not omniscient, are often political, and credit-giving statements are often misleading or factually incorrect. "fairly represent the history" – the history is not currently fairly represented because we focus quite a lot on developments before 1500, which are covered quite well, but not at all on developments after 1500. If you want to work on "fairly" representing the history of the topic, please go find some sources about 16th–19th century trigonometry and extend this section. –jacobolus (t) 18:50, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Can you guys find somewhere else to take this "discussion"? Unless you have an issue with the resolution of this report, it's taking up space that it shouldn't be taking up here. Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Kevin Roberts (political strategist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Just10A (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [162]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [163]
2. [164]
3. [165]
4. [166]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [167]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [168]

Comments:

I am writing to formally report user Just10A for their disruptive editing behavior on the article Kevin Roberts (political strategist). Over the course of our discussions on the talk page, I have raised concerns about neutrality, verifiability, and adherence to Wikipedia’s sourcing standards, particularly regarding content related to Project 2025. However, Just10A has repeatedly:

Added or restored material without proper citations. Engaged in edit warring by reverting changes without consensus. Ignored talk page discussions, failing to engage constructively in content dispute resolution. Introduced content that appears promotional and does not meet Wikipedia’s neutral point of view (NPOV) policy. I have made good-faith efforts to address these issues on the talk page, but Just10A continues to dismiss concerns and reinstate problematic content. I believe this behavior violates Wikipedia’s core policies on NPOV, verifiability, and edit warring.

Just10A raised an issue that I shouldn't have the concluding lead sentence because there is no information in the body regarding Project 2025. I took him up on that offer to make accomodations so that he's happy. I spent quite some time writing in the body a subheading regarding Project 2025. Project 2025 is spearheaded by Roberts. User then claimed that it's irrelevant and deleted the paragraph. He has also repeatedly harassed me the past few days. It seems that his issue is with displaying the appropriate information on the article page. I believe that he is not being sincere in his reasoning as to why he doesn't want the information available. At least 6 times I and other users posted in the talk asking what his objections are to the sourced material but they have been ignored. When I left a warning on his page regarding edit warring, he reverted my comment. I was also nice enough not to report him yesterday for editwarring, after he raised this to admins. I believe these actions are not constructive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Summerfell1978 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 5 February 2025 month year (UTC) Just10A (talk) 17:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I think this might end up as a WP:BOOMERANG. The reporting User was blocked for edit warring on the Kevin Roberts (political strategist) page (their report hasn't even been archived yet, it's still on this page), and immediately returned after the block by resuming to edit war the page, despite being implored multiple times by myself and other editors to draft on the talk page and gain consensus before injecting things in. [169] The diffs he provided of me "edit warring" are multiple days apart, and the first ones are from their initial dispute above which resulted in their block. I (along with others) reverted them twice since they returned, but will not do again to avoid 3RR until this is resolved.

On top of this, they've done what I think can only be seen as a WP:HOUNDING edit [170] against me after this all started up again, and have had a pattern of clear incivility on the talk pages, saying things like: "Some of us, like me, contribute to society as a surgeon. Not all of us have time at home to make 220,000 edits on Wikipedia in a span of few years." (making fun of an editors large amount of edits, on their talk page) and "If you can't read, this really isn't my problem."

Unfortunately, I don't think the original block did it's job, and they are clearly WP:NOTHERE and engaging in WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior. A boomerang might be appropriate here. Just10A (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Considering the edit comments in the article history from several frustrated editors it looks like WP:CIR too. Simonm223 (talk) 18:06, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week Per and in addition to the above discussion, they did it right off their last block, they have been alerted to CTOPS, the talk page has a CTOPS notice—there's not much else I need to say. If they return to this again a responding admin should block for a month, log it and make it ArbCom-appealable. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Rade language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Fdom5997 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rade_language&diff=prev&oldid=1273844739

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rade_language&diff=prev&oldid=1273845371
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rade_language&diff=prev&oldid=1273822246
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rade_language&diff=prev&oldid=1273702667

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fdom5997&diff=prev&oldid=1273847447

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fdom5997&diff=prev&oldid=1273852474

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: == Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion == Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Where's "can also be heard as" and "may be heard as" in the source?. Thank you.

Comments:User talk:Fdom5997 repeatedly reverted my edits with no justification other than "it's my wording choice" or "I like to write it that way". They repeatedly failed to add inline citations and stop using subjective languages unwarranted by the sources they're refusing to cite properly. When all failed, they resorted to making this threat in the edit summary: Stop reverting and just concede. Keep this up and I will report you to ANI:Noticeboard, clearly demanding me to capitulate to their bad behavior. During our exchange to resolve the issue, they repeatedly misrepresented my argument, insisting that I was forcing them to "quote verbatim" the sources, even though I only asked them to stop using unfounded subjective language and cite sources properly.Mazamadao (talk) 07:55, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Page protected In full for three days. I'd tell you to go to the talk page, but it's clear from that discussion on Maz's talk page that that's no longer going to be productive, as you're both digging in and losing good faith. So ... for the love of wiki, get some other people involved so you can reach a consensus on this very lame edit war. If you don't, and just go back to what you've been doing when the protection expires, I see no choice but to recommend to anyone looking over this record that the two of you be blocked from the page for some certain time. Daniel Case (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh yeah it was lame, it was like arguing with a toddler on reddit. I've finally figured out why I couldn't get through to this person given how he just kept repeating the same lie again and again. Dude was so emotional he could barely read an entire response, and just kept skimming to the most triggering parts to clip quotes out of context to point out my "inconsistency" as some kind of gotcha. I even had to check by asking him whether he even read my responses or not or he was just eager to get angry and typing, and apparently I was right. He was already dead set on his opinion that I was forcing him to "quote verbatim" the sources, and he wouldn't budge on that. Mazamadao (talk) 15:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

OK, but maybe if some other people see things the same way, they might change their minds. As long as it remains just the two of you, you need to remember that old adage about wrestling with a pig. Daniel Case (talk) 19:02, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: The Simpsons season 36 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: U-Mos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: diff

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. diff
2. diff

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [171]

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

Comments:
Unfortunately the user failed to notify me of this report, but I have come across it in their contributions. Lado ceased replying on the article talk page so I considered the matter resolved and restored the content in line with secondary sources. This prompted him to re-engage, and I am again giving time for the discussion, with his reversion standing pending that discussion. The process is thus working, and there's no issue here that I can see. U-Mos (talk) 12:18, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

I warned you on your talk page, this is your notification. But you had ignore an delete my warning. Lado85 (talk) 12:55, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

• No violation. Lado85, you are required to notify any user of a report you file here per the instructions at the top of this page. An edit-warring warning is insufficient. Bbb23 (talk) 14:28, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

  Sorry, I missed that. Lado85 (talk) 15:04, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

  Why no violation? He continues to edit whit open discussion. He also did same edits on three episodes pages - O C'mon All Ye Faithful, The Man Who Flew Too Much, Bottle Episode (The Simpsons). But discussion is in progress and he ignores this. Lado85 (talk) 15:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Vijayanagara Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 152.58.249.24 (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 16:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC) to 16:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 16:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Telugu and Brahmin dogs survived under the foot of kannadigas.kannadigas survived under the foot of Delhi sultanate.."
   2. 16:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 16:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Telugu beggar dogs and Outsider stealer Aryans they slavery for kannadigas they survived only under the foot of kannadigas.... Provide proofs for Sanskrit and telugu. Telugu Nayaks is slave of vijayanagara they are not kings only kannadigas throw bone for those telugu dogs ..Don't steal our kannadiga history"
3. 15:52, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Telugu and Sanskrit is not official language in vijayanagara.telugu Nayaks only under the foot of kannadigas"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 15:56, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Welcome to Wikipedia!"
2. 17:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on Vijayanagara Empire."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

To add more, the IP has been passing WP:PA & racial slurs [172][173][174]. – Garuda ^Talk! 17:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – Five days for personal attacks. Referring to groups of people as 'dogs' in edit summaries. See also the edit summaries quoted above by the submitter. EdJohnston (talk) 18:23, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 190.215.204.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. diff
2. diff
3. diff
4. diff
5. diff
6. diff

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: diff

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

Comments:
Persistent disruptive editing against consensus by Chile-based dynamic IP engaging in years' long long term abuse (LTA) in spite of advice, repeated warnings, blocks and range blocks. Pushing the same agenda on many film-based articles, especially Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts.

Inexhaustive and dated list:

• 201.188.128.0/19 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) range blocked for 1 year on 7 June 2024 by Daniel Case
• 201.188.130.178 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) range blocked (above)
• 201.188.149.181 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) blocked for 3 months on 26 May 2024
• 201.188.133.126 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) blocked for 3 months on 22 May 2024
• 190.21.190.250 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) range blocked for 6 months on 5 May 2024
• 190.21.184.81 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) blocked for 3 months on 28 April 2024, for editing while blocked
• 201.188.130.53 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) blocked for 3 months on 22 April 2024
• Also see 190.21.190.0/19 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)).
• Also see detailed AN/I from June 2023. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 09:40, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks The IP's lengthy history of blocks as an open proxy doesn't help. Daniel Case (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Southern Redbacks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 103.163.248.126 (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:

1. 10:50, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Only warning: Page moves against naming conventions or consensus on Southern Redbacks."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

IP user with similiar behaviour to other IPs. Technopat (talk) 11:25, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked for one month for block evasion and as a proxy.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:40, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Muthuraja (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: GREATEST98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [175]
2. [176]
3. [177]
4. [178]

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 12:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Muthuraja."
2. 12:27, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I stumbled across this user before I saw this partial report, but they are now blocked for 31 hours for disruptive editing. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 17:06, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Susan Solomon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Johanes1980 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1274586639 by Iiii I I I (talk)"
2. 05:16, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1274586544 by Iiii I I I (talk)"
3. 05:14, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1274586218 by Iiii I I I (talk)"
4. 05:07, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1274582593 by Iiii I I I (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 17:52, 6 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Removed material that blatantly violates BLP */ Reply"

Comments:

User has been inserting disputed content into a BLP. Refuses to discuss on talk page Hy Brasil (talk) 05:23, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

== Your recent edits on ArticleName ==

Hello, I'm Johanes1980. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to ArticleName have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Johanes1980 (talk) 05:49, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I’m beginning to think, based on the above, and other edits by the reported user, that it may be a matter of WP:CIR or just plain WP:NOTHERE Hy Brasil (talk) 05:56, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

To elaborate further, Johanes1980 has been persistently trying to add poorly-sourced information critical of Susan Solomon to her article. There is discussion on the article talk page, but the general gist is that this user has cited non-peer reviewed articles published in a vanity press and an editorial that has nothing to do with Susan Solomon, all written by the same person, Krzysztof Sienicki. Despite several warnings, Johanes1980 continues to re-add the same information. --Iiii I I I (talk) 05:25, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Suggest a partial block from the article since this user still inserts the same information despite warnings from other users. Galaxybeing (talk) 05:57, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh, come on. Get real. Your claim that the editorial 'has nothing to do with Susan Solomon,' when referring to a scientific article published in a scientific journal, is in fact entirely about Solomon's book and the controversy it caused. Johanes1980 (talk) 06:04, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

the link to the journal is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulletin_of_the_American_Meteorological_Society and reads "The Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS) is a scientific journal published by the American Meteorological Society. BAMS is the flagship magazine of AMS and publishes peer reviewed articles of interest and significance for the weather, water, and climate community as well as news, editorials, and reviews for AMS members. BAMS articles are fully open access; AMS members can also access the digital version which replicates the print issue cover-to-cover and often includes enhanced articles with audio and video. Johanes1980 (talk) 06:07, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I have already outlined my issues with your citation at Talk:Susan Solomon. Your AI-generated comments don't address anything I said. Iiii I I I (talk) 06:12, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Can you read and understand what kind of journal BAMS is, the one I have cited? BAMS is a scientific journal, and all the materials published in it are peer-reviewed, including Sienicki's article about Solomon. Johanes1980 (talk) 06:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

BAMS is the flagship magazine of AMS (American Meteorologcal Society) What else you need? Johanes1980 (talk) 06:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

At least I'm using ChatGPT instead of your DeepSeek Johanes1980 (talk) 06:22, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Johanes, please do not use ChatGPT or other Generative AI models such as DeepSeek to write your comments in both the talk page discussion and this page, see WP:LLMTALK. We want to hear, and value, what you - as a human, have to say about these meteorology sources, but LLMs are robots and are prone to making hallucinations, mistakes or presenting things in an overly verbose way that makes things harder for human editors who are putting in effort to help reach an agreement. Thank you! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 08:55, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, just a reminder that this noticeboard is for conduct issues related to edit warring. Please keep discussion of the content dispute about whether the journal is a reliable source in the talk page discussion, or consider starting a WP:RSN discussion. Because being right isn't enough and you have undoubtedly crossed the bright line of WP:3RR, it no longer matters if the journal is reliable or not - the reason you are here, and what matters, is demonstrating to the community that you have an understanding of what edit warring is and will cease edit-warring in WP:BLP-violating content without a need for sanctions. Thanks! :) MolecularPilot ^{🧪️✈️} 09:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked - 48 hours for 3RR violation. The user continued to revert while this report was open. EdJohnston (talk) 17:11, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

  Johanes1980 continues to post +27k diffs of AI-generated text on their user talk page and has now issued a legal threat. Iiii I I I (talk) 17:36, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely for making legal threats. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Karan Kayastha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 205.254.166.96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:10, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Who’s edit warring? Links shared by me for the cited sources grant full view access for the page no’s supporting the added content (not an issue of snippet view either), restoring sourced details"
2. 07:28, 8 February 2025 (UTC) "Have you gone through the source cited? how can you assume it’s original research"
3. Consecutive edits made from 03:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC) to 03:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 03:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Go through the source, everything is mentioned in it, restored sourced information"
   2. 03:28, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Page number in the source for the content added"
   3. 03:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Page no"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: [179]

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Edit warring in violation of WP:ONUS. The content that was being removed was added by them from another IP before. [180] - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 72 hours from the article. They didn't break 3RR but look like they're trying to stay under that radar. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Shiny Happy People: Duggar Family Secrets (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: LAMHM11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:02, 9 February 2025 (UTC) "Restore accuracy and missing content"
2. 20:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC) "Restore accuracy and missing content"
3. 19:58, 9 February 2025 (UTC) "Restored accurate information and references"
4. 19:17, 9 February 2025 (UTC) "Same"
5. 22:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC) "Restored accurate information with references that are being removed by those who do not want these facts to come to light."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:01, 9 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Pretty blatant POV pushing, using youtube videos as sources, etc. Simultaneous edit warring and 3RR violations on both this article and related articles Bill Gothard and Institute in Basic Life Principles MrOllie (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 60 hours Since they've been doing this on more than one article, they're siteblocked. Acroterion (talk) 20:20, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [181]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [182]
2. [183]
3. [184]
4. [185]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [186]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [187]

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

Comments:

This user began as an IP and then registered an account. They have not made any effort to use the talk page or reacted to the edit warning label on their talk page.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:36, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I have provided the article copyright-free sources for my edits. Many readers find Widsith poem mainly from wikipedia and it's now there provided copyright-free. You send me message five minutes before saying I havent made any effort to use the talk page or warning label. Please be patient before making accusations. Widsither (talk) 15:41, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

I'll note that Widsither now, having made whatever edits he wanted at Widsith without bothering to use the talk page to discuss them, has started some shenanigans about retiring [188]. They clearly have no real interest in collaborating on an encyclopedia, even beyond the edit warring so far.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

He hasn't edited since then. Let's see if he sticks to that. Daniel Case (talk) 20:37, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Declined It looks like he's meant it. Daniel Case (talk) 20:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Bogdan Guskov (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 185.41.120.36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Russian origin plays a massive role for Bogdan Guskov himself, which he has repeatedly said in interviews, and for this reason he also taked a nickname "Czarevich", self-identifying as Russian by origin and specifically emphasizing this with his nickname. I will also remind you that Bogdan has Russian citizenship and in practice went out with the Russian flag in addition to the flag of Uzbekistan."
2. 18:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275030123 by Nswix (talk) Yes, but this contradicts the practice in already protected pages in similar examples (see Nikolai Gogol, for example; there the question of origin is brought out in the first paragraph, and the page is extended confirmed protected)."
3. 17:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1274871028 by Nswix (talk) Bogdan Vladimirovich Guskov have a Russian origin from his mother and father-lines. No vandalism, please."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:49, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Bogdan Guskov."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: Repeated reverts of MOS:ETHNICITY. User is also in an edit war at Old East Slavic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nswix (talk • contribs)

Page protected For a month. User didn't actually violate 3RR, but (largely because I forgot what noticeboard I was responding to), I felt protection the best option. Daniel Case (talk) 20:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sneferu (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2600:6C4E:2F0:B950:3DA1:638:9B46:812B (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:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Persistent addition of unsourced birth/death dates on several articles about ancient people, also with other IPs such as 2600:6c4e:02f0:b950:883e:b3ff:fec3:9b93 , 2600:6c4e:2f0:b950:3cb5:a1ff:fe64:fd2b , and also 64.113.165.126. Doesn't answer in their talk page. Already reported and blocked on 15 January. I would suggest a rangeblock on the 2600:6c4e:2f0:b950::/64 range. Lone-078 (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

• Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Ganzfeld experiment (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Aganon77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "MrOllie is avoiding to engage in the content, even updating context of existing references"
2. 14:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "Added image for updated metaanalysis"
3. 19:07, 12 February 2025 (UTC) "I DID USE THE TALK ARTICLE; TALK. DO NOT UNDO; Undid revision 1275386462 by LuckyLouie (talk)"
4. 18:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Contemporary research */"

A couple days old but relevant

1. 21:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Cited metaanalysis to stop unfair edits"
2. 21:17, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275057658 by Hemiauchenia (talk)"
3. 18:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275031750 by LuckyLouie (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:24, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "/* February 2025 */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 14:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Questionable conducts by editors regarding reputable sources */ Reply"

Comments:

Profringe edit warring about ESP. Everyone else who has commented on the talk page is against. There's also this from an IP, pretty clearly the same person. - MrOllie (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Just saw that Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Request_concerning_Aganon77 was opened as I was typing up this one. - MrOllie (talk) 14:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  Left CTOPS notice on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 22:07, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Gillingham School (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:

• 2a00:23c7:a023:3300:9080:9fcc:ca8e:d6f6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 2a00:23c7:a023:3300:2498:5f3c:7e5:7316 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [189]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [190]
2. [191]
3. [192]
4. [193]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [194]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [195]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [196] and [197]

Comments:

Appears to have switched to a new IP to avoid intervention on 3RR after warning was given to the first IP. The reverting is a repeated section blanking. After a talk page discussion was started, user reverted again. Reverts were made after 3 separate registered users attempted to restore the removed content.

I have since made an edit to the section in question, in order to try to address the IP user's concerns w/o blanking the section. After this, the repeated reverts seem to have stopped, but based on my understanding of the 3RR, I am under the understanding that a report is still needed.~Malvoliox (talk | contribs) 00:00, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – Special:Contributions/2a00:23c7:a023:3300::/36 three days for 3RR violation. Since the material is well-sourced there are no BLP grounds for removal. The most you could argue is undue weight, which needs consensus. EdJohnston (talk) 15:25, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Disney+ Hotstar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 07:57, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Acquisition by Disney, integration with Disney+ */"
2. 07:52, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275651567 by 2409:40C1:5D:D23F:8000:0:0:0 (talk)"
3. 07:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "Restored revision 1275648824 by Sobhit Chakma (talk)"
4. Consecutive edits made from 05:09, 14 February 2025 (UTC) to 05:10, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 05:09, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275637011 by 103.175.89.230 (talk)"
   2. 05:10, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "/* top */"
5. 04:29, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "/* top */ The url hasn't changed"
6. 04:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by TheOasisBay (talk) to last revision by 2402:8100:2585:50F4:8CA0:F15F:F621:6BE"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 07:53, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Disney+ Hotstar."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arnav_Bhate&oldid=1275652265 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Earthismyworld (talk • contribs) 08:10, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Comments:

Blanket 3RR rule violation, no effort to resolve issue(s) on talk pages (of editors whose edit was reverted) regarding reverts observed. Earthismyworld (talk) 08:06, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Half of the diffs linked aren't even reverts. And look at the duration between the warning and the notice here. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 08:16, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Result: No action. Another admin has semiprotected the page for a week. There is an active discussion on Talk about whether to split the article. All editors should defer to whatever conclusion is reached there. EdJohnston (talk) 15:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: JioHotstar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 223.187.53.246 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "←Removed redirect to Disney+ Hotstar"
2. 12:55, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "←Removed redirect to Disney+ Hotstar"
3. 12:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "←Removed redirect to Disney+ Hotstar"
4. 12:45, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "←Removed redirect to Disney+ Hotstar"
5. Consecutive edits made from 12:37, 14 February 2025 (UTC) to 12:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 12:37, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "←Removed redirect to Disney+ Hotstar"
   2. 12:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC) ""
   3. 12:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:00, 14 February 2025 (UTC) "Final warning: Vandalism on JioHotstar."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Also Sockpuppet of 106.221.188.201, who did the same UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 13:02, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Apply WP:BOOMERANG reporting user did the same 223.187.53.246 (talk) 13:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Result: Page semiprotected by another admin per a complaint at WP:RFPP. This seems to be the same dispute as one reported above (article splitting). EdJohnston (talk) 16:13, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: The Daily Caller (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Digg396 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [198]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [199]
2. [200]
3. [201]
4. [202]
5. [203]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [204]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [205]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [206]

Comments:
Also issues with civility [207] Simonm223 (talk) 18:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of indefinitely as NOTHERE EvergreenFir (talk) 18:43, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Matt Shakman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: NortonUSA (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 16:08, 15 February 2025 (UTC) to 16:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 16:08, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275843172 by Trailblazer101 (talk)"
   2. 16:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 08:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1275798894 by Trailblazer101 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 11:27, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Matt Shakman."
2. 16:13, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Matt Shakman."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User appears to have also been reverting logged out (diff) and via an alt account (diff) and has ignored all warnings, showing no sign of ceasing their activities of blatant image copyright violations. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Yet another revert (diff). Far past 3RR at this point. Also see this talk for reference of misunderstanding file usage rights and admitting to editing while logged out. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:30, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:53, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Raghuvaṃśa (dynasty) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Yashraghuwanshi00 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "reverted changes"
2. 12:16, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "some factual changes"
3. 12:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "reverted changes"
4. 04:37, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "reverted changes by unknown"
5. 18:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC) "some factual changes"
6. 17:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC) "some factual changes"
7. 17:09, 12 February 2025 (UTC) "some factual changes"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 12:28, 13 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Raghuvaṃśa (dynasty)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Constant caste based POV blanking of sourced content, despite being aware of GSCASTE and edit warring warning. Also continuing to edit war on Baliyan (surname) [208] - Ratnahastin (talk) 13:03, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  Left CTOPS notice on talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sinfest&diff=prev&oldid=1275771415
2. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sinfest&diff=prev&oldid=1275567373
3. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sinfest&diff=prev&oldid=1275477337

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Traumnovelle&diff=prev&oldid=1273169046

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Traumnovelle&diff=prev&oldid=1275797464

Comments:

Traumnovelle often reverts edits to the Sinfest page before or without discussing these reversions on the talk page. He seems to believe, from his comments on the talk page, and in the reversion notes, that he is some sort of police officer for the page. He will often revert even in the face of significant consensus against him. I’m getting frustrated with him, and he’s at it again, removing twice an added image that has consensus for it, and once well sourced categories for the article. While I’m only displaying the behavior since I warned him to stop reverting so much, this behavior is consistent and long ranging. Le Blue Dude (talk) 04:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Le Blue Dude, the consensus regarding the image addition would need to be very clear to justify your repeated re-addition against others' reverts. The onus to obtain such a consensus is on you, but you may not be able to neutrally determine whether it was reached. Where exactly has that allegedly happened? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 04:17, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

I’m not the one who put on the image, for the record. I added the categories that are supported by a quote within the article. Le Blue Dude (talk) 20:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

That’s not to say I don’t agree that the image belongs. I agree with the other two editors who added it that it belongs.

The big thing that Traumnovelle did despite clear consensus was repeatedly removing burninglibrary’s mention of the patron ban, but that was before Traumnovelle’s warning Le Blue Dude (talk) 20:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh sorry, "image" was wrong. I was referring to your edit warring. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:43, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

I will just state this is another frivolous report from an SPA against me. [209] [210] Traumnovelle (talk) 20:10, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Frustration and perceived article ownership are not sufficient reasons to file a report for edit warring. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:50, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Declined ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:51, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Star Vijay

Diffs of reverts -

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Star_Vijay&diff=prev&oldid=1275880398 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Star_Vijay&diff=prev&oldid=1275825638 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Star_Vijay&diff=prev&oldid=1275785493

User claims to make paid edits so intention of edit warring may involve paid editing as well

highlighting Page: JioHotstar

@United Blasters and @Arnav Bhate both violated 3RR rules 223.185.50.217 (talk) 17:34, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Bbb23 (talk) 18:50, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Paid edits? Any proof? Wikipedia Administrators, It's clear that, this user is trying to block me and Arnav..., This user is that who repeatedly tried to Remove the Redirect page JioHotstar, for it his many IP address and accounts got blocked. Me and Arnav, was against it. It's clear that he is a sockpuppet of User:27.56.79.145 So it's clear. UNITED BLASTERS (talk) 01:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: United States DOGE Service}}
User being reported:User:2601:642:4F84:1590:C8D:B02D:C9CB:6B91

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_DOGE_Service&oldid=1275794921 I apologize, I'm not sure how to insert a diff directly

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_DOGE_Service&oldid=1275945810
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_DOGE_Service&oldid=1275969910
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States_DOGE_Service&oldid=1275970151

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2601:642:4F84:1590:C8D:B02D:C9CB:6B91&oldid=1275970342

User is adding a redirect, making it difficult to access the articles talk page. Redirect has been being added before consensus is reached. Please see the below diff, posted to the users talk page which they immediately reverted. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2601:642:4F84:1590:C8D:B02D:C9CB:6B91&oldid=1275971185

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2601:642:4F84:1590:C8D:B02D:C9CB:6B91&oldid=1275971986

Comments: IP User does not seem interested in holding a discussion before making the redirect.Stickymatch 04:11, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I am free to remove comments from my talk page. If someone wants to object to a redirect I'll hear that ojection, but so far it's drive-by reverting. 2601:642:4F84:1590:C8D:B02D:C9CB:6B91 (talk) 04:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I think it would make the most sense to discuss the change before making it, considering it effectively removes all the content of the page without merging the two together. Stickymatch 04:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't intend to stop anyone from integrating information into the target article, and I'm still a little annoyed by a prior experience at cargo cult science where a discussed merge led to an article being hatracked onto another with no integration. 2601:642:4F84:1590:C8D:B02D:C9CB:6B91 (talk) 04:20, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Could you just please let me know why you want to conduct the redirect? There's distinct content on the United States DOGE Service, especially on how it's original purpose related to the USDS. Stickymatch 04:25, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Amame (album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 201.122.44.60 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 03:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 03:14, 15 February 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 02:34, 15 February 2025 (UTC) ""
4. 02:20, 15 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:15, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Hijacking articles on Amame (album)."
2. 02:31, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Hijacking articles on Amame (album)."
3. 03:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Hijacking articles on Amame (album)."
4. 03:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Amame (album)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: Already blocked  for a period of 2 weeks by Ad Orientem Daniel Case (talk) 06:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Ulysses S. Grant (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Artinmeysamiraad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [211]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [212]
2. [213]
3. [214]
4. [215]
5. [216]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [217]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [218]

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Part of the reason for the duration is the editor's history. They have never responded to any of the many warnings on their Talk page. Many of their edits have been reverted at other articles, and if it didn't arguably prevent me from acting administratively, I would have reverted many myself for a variety of reasons.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Liberalism in China (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ProKMT (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [219]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [220]
2. [221]
3. [222]
4. [223]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [224]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [225]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [226]

Comments: Did the same for this page[227]

I have consistently explained my edits and the rationale behind them, particularly in addressing inaccuracies and misinformation within the original template created by Pro-KMT. My goal has been to ensure that the template accurately reflects political realities without conflating distinct ideological movements or misrepresenting historical and contemporary political alignments.

Despite my efforts to bring the discussion to the talk page to establish consensus and avoid edit warring, Pro-KMT has refused to engage constructively. Instead of addressing the concerns raised, Pro-KMT have continued to revert edits without meaningful discussion, escalating the conflict rather than working toward a resolution.

Additionally, Pro-KMT has repeatedly been found engaging in violations of WP:POV [228][229][230] and WP:SYNTH [231][232]. This pattern of behavior undermines Wikipedia’s commitment to neutrality and verifiability. Furthermore, Pro-KMT has been accused of sockpuppetry [233][234] in the past, which raises further concerns about editorial conduct.

Given this history, it is clear that my efforts to improve the accuracy of the template and establish a WP:NPOV template have been met with resistance from a user who is more interested in enforcing their own viewpoint than in upholding Wikipedia’s standards. I remain open to constructive discussion, but continued disruptive editing should not be tolerated. Guotaian (talk) 14:13, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Both editors blocked 24h for the staggering amount of edit warring across multiple pages. There were also some personal attacks in edit summaries by ProKMT. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:27, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Liberalism in China (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Guotaian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [235]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [236]
2. [237]
3. [238]
4. [239]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [240]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [241]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [242]

Comments: Did the same for this page[243]

Guotaian has been pointed out by other user on the user talk page due to its continuous destructive editing. [244] [245] Even I've never been blocked by Wikipedia[246], but Guotaian has been blocked by constant editing wars and devastating editing.[247]

The report made by Guotaian is very biased Check the history of the Template:Liberalism in China; Guotaian attempted radical edits that were not agreed upon in talk page, and I cancelled his edits and supported 'status quo'. I may have been forced to violate 3RR, but I'm trying to stop Guotaian's vandalism, so I hope the Administrators understand this. ProKMT (talk) 10:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Guotaian made a radical and disruptive new edit first, and Guotaian started the edit war first. If my edit to undo Guotaian's vandalism should be blocked for violating the 3RRs, then Guotaian's 3RR violation requires a much longer block than mine. ProKMT (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

@ProKMT Isn't the page you should set above be Template:Liberalism in China? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:25, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Both editors blocked 24h for the staggering amount of edit warring across multiple pages. There were also some personal attacks in edit summaries by ProKMT. It is further noted that opening a retaliatory report is bad form; if there's anything relevant to be said about the other editor's editing, it can be brought up as a response in the original report. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:28, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Islamic views on concubinage (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: John Not Real Name (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276374149 by M.Bitton (talk) See talk page."
2. 13:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276373125 by M.Bitton (talk) Please refrain from edit-warring."
3. 13:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276368627 by M.Bitton (talk) No, it is not. It is adding context to the statement as is done in the surrounding text. For example the bit about 14th Century legal texts. It is showing the practice as explained by proper sources with good citations."
4. 12:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276268623 by Diannaa (talk) Or you could again leave accurate and cited information alone."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Islamic views on concubinage."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 13:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "/* February 2025 */ new section"

Comments:

They blanked their talk page and resumed their edit war while refusing to address Dianaa's concerns. M.Bitton (talk) 14:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Power Macintosh 5200 LC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Barry Wom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [248]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [249]
2. [250]
3. [251]
4. [252]

Comments: Please someone stop this guy. If you look at his editing history you will see that he causes more damage than he fixes.--2800:484:738A:43F0:6A6:1713:2923:648C (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Per WP:NOT3RR, reverts were due to block evasion by JeanCastì Barry Wom (talk) 15:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

• IP rangeblocked for obvious block evasion.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: User talk:DragonofBatley (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 216.126.35.216 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:46, 18 February 2025
2. 13:11, 18 February 2025
3. 19:55, 18 February 2025
4. 20:40, 18 February 2025
5. 21:03, 18 February 2025
6. 21:27, 18 February 2025 (Note the personal attack too, both on the page and in the edit summary)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [253]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User_talk:DragonofBatley#PROD_notifications and User_talk:DragonofBatley#Harassment

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [254]

Comments:

It's obviously DragonofBatley rejoicing in some logged-out trolling; semi'ing their own talk page against their further input would be advantageous to all. (Except DragonofBatley, which of course is no longer our concern.) Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 22:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Nope. I am not DragonofBately. 216.126.35.216 (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Then you are to be congratulated on your honesty. In owning up to your trolling rather than socking. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 22:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

• IP blocked as a proxy.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: List of tallest people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Justegypt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [255] [256]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [257]
2. [258]
3. [259]
4. [260]
5. [261]
6. [262]
7. [263]
8. [264]
9. [265]
10. [266]
11. [267]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [268] [269]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [270]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [271]

Comments: Justegypt was warned on the 12th for edit warring. On the 15th, they violated 3RR (diffs 1 to 6) and received the other warning on their talk page the same day. I eventually told them to stop edit warring when I started a talk page section. Another back and forth reverting between Justegypt and DjangoLeFandango started on the 16th (diffs 8 and 9; diff 7 reverted an unregistered account) and then both discussed on the talk page, with Justegypt eventually stating that "If you remove it, I will restore it and I am ready to do this daily." Afterwards, I pinged them with a clear intention to take to this noticeboard if the issue persisted. They continued discussion on that talk page section, so Justegypt saw the pings. After DjangoLeFandango removed content added by Justegypt following the discussion, Justegypt restored their own version (diff 10) against consensus that was established on the talk page and RSN, and when partially reverted by me and Halbared, ​ Justegypt re-reverted (diff 11). It is clear this behavior will likely persist if no action is taken. ObserveOwl (talk) 22:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

To be a bit more clear, Justegypt originally added three entries to the page (two of them above the recognized tallest living person) and discussion between Justegypt and DjangoLeFandango stemmed from the entry for Mohamed Shehata. A third opinion and subsequent RSN post found that the sources were not sufficient for the entry. DjangoLeFandango also disputed the entry for Muhammad Hussein Heikal, and when inquired on the talk page, Justegypt refused to discuss this other entry, replying with "lol", and subsequently restored that material on diff 11 without explanation. ObserveOwl (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

• I'm not fond of pblocks because so many times the aftermath can be unpleasant, but in this case I've indefinitely pblocked Justegypt from editing the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sambhaji (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 10:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276527279 by GenuineArt (talk)"
2. 10:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276526497 by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk)"
3. 10:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Wrongly Sourced information"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 10:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Sambhaji."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Constant removal of sourced content without any reason. - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked 31 h. Sandstein 10:55, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: S. M. Kamrul Hassan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Devidboon1987 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276515899 by Jéské Couriano (talk)"
2. Consecutive edits made from 08:29, 19 February 2025 (UTC) to 08:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 08:29, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276514572 by Jéské Couriano (talk)"
   2. 08:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 08:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276511459 by Jéské Couriano (talk)"
4. 07:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Full Details Segmented... No Change Has Made...Only Given Key point Carrer, Education"
5. Consecutive edits made from 14:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC) to 14:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 14:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "His full biography"
   2. 14:36, 18 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on S. M. Kamrul Hassan."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Yom Kippur War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 09:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 06:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

1RR restriction breached by a WP:PGAMEing editor. User was invited to join a RfC anyways in [272], but ignored it and proceeded to make the 3rd revert. User's EC was revoked after an ANI discussion. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 12:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Already blocked  for a period of one week by BusterD. Daniel Case (talk) 19:46, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: List of foreign-born samurai in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: KeiTakahashi999 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [273]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [274]
2. [275]
3. [276]
4. [277]
5. [278]
6. [279]
7. [280]
8. [281]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [282] [283]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [284]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [285]

Comments:

Repeat edit warring. Seems to not care that he is edit warring despite multiple warnings on his talk page. Bladeandroid (talk) 07:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Since this report he has been topic-banned from this page as an AE action under WP:CT/YA. Daniel Case (talk) 18:36, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Ricky Rich (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: User623921 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [286]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:37, 17 February 2025
2. 12:49, 18 February 2025
3. 13:18, 18 February 2025
4. 13:07, 19 February 2025

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 14:57, 20 February 2025

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 16:17, 20 February 2025

Comments:

• User has previously been blocked on Swedish Wikipedia for similar edit warring Surayeproject3 (talk) 16:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

That noted, I have decided the best thing to do is protect it for three days so you can get more people in this discussion and get consensus. Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: List of highest-grossing animated films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 71.81.37.38 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [287]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [288] (@ 13:45, 20 February)
2. [289]
3. [290]
4. [291] (@ 20:12, 19 February)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [292]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [293]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [294]

Comments:
Straight 4RR violation. First three reverts were of user:Fanoflionking, who stopped after 3RR and a warning and initiated the tp discussion. The 4th revert was made after the user was warned. - \\'cԼF 18:48, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Page protected EvergreenFir (talk) 18:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sabancı family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bo12121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [295]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [296]
2. [297]
3. [298]
4. [299]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [300]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: I am unsure of Bo12121's motives or issues with the information.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [301]

Comments:

User:Bo12121 has been edit warring on Sabancı family and Hacı Ömer Sabancı. I suspect they are logging out[302] to edit-war as well. --Kansas Bear 21:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 21:43, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Kidnapping of the Bibas family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Leaky.Solar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 1276954601

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Leaky.Solar's 1RR: "Readded 2/18 announcement the yarden bibas section above mentions the announcement of his expected release as well" is not an explanation. Yarden Bibas was not the subject at this section, but his killed children.
2. My explained objection: "WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NOTOPINION, Hamas is considered as a terror organization by Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States, as well as the European Union".
3. Leaky.Solar's original editing.

The article belongs to the ARBPIA. A general warning has already been written on its talk page.

an3-notice.

• This is very poorly presented. Based on the diffs above, though, it looks like Leaky added the material today at 17:02, was reverted by the filer at 18:08, and Leaky reverted at 19:25. In that sequence, Leaky never violated 1RR as they reverted only once.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Dorian Gray Wild, please let me know if I made a mistake in the above analysis; otherwise, I will be closing this as "no violation".--Bbb23 (talk) 21:22, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• In the He WP, an edit warring is forbidden even once. I tag User:The Mountain of Eden. They will decide if they leave it, or revert the undoing of Leaky and return here if Leaky persists. _Dgw|Talk 23:26, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

No violation per Bbb23 above. Daniel Case (talk) 23:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Tutankhamun (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "I am trying to work with the rest of the editors and discuss the reason for removing my edit, but no one is answering. I want to clarify that this is not an edit war. This is not a difference in the accuracy of the information. This is the removal of an editor’s edit for no reason."
2. 02:07, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "This edit took me several hours, and it is simply removed over and over again without explaining any reasons, and no one sends me a message on the talk page, and then I am warned that I am in a edit war! This is a disgusting society. I'm really tired of it"
3. 01:48, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "adults? Are you kidding?"
4. 01:40, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "Sources deemed unreliable by Wikipedia have been removed"
5. 01:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "I noticed that you removed my edit even after adding many “reliable” scientific and historical sources that tell the story of Abd al-Rasul, in addition to some news articles that convey his story. I made a note that this is a “different story.” Failure to appreciate my edit and my effort is unacceptable. I wait for you in the talk page, and until then I will re my edit."
6. 00:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "Several modifications were made (it took hours of effort to search and check the sources). I added the story of Hussein Abdel Rasoul. If you have an objection, you can discuss it on the talk page."
7. Consecutive edits made from 20:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC) to 21:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 20:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Adding information about the main image of Tutankhamun in the article"
   2. 21:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "I have added more information about the discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb and sources will be added immediately"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 21:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "/* February 2025 */ cmt"
2. 00:42, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "/* February 2025 */ cmt"
3. 00:43, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "Reverted 2 edits by FlightTime (talk)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:40, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: List of wars involving Bangladesh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276954127 by DACartman (talk)"
2. 19:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276953541 by DACartman (talk)"
3. Consecutive edits made from 19:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC) to 19:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 19:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276816540 by Shubhsamant09 (talk)"
   2. 19:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1272990321 by Borgenland (talk)"
   3. 19:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Welcome to Wikipedia!"
2. 20:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Introduction to contentious topics */ new section"
3. 20:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Removal of content, blanking on List of wars involving Bangladesh."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Should be indef'd for mass generic changes without opting consensus driven approach. – Garuda ^Talk! 14:39, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• Hasn't gone over 3RR, and hasn't been warned of 3RR. Minor edit war happened yesterday, and hasn't restarted today, so getting stale. Decline to take action. PhilKnight (talk) 15:44, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Latino World Order (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Deathlock97 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [303]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [304]
2. [305]
3. [306]
4. [307]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [308]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [309]

Comments:
Has been warned on his talk page previously. We don't do part-time members on articles yet has ignored the warning and decided to keep adding it anyway. Voilation of 3RR. Lemonademan22 (talk) 00:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Stale and the user has not violated 3RR. Bbb23 (talk) 00:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  There's three edits there. Looks to me as if the user has. Lemonademan22 (talk) 00:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Lemonademan22: WP:3RR is more than three reverts within a 24 hour period. The diffs above are from January 19 to February 18, and two of them are consecutive edits; Per WP:3RR A series of consecutively saved reverting edits by one user, with no intervening edits by another user, counts as one revert. This content dispute would be something to discuss on the article's talk page instead of reverting each other back and forth. - Aoidh (talk) 01:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  It's an accepted consensus voted on by the members of the Wikiproject Professional Wrestling that we do not include "Part-time members" plus it's all unsourced anyway.

  I doubt a talk page consensus would do anything considering the user did not reply to the talk page warning and isn't engaging outside the edits themeselves. Lemonademan22 (talk) 01:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  You'll still need to actually point to the discussion that shows there is a consensus (and a WP:VOTE is not the same as a WP:CONSENSUS), and engage in talk page discussion to avoid being blocked yourself for edit warring. Doubting that a talk page discussion will be effective is not an excuse to engage in repeated reverting of edits in lieu of such a discussion. Per WP:EW, An editor who repeatedly restores their preferred version is edit warring, regardless of whether those edits are justifiable. - Aoidh (talk) 02:18, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  Here. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 112#"Associates" in stable/faction articles (also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Professional wrestling/Archive 112#Part-time members). Also, where do I go from here? Do I direct the discussion to the appropriate talk page? Lemonademan22 (talk) 02:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  I have responded to this at my talk page. - Aoidh (talk) 05:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

  I'd just like to add that the user violating 3RR doesn't really matter. They're still edit warring, even if it's in slow motion. They've continued after I placed a warning on their talk page, and they have not communicated at all. Consequently I don't see them stopping, which is why a block (or P-block) might be necessary. — Czello ^(music) 12:12, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• I've blocked both User:Deathlock97 and User:Lemonademan22 for 24 hours for their continued edit warring on the article Latino World Order after this report was marked as stale. Both are engaging in a slow-moving edit war and Lemonademan22's comment that Your edits will keep being reverted in lieu of any attempt at discussion contributed to their being blocked alongside Deathlock97. - Aoidh (talk) 05:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Najd (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "Continuous disruptions by this user. Most likely a sockpuppet of a previous user who was banned and who made very similar disruptive edits."
2. 15:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "The Shammar mountains are a very large geographic part of Najd. Meanwhile Diriyah has only had historical relevance in the past 300 years and there are 1000 of such Najdi villages. Thus the photo is more representative and more neutral. Ahadith have no place here and have never had that."
3. 11:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC) "No relevance to this article at all. No other region has any ahadith attached to it. For good reason."
4. 18:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC) "Return to previous version. The hadith in question is weak and has no relevance to an article about Najd. Geogrpahical feature more representative."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 10:28, 23 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 15:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC) on Talk:Najd "/* Removal of the Hadith section */ new topic"

Comments:

I'm not happy with how the user being reported is assuming bad faith and accusing Abo Yemen of socking. Obvious attempt to avoid 3RR violations by reverting a bit late. The notice at the top of this noticeboard boldly states "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."

This has escalated into a ANI report at WP:ANI#Photomenal calling my edits disruptive and throwing out false accusations, and the talk page discussion is literally going nowhere close to resolving the dispute. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 13:26, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I just realized that the edit warring template is a bit out of place, but the user has been made aware of 3RR in 2023, so they should have the 3RR thing in mind already. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 13:42, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Nicely presented report. Bbb23 (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Indef them. Ever since they joined Wikipedia in 2018, they barely had any constructive edits. The project can survive without them 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:37, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Bloodthirstiness is not a good look.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:14, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

sorry😔 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Ettore Majorana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ItalianHistorian25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [310]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [311]
2. [312]
3. [313]
4. [314]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. [315]
2. [316]
3. [317]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [318]

Comments:

As shown at [319], I made a sequence of small improvements to the article. I made sure to break it into chunks and carefully label each such improvement with an explanation.

ItalianHistorian25 mass reverted all of these improvements, at first with no explanation, then falsely accusing me ([320]) of "removing references to historical facts". This is a lie. I did no such thing. The above diffs show this. 50.221.225.231 (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Page protected for one week. Bbb23 (talk) 01:36, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

@Bbb23: And the block for ItalianHistorian25 mass-reverting improvements without explanation and breaking WP:3RR? 50.221.225.231 (talk) 01:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

I chose not to block either of you for edit-warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:28, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Hawaiian Airlines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: AmaryahJohnson1996 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1277456444

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1277525163
2. Special:Diff/1277526780
3. Special:Diff/1277533155

Request by User:RickyCourtney for an explanation of reverts, unanswered as of this writing: Special:Diff/1277533725

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1277560859

Comments:
No 3RR violation, but three reverts in less than two hours is clearly edit warring. Initial explanation provided with the first revert was "He's an irrelevant change fleet list just separate passengers and cargo in the plane.", which doesn't make any sense. Musashi1600 (talk) 11:01, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Since this was posted the editor made a fourth revert to the page: Special:Diff/1277572097. I have attempted to engage the editor on their talk page to better understand their concerns and warn them that they were approaching the 3RR limit, however the response was incoherent. RickyCourtney (talk) 15:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:20, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Renaissance (Beyoncé album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Thedayandthetime (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [321]

You must notify any user you have reported. You may use {{subst:an3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.
You may also want to consider if the user is aware of the edit warring policy before making a report.

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 10 Feb edit 1
2. 12 Feb edit 2 (related but not same revision)
3. 13 Feb edit 3
4. 14 Feb edit 4
5. 14 Feb edit 5 (related to edit 2)
6. 14 Feb edit 6 (related to edit 5)
7. 15 Feb edit 7
8. 15 Feb edit 8
9. 16 Feb edit 9
10. 17 Feb edit 10
11. 18 Feb edit 11
12. 18 Feb edit 12
13. 22 Feb edit 13
14. 23 Feb edit 14
15. 24 Feb edit 15

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: warned between 5-9th Jan about a similar issue, different article, user blanked the talkpage, Warned on 13 Jan, Blanked 3 days later about a similar issue, different topic, warned 25th Feb about this discussion

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See above

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [322]

Comments:
So I haven't been directly involved as such in this edit war, however Thedayandthetime is clearly not here to be constructive. There is no evidence of following WP:BRD and their editing constitutes WP:EDITWARING, breaches of WP:3RR and a lack of engagement. There's no evidence of trying to start a discussion to gain a consensus except a single message stating their POV on the article talkpage. The user was involved in a similar edit war at Cowboy Carter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Their edits also demonstrate they do not understand WP:AFFILIATE either as they're insisting on commercial links to source track listings. The volume of edits to the article topics discussed is unacceptable even if they are right in what they are trying to say or promote (I haven't checked and I don't care enough at this point). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lil-unique1 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Lil-unique1, thanks for the report. The user has edit warred with a sockpuppeteer and removed disputed material about living persons that was re-added in violation of WP:BLPRESTORE. You may be right about the issues identified with Thedayandthetime's behavior, and Thedayandthetime may have to change their approach to such situations, but I can't really take action against them at this time. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Thedayandthetime (talk) 00:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Not blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

User being reported: BauhausFan89 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Page: Germans (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1270709550
2. Special:Diff/1273912149
3. Special:Diff/1274243241
4. Special:Diff/1277653445

I started a discussion at Talk:Germans#Language_and_diaspora in which another user and myself both opposed BauhausFan89's addition of the map (as well as other additions by them). They were edit warring before at

Page: Culture of Germany (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1270419075
2. Special:Diff/1270882721
3. Special:Diff/1271109701
4. Special:Diff/1273823235

Discussion started on talk page by me, Talk:Culture_of_Germany#Pictures_of_the_article, ending in a warning by me for edit warring, Special:Diff/1271311955, warning on user's talk page: Special:Diff/1273851375

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1277790079

Comments:
No 3RR violation, but slow edit warring on at least two pages. Please note that they have been warned recently by another user for edit warring (Special:Diff/1275518787) and that three different users (one of them myself) have warned them for marking edits as "minor" on their user's page. Rsk6400 (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
I had really hoped this would stop... but it's been going on since at least July of last year on the Telecomm article alone. It took a firmly worded notif to get them to take the issue to the talk page, after repeatedly ignoring input from several other users to do so.--Picard's Facepalm • ^{Made It So} _Engage! • 20:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 1 month ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sahaja Yoga (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:59, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "Removing content that is based on wrong advertisements by few people and is hurting the feelings of thousands of practitioners. Sahajayoga is scientifically backed and is practised in more than140 countries."
2. 08:52, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "Removing content that is based on wrong advertisements by few people and is hurting the feelings of thousands of practitioners. Sahajayoga is scientifically backed and is practised in more than140 countries."
3. 08:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "removed unauthentic information that has hurt feelings of many believer"
4. 10:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC) "Sahaja Yoga is not a religion. Its a meditation techniques practiced in more than 140 countries. Please stop spreading nuisance without proper knowledge. Here are some of the authentic resources from different countries giving the details. 1) [323]https://us.sahajayoga.org/ 2) [324]https://www.sahajayoga.com.au/ 3) [325]https://www.sahajay"
5. 10:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1277724300 by Bon courage (talk)"
6. 09:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC) "Sahaja Yoga is not a religion. Its a meditation techniques practiced in more than 140 countries. Please stop spreading nuisance without proper knowledge. Here are some of the authentic resources from different countries giving the details. 1) [326]https://us.sahajayoga.org/ 2) [327]https://www.sahajayoga.com.au/ 3) [328]https://www.sahajay"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 10:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Sahaja Yoga."
2. 09:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Removal of content, blanking on Sahaja Yoga."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Four edits changing "religion" or "religious movement" to "meditation technique" in the first sentence, two blanking a lead sentence (supported in the body by sources, and discussed at length on talk) about some characterising the group as a cult. The user was warned for edit warring the same issues last November.

Since joining Wikipedia last year, 24 of their 26 edits have been edit warring or otherwise disrupting Sahaja Yoga content. Belbury (talk) 09:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Partially blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:57, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Pages: List of United States over-the-air television networks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), 30 Minutes (TV program) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 69.74.140.68 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1277446269; Special:Diff/1277452428

Diffs of the user's reverts, first page:

1. Special:Diff/1277765773
2. Special:Diff/1277778015

Diffs of the user's reverts, second page:

1. Special:Diff/1277782841

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1277766831

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: The IP has received several warnings in the past but never responded. I think my edit comments were clear enough, but the IP apparently ignores them as well.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1277782483

Comments:

The IP has received several warnings (previously for disruption and vandalism, now for edit warring) but never responded. I think my edit comments were clear enough, but the IP apparently ignores them as well.

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. Daniel Case (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

That's correct, but I think this is a case for WP:IAR. Or rather: We shouldn't apply the rules too diligently. It's an IP that received several warnings on its talk page and never responded. If the IP does the same edit on List of United States over-the-air television networks again in a day or two, it should be blocked. Anything else would be waste of our time. — Chrisahn (talk) 21:15, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Here we go. The IP reverted again, and now also started an edit-war on another page. Can we PLEASE just stop this and block the IP? Sure, it's technically not 3RR, but what else can we do? Post yet another warning on the IP's talk page? That's a waste of time. Why do I have to spend so much time just to stop this obviously disruptive IP? — Chrisahn (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2025 (UT

Blocked – for a period of 10 years @Chrisahn: Upon further review I have blocked the user for the next decade (the IP, associated with a school district on Long Island (surprise!) came off a 5-year block a couple of years ago, the most recent of a long series of ever-escalated blocks, so this was the obvious next step as we cannot block IPs indefinitely). Due to the long block, most of the previous warnings and notices had been removed from the talk page per the notice at the top, so neither of us were aware of the IP's history. Had I been (and this is not your fault) at the time I reviewed your report, I would have done what I just did. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Alexis Kougias (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2A02:587:CC21:8C00:A518:FB8D:F504:3C59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 07:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 07:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 07:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
4. 07:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
5. 07:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
6. 07:00, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "born 23 January 1951"
7. Consecutive edits made from 06:19, 27 February 2025 (UTC) to 06:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 06:19, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
   2. 06:32, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""
8. 06:02, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "born 23 January 1951 oxi 4 November 1951"
9. 05:59, 27 February 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 07:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Alexis Kougias."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 07:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Birthdate */ new section"

Comments:

Appears to be range; see User:2A02:587:CC21:8C00:43AE:4E7:13E9:FA33 for same edit after 3RR warning. Iseult ^Δx talk to me 07:43, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

See also User:2A02:587:CC21:8C00::/64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) & 2a02:587:cc21:8c00:43ae:4e7:13e9:fa33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).

Also reported at wikidata:Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Report concerning 2a02:587:cc21:8c00:a518:fb8d:f504:3c59.

I am an involved admin. Peaceray (talk) 07:59, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Page protected In full for three days. The IP has provided sources; it should be worked out on the talk page as to whether they are reliable and whether the birth date they give should be taken as the more accurate one. Daniel Case (talk) 21:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Kubo and the Two Strings (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Camsteerie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [329]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [330]
2. [331]
3. [332]
4. [333]
5. [334]
6. [335]
7. [336]
8. [337]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [338]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [339]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [340]

Comments: User is repeatedly attempting to include the Japanese terms "netsuke" and "shamisen" (and associated Japanese characters) throughout the article, including the lede. This is original research; per the talk page, these terms are not used in the film itself. I attempted a compromise by including "netsuke" with a link [341], then in a footnote [342], despite there being no valid reason for its inclusion. This was rejected.

A couple of complications here. The user has admitted to editing while logged out [343], which is why the IP editor is included in the above reverts. Also, an editor with a suspiciously similar username to mine has entered the fray: [344]. I am unconnected to this account.

• interactions both ways here need to be examined. There's another editor user:Larry Wom which only was just created to revert some of the changes by Camsteerie, as well as on talk page. Camsteerie at least explained the edits from a IP (browser settings logged them off). This is not in support of what Camsteerie was trying to add (i've discussed the issue on the talk page), but the edits by Barry and this Larry are highly suspicious and may warrant SPI. Masem (t) 17:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I already pointed this out above, and I've already mentioned to you that SPI is welcome. I have my suspicions as to who is behind this account and if a CU reveals that Larry Mow happens to be associated with an IP address in Colombia, they would be confirmed. Barry Wom (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

@Masem

@Barry Wom

As it does not seem to be have lodged, and as Barry Wom is well aware of the edit warring rules, I apply that Barry Wom is investigated for not just violating Wikipedia rules on edit warring, but also of sock puppetry in operating as a second newly opened account of Larry Mow to circumvent WP:3RR. Camsteerie (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Do you really think that an editor who has been here for 15+ years and who has accumulated nearly 15,000 edits is going to create a blatantly obvious sock account to continue edit warring? I've blocked it as an obvious jo-job impersonation account.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 18:57, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

ETA: the user is continuing to edit while logged out, despite warnings [345].— Preceding unsigned comment added by Barry Wom (talk • contribs) .

Camsteerie has explained how they keep getting logged out and admitted to editing as an IP due to that. Masem (t) 19:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

If the Larry Mow is actually a "jo-job impersonation" account - whatever that is, new term to me, but I guess a bot or a malicious disruptor trying to divert attention by throwing suspicion to another editor. If Barry Wom is then shown to be innocent of sock puppetry here, then please accept my apologies. Camsteerie (talk) 21:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I've dealt with the socking element of this report and will leave the edit warring review to another admin.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 20:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week The edit warring is bad enough, the logged-out editing is worse, and to me the high probability that the "Larry Mow" account was created as a joe job (something I have always known was possible but until now, in 20 years here, had never actually seen happen) add up to enough egregious misbehavior as to demand a longer block than usual. Daniel Case (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

User being reported: User:EF5

Diffs of the users reverts:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1277942652

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1277942573

Comments: Also made personal attacks against me for my views. You can factor that in when making the block. Thank you.

Comment: Not edit warring, I've only reverted their disrputive noms twice; others have as well. Their nominations are clearly biased, disruptive and transphobic. E_F⁵ 16:34, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

You have. My nomination is in good faith. You did not take the time to discuss. This is blatant edit warring under the policy. 192.184.150.127 (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

192.184.150.127, please read WP:3RR. It is not edit warring till I revert three times. Suggest a BOOMERANG. — E_F⁵ 16:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Actually that's not always true ... Daniel Case (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Daniel Case, really? I always thought 3+ reverts = edit warring, but anything below is fine (obviously excluding WP:1RR, which isn't the case here). :) — E_F⁵ 21:53, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Well, first off, there's the exemptions at 3RRNO ... not very wide, but they're there. But also there's slow-motion edit warring, where people keep making the same reverts over a period of days. And then there's gaming ... making just three reverts in 24 hours, waiting, then doing it again.

I might also consider it edit warring when someone keeps reverting during a talk discussion in violation of WP:STATUSQUO regardless of how often that happens.

As noted at WP:EW: "it is absolutely possible to engage in edit warring without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so."

And, also:" The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times. Daniel Case (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Huh, thanks for sharing. I'll keep that in mind when reverting from now on. — E_F⁵ 22:15, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Recommend WP:BOOMERANG, IP couldn’t be more blatant of a troll if they tried. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  @EF5 SFR’s blocked them 31 hours for vandalism, so thankfully we’re done for now. The Kip ^(contribs) 16:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Thank you. Transphobia sucks. E_F⁵ 16:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Asia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Theliberian24 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1277873164

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1277972007
2. Special:Diff/1277976293, note personal attack in the edit summary

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:PermaLink/1277974618

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_in_Asia/Archive_1#Russia_is_a_European_country, which is an old discussion, but there's been a longstanding editing consensus since then in favor of including Russia, and the onus is definitely on editors pushing for its removal to make the case at this point in time.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1277979205

Comments:
Note that this page is under a 1RR sanction, so the second revert is already a red-line violation. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Daniel Case (talk) 22:18, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: Rohan Mehra (born 1990) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Rohan4747 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC) ""
2. 16:16, 28 February 2025 (UTC) ""
3. 14:19, 28 February 2025 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 07:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC) to 07:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 07:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC) ""
   2. 07:46, 28 February 2025 (UTC) ""
5. Consecutive edits made from 06:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC) to 06:52, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
   1. 06:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC) "This is my page. I am Rohan Mehra . Kindly don’t interrupt .This is the updated version of my work"
   2. 06:52, 28 February 2025 (UTC) "This is my page. I am Rohan Mehra . Kindly don’t interrupt .This is the updated version of my work"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 06:55, 28 February 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Ownership of articles on Rohan Mehra (born 1990)."
2. 16:00, 28 February 2025 (UTC) "Notice: Conflict of interest on Rohan Mehra (born 1990)."
3. 16:59, 28 February 2025 (UTC) "/* Managing a conflict of interest */ Reply"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User claims to be the article subject, asserts ownership of the article, and has ignored all warnings. Jfire (talk) 17:02, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Indefinitely pblocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:07, 28 February 2025 (UTC)