Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

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

User:Affinepplan reported by User:Closed Limelike Curves (Result: EC protection, warning)

Page: Later-no-harm criterion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222974899 by Aydoh8 (talk)"
2. Consecutive edits made from 01:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) to 01:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 01:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "removed irrelevant and unrigorous political commentary"
   2. 01:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "removed irrelevant and unrigorous speculation about election strategy"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: You are a suspected sockpuppet."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "/* This article needs serious revision */"

Comments:

Likely use of anonymous IP edits in attempt to evade 3RR. –Sincerely, A Lime 05:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Aydoh8 who warned @Affinepplan. Sorry you got dragged into this :(

I believe users @64.112.229.118, @47.230.61.20, @Affinepplan are the same person.

Short timeline:

1. @64.112.229.118 attempts to delete portions of article. Reverted by @Ankermast.
2. @64.112.229.118 responds by adding a disparaging Template:Multiple issues message insulting authors of the page. Reverted by me @Closed Limelike Curves.
3. @Affinepplan (believed to be same user as above) reverts to restore the template. (1st revert.)
4. ~1 week passes, with intervening edits from unrelated users.
5. I notice the restored template and revert.
6. @47.230.61.20 (believed to be same user) reverts to restore the template. (Second revert, first in 24 hour period.)
7. I notice the unusual activity and request page protection, as well as warning @Affinepplan. I do not restore.
8. @Aydoh8 takes notice and restores the previous version of the page. @Affinepplan restores (Third revert.)
9. @Aydoh8 reverts again and informs @Affinepplan their actions may constitute edit warring. @Affinepplan nevertheless reverts a fourth time, ignoring warning.

–Sincerely, A Lime 06:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Closed Limelike Curves I was going to bring this to AN3 anyway if they kept going. Looks like they've stopped. I also recommend you file a sockpuppet report at WP:SPI as well. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 11:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Result: Since User:Affinepplan and User:Closed Limelike Curves have both edited the artice on May 11 I conclude that the edit war is not over. So I have put extended confirmed protection on the article for one month. That will exclude the main warring parties (and any IPs) from editing the article directly. Please try to reach agreement on the talk page and see WP:DR if you are stuck. User:Affinepplan may have been editing logged-out and they are warned not to continue that. EdJohnston (talk) 03:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Delores Hilll reported by User:Myrealnamm (Result: No violation)

Page: Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223356038 by 109.76.198.112 (talk)"
2. 15:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223355380 by 109.76.198.112 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 15:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Reverting Edits */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Reverting "good faith" edits by IP users, and only giving them uw4s. Please check. If I'm wrong, and the IPs are vandalising, then that's a trout for me Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 15:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the inaccurate information for this notice. I wasn't familiar with the Edit Warring section in Twinkle. Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 15:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I cannot believe that anyone who has read the diffs or edit summaries of my changes can actually think my edits were vandalism. We all make mistakes sometimes but my edits were made in in a good faith effort to follow WP:UGC and I clearly explained as much in my edit summaries. Thanks. -- 109.76.198.112 (talk) 16:02, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

• No violation Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

The user also reverted my good faith edit here (I removed a link from a word that was literally linked in the previous section) and gave me a uw4 here. This is not edit-warring, of course. This should be moved to ANI. 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:ADC9:2C9F:7B0:FC19 (talk) 16:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Unfriendnow reported by User:108.35.216.149 (Result: Blocked one week)

Page: Multiple (see below)
User being reported: Unfriendnow (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [1] is a partial revert of [2] at Agnelli family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
2. [3] is a revert of [4] at Andrew Cavendish, 11th Duke of Devonshire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
3. [5] is a revert of [6] at William Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
4. [7] is a revert of [8] at Rose Hanbury (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [9]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [10]

Comments:
Since being unblocked (after using a sockpuppet User:Namenotimportant00 to conduct a wide-ranging edit war), four of ten edits have been to continue these edit wars. Of the remaining six, one is a revert of precisely the same nature (but it is a first revert, not a repeat of an earlier reverted edit), one is inappropriate canvassing, and one is the same kind of unsourced trivia that resulted in the block in the first place. 108.35.216.149 (talk) 00:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 00:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Abhishek0831996 reported by User:Pharaoh496 (Result: No violation)

Page: Narendra Modi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Abhishek0831996 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [11]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 1
2. 2

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [12]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [13]

Comments:

• User is removing important edits on the PM of India's page, who is involved in an election currently.
• He has a history of being biased towards editing.
• He has reverted my edits twice, in which great care had been taken to ensure neutrality
• I wrote a message on his talk page and the guy simply removed it!
• This is the first time im filing such a complaint, so please excuse me if Im doing anything wrong; in which case I shall learn and adapt. I see someone disrupting the process and hence have filed this. Pharaoh496 (talk) 11:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

noex

User:I would be bias if it was allowed reported by User:TarnishedPath (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: Australian Labor Party (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: I would be bias if it was allowed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1223227860

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1223337759
2. Special:Diff/1223438180
3. Special:Diff/1223455886
4. Special:Diff/1223458796

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1223457507

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Australian_Labor_Party#Seeking_a_broad_consensus_to_re-situate_the_ALP's_ideology_in_accordance_to_reliable_sources.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1223460616

Comments:

There is longstanding consensus that the fields in the infobox that the editor is editing should not be modified unless broad consensus is obtained in talk. This is evident by another editor previously placing code in the infobox stating <!-- It is important to seek and gain broad consensus on the article talk page before changing this -->. Editor has ridiculously attempted to reverse the onus to obtain consensus in talk by claimed that others need to obtain consensus for why the editor's changes shouldn't happen. TarnishedPath^talk 08:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Notably after the editor was reverted by an admin after the editor's fourth revert, told to not continue, take it to talk and obtain consensus an IP has shown up and reverted three more times (Special:Diff/1223465905, Special:Diff/1223468614 and Special:Diff/1223476797). In the last edit by the IP they left the edit summary "I don't want an edit war, but Labor has a centrist faction" which is almost identical phrasing that the editor uses on the articles talk page in their edit at Special:Diff/1223479083 when they wrote "Simply put, Labor has Centrist factions. I don't want an edit war". I'm not going to open a SPI between a single account and a single IP for obvious reasons but there certainly is some loud quaking. TarnishedPath^talk 13:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  Added CTOPS notice to talk page per WP:CT/CID. Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Casteiswrong reported by User:Wikaviani (Result: Blocked 72 hours)

Page: Snell's law (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Casteiswrong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [14]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [15]
2. [16]
3. [17]
4. [18]
5. [19]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [20]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [21]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [22]

Comments:

Reported user is actively edit-warring against several editors (includng me) to impose original research in the article and removes srongly sourced content that has been in the article for a quite long time. They have already been warned by an admin for edit warring and also by me, but they keep going on their disruptive path and made not less than 5 reverts within 24 hours.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Not fair, one user alone is charged with edit-warring while a team of editors with the same objective do not cumulatively break the same rule. This is a conflict between two scholars, Selin and Rashed, where the former is more objective while Rashed adds original research not even mentioned in the original manuscript translation. I am happy to remove all content and just stick the primary source, including my diagram derived from Selin's book and its translation. The readers will decide what to make out of it. Casteiswrong (talk) 13:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

You are putting your own POV and reverting edits before consensus. The editors have warned you multiple times. Furthermore the issue regarding historicity of Snell's law has already been discussed by wikipedians https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Snell%27s_law#Elaborate_on_Ibn_Sahl's_authorship_of_the_law You cannot push your pov by going against the consensus of other editors. Hu741f4 (talk) 15:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

User:46.44.180.253 reported by User:Air on White (Result: Blocked)

Page: Destruction under the Mongol Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 46.44.180.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "Out of scope in an article on 'destruction under..." . Despite the valid source, the link to the subject matter is very weak and actually seems biased to force in the unrelated (nevertheless important) subject of climate change. This section should be moved to a corresponding article."
2. 21:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "I am not the same who did the edit in February. Despite this section does have a valid reference, and apart from my valid POV that is also part of the discussion, environmental impact is simply out of scope for an article about "Destruction under ...'. No need to argue with WP on this. If you edit out my deletion again, how about adding similar paragraphs on the deeds of Nazi Germany, early communist China, Stalin era Soviet Union? This section should never have found it's place here from the..."
3. 21:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "Irrelevant to the topic, subliminal inclusion of a positive of element of genocide. See the discussion and my previous reasoning for removing this section. Imagine the same applied for the deeds of Hitler Stalin Mao and their likes. Climate change topics are important yet do not weigh up to massive genocide."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Violated 3RR, has made no effort to discuss on talk page instead of edit warring. It was previously agreed upon that the deletion of a section of this article needed consensus. Air on White (talk) 22:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

The IP user has been blocked for violating 3RR without an admin commenting on this report. Air on White (talk) 00:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – 24 hours by User:Daniel Quinlan for 3RR violation. EdJohnston (talk) 02:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I blocked them as part of reviewing a request to protect the article on WP:RFPP. It wasn't based on this report. @EdJohnston: Thanks for the ping. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 02:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

User:146.196.34.177 reported by User:Vkwiki100 (Result: Blocked)

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

User being reported: 146.196.34.177 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Consecutive edits made from 14:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC) to 15:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 15:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 08:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) to 12:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 08:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 11:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   3. 12:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Ancient history */"
3. 06:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC) to 19:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 19:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Ancient history */"
5. Consecutive edits made from 17:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC) to 17:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 17:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 17:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Ancient history */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Final warning: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Dausa."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This IP user is persistently adding unsourced content to the article. VK wiki100 15:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted the latest edits as unsourced and left a 3RR warning. I won't block, because I am now involved. PhilKnight (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

The IP has now reverted again, following my 3RR warning. I think they can now be blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I've blocked them for 48 hours. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

User:73.134.81.186 reported by User:Redraiderengineer (Result: Blocked from article for 72 hours)

Page: George Washington University (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 73.134.81.186 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 13:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC) by Tobby72 (Added image and paragraph regarding 2024 events to Controversies section)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1221695979 by Tobby72
2. 22:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1221880335 by Randy Kryn
3. 13:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1222015962 by Tobby72
4. 14:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC) Partial revert of CanonNi (image)
5. 01:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of ElKevbo (Removed image and different paragraph regarding 2022 events moved by ElKevbo)
6. 13:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1222637235 by ElKevbo
7. 17:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1223285595 by ElKevbo

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 13:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 21:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC) Discussion started by ElKevbo

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 18:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments:
The editor has engaged in a slow edit war over content that could be perceived as negative. They have reverted multiple editors, and after the warning and attempt to engage in discussion by ElKevbo, the editor responded then reverted one minute later. Even if the editor is correct about the current event, their actions violate the spirit of the edit warring policy by hampering discussion. Redraiderengineer (talk) 18:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 72 hours from article. Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User:L.R. Luther reported by User:GSK (Result: Blocked 72 hours)

Page: The Amazing Digital Circus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: L.R. Luther (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223682422 by Eldomtom2 (talk) who males up these rules anyway? The visual editing info details whats being said. #diff-undo"
2. 17:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "When you edit the page via "Visual Editing" It doesn't say anything about the media needing to claim where it's based or inspired by at all."
3. 16:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223668014 by Eldomtom2 (talk) Again, please stop removing this. It's getting annoying. #diff-undo"
4. 10:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "For a millionth time. Please do not change this. It's important to add info that makes the article more accurate. Do not break TOS"
5. 22:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223393565 by Eldomtom2 (talk) its important to add thia for accuracy #diff-undo"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on The Amazing Digital Circus."
2. 17:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on The Amazing Digital Circus."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox? */ reply"
2. 12:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox? */"
3. 17:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox? */"

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Carliertwo reported by User:QuietHere (Result: Both blocked 48 hours)

Page: Los Angeles (Lol Tolhurst, Budgie, and Jacknife Lee album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Wp:pointy and wp:own: wikipedia is a collaborative project."
2. Consecutive edits made from 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) to 02:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "wp:trivia that's trivial content as it didn't happen. wp:undue"
   2. 02:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Right url, showing professional reviews only"
3. 00:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "wiki is not"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 06:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Edit-warring report"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 05:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) on Los Angeles (Lol Tolhurst, Budgie, and Jacknife Lee album) "None of what you're writing makes any sense to me, and I have already made my point behind my edits clear. Again, if you're this dedicated to these changes, please bring them to discussion, or else you will be reported for edit-warring."

Comments:

Notice was removed as improperly filed(???) so here it is again.

Carliertwo came to Los Angeles (Lol Tolhurst, Budgie, and Jacknife Lee album) and changed a couple things which I disagreed with. I undid, explaining my reasoning and noting BRD (this was the second reversion), only for them to redo their edit multiple other times (including a second undo in which I warned them of this very report), explaining their reasoning but not following instructions to go to a talk page rather than continue to argue in edit summaries. Carliertwo has an extensive history of being reported on this board, so surely they know exactly what trouble they're causing.

QuietHere (talk | contributions) 20:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Netanya9 reported by User:Skyerise (Result: Indefinitely pblocked from article)

Page: Marc Gafni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Netanya9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [23]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [24]
2. [25]
3. [26]
4. [27]
5. [28]
6. [29]
7. [30]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [31]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [32]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [33]

Comments:
Note: Netanya9 is continuing to revert after this report was made (#5, #6 & #7). Skyerise (talk) 23:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely pblocked from editing the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Skyerise reported by User:Netanya9 (Result: Declined Diffs fail to show edit warring.)

Page: Marc Gafni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to: [34]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [35]
2. [36]
3. [37]
4. [38]
5. [39]
6. [40]

Please review several edit wars in editing history.

Core are diffs 4-6 above, where editor copy-pastes several paragraphs from the article and puts them in the lead. Leaving big paragraphs in the article twice.

The talk page has lots of discussion on the lead, this is a controversial page and the lead can not be edited in this big way without consensus.

I have warned the editor both in my reverting notes and on his/her talk page.

He/she has reported me on this page, please help.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [41]

See several 3RR warnings in my edits.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [42]

Discussions on NPOV and the WP:BLP lead over long period of time. Skyerise (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is just joining this long-term conversation.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [43]

[44]

Comments:
Thank you for reviewing these edits.

Netanya9 (talk)@Netanya

Please note that this is an intentionally falsified reported. Not all the listed edits are from the same day, not all the listed edits are reverts. Supposed revert #2 is not a revert, and it is from May 3. #3 is not a revert, and it is from May 2. Edit #5 is not a revert, it is an initial addition of text to the lead. Edit #6 is not a revert, it is an addition. On the other hand Netanya9 has 6 clear reverts obvious as reverts in their edit history. I only listed four of the 6 in the report above. Skyerise (talk) 23:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC) They are continuing to revert even after being reported and are now at 8 reverts. Skyerise (talk) 23:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

(Comment) @Netanya9, this is a friendly reminder to place subst:An3-notice when making reports. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:56, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

• Declined Diffs fail to show edit warring. Netanya9, you appear to have only edited on this one article for the past 2.5 years and have a habit of trying to block changes. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

  @EvergreenFir, your review seems biased according to your previous communications on @Skyerise talk page here: [45]

  I've contributed value to discussions on Marc Gafni's talk page here for many years. @Skyerise is a new (apparently) biased account that only exists since April 2024 possibly a sockpuppet to vandalize this page (as has happened many times over the years.

Bbb23 Daniel Case User:Daniel Quinlan EdJohnston

Could you please help and review this 'decline'?

• Posting all diff links below, these are all not marked as reverts as user has redone these same edits several times:

  Edit 1: adding controversial content copy/pasted from article, as duplicate, to the lead.

  Edit 2: changing 'author' to 'writer' without clarifying on talk page. (Gafni is bestselling author, not a writer).

  1. [46]
  2. [47]
  3. [48]
  4. {[49]
  5. [50]
  6. [51]

  Thank you so much for reviewing. Netanya9 (talk) 11:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

An editor does not have to clear minor edits on the talk page. Our categories use "writer", not "author". "Writer" is correct usage, "author" is generally used with a following "of": a writer may be the author of such-and-such a book. Writers should be identified as writers in the lead, not authors. Skyerise (talk) 11:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Please cite wikipedia source that says professional best seller authors should be listed as 'writers'.

Here's some general knowledge of use of these words:

"Both author and writer refer to a person who writes. In general, the word author is used to refer to a person who writes professionally, especially someone who writes published books. The word writer is typically used more generally to refer to someone who writes anything, including works besides books."

But I don't think we should use the #3RR report board to discuss these detailed matters. Netanya9 (talk) 11:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Might I point out that it was you who brought it up here? Skyerise (talk) 11:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Also, please review WP:OWN. You seem to be asserting ownership over the article. You also have not addressed your obvious COI at WP:COIN. Skyerise (talk) 11:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

@Netanya9 Your diff did not work and Skyerise is neither a new account nor a sockpuppet given that their account was created in 2009 and has over 130,000 edits. You, on the other hand, have 278 edits total, the last 196 from the past 2.5 years of which were all related to this one article. EvergreenFir (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User:CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine reported by User:Seawolf35 (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: 2024 Nairobi mid-air collision (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1223801945 by CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk): See ur talk page dude."
2. 13:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC) "Restored revision 1223801194 by CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk): Looks like u don't know what preliminary means. ASN and planespotters are two of these largest aviation sources and usually don't get things wrong"
3. 13:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Fadedreality556 (talk): Having two sources means that I am more accurate. Both sources agree with each other"
4. 17:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by KcalcNoraa (talk): Preliminary reports are usually unreliable. Besides, there are two cites indicating that the age of the aircraft is 23 years old and that the collision took place at 0945 not 0934. Its literally cited"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 15:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 15:27, 14 May 2024 (UTC) on User talk:CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine "/* 2024 Nairobi Mid-Air Collision */ new section"

Comments:

Over 3rr and slow burning edit warring across several pages. I recognize I did just warn them but this has been a persistent problem. v/r - Seawolf35 ^T--C 15:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Of all the LAME reasons to get blocked for 3RR—a hyphen! Is there such a thing as a valley to die in? Daniel Case (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Capitals00 reported by User:Kashmiri (Result: )

Page: Stateless nation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Capitals00 (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. [52]
2. [53]
3. [54]
4. [55]
5. [56]
6. [57]
7. [58]
8. [59]
9. [60]
10. [61]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [62]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [63]

Comments:

This is not a 3RR violation report; this is a report of a user's protracted edit warring in one article, Stateless nation, spannig a longer period. Their edit warring in other articles was a subject of several noticeboard discussions elsewhere, and user has been made aware of our edit warring policies multiple times in the course of these (see their Talk page history as they routinely remove warnings).

Here in Stateless nation, the user has been repeatedly censoring any mention of Tamils as a stateless nation. All their edits were consistently reverted by multiple independent editors.

Given that the Tamils have been fighting for independence against both India and Sri Lanka, this can only be seen as an unambiguous POV-pushing, and so one wonders whether this disruption is not a substantial breach of the user's topic ban on India–Pakistan conflict broadly construed (Special:Permalink/841340595#Capitals00), where they were given an explicit warning by GoldenRing: You are warned that any further disruption or testing of the edges of the ban will be met with either an indefinite topic ban from all topics related to India, Pakistan and Afghanistan or an indefinite block, without further warning.[64] — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

• Those routine reverts for removing disruption cannot be considered as "edit warring". However, I reverted Kashmiri only after he failed to justify his revert as visible from this discussion. He is now misusing this noticeboard since he failed to find any valid basis for his restoring a misleading edit.

It is ironic that Kashmiri is accusing me of POV pushing while at the same time he is falsifying history over the POV edits which he cannot support with a proper source. No Tamils are "fighting for independence against both India and Sri Lanka", contrary to his false claims.

His falsification does not stop here. He is talking about an unrelated topic to enrich this frivolous report which was already overturned more than 5 years ago.[65] Capitals00 (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

OK, no info was there on your Talk. It may be good to revisit the measure, as it apparently worked so well as long as it was in place. — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Pathetic of you to dream of ways to get rid of me only because lost a content dispute and your frivolous report also got debunked.With this outright disruptive restoration (with misleading edit summary) by you despite evident failure on talk page, it is clear that you are causing disruption and misusing this noticeboard to win content dispute. See WP:BATTLE. Capitals00 (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

These were no "routine reverts". This was POV pushing only by you that was reverted by several independent editors. You've brought significant disruption to the article. Combined with all the warnings about your behavious in other articles – warnings that you've been always immediately removing from your Talk – I honestly believe the level of disruption you cause is reaching a point where a sanction is necessary. — kashmīrī ^TALK 16:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

It is ironic that you are falsely accusing me of POV pushing while at the same time you are falsifying history over your POV edits which you cannot support with a proper source. No Tamils are "fighting for independence against both India and Sri Lanka", contrary to your false claims. If anyone is being disruptive then that is you as evident from your frivolous report, this outright disruptive restoration (with misleading edit summary), and now your meaningless rants. Capitals00 (talk) 16:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

User:Apoel4 reported by User:Shahin (Result: Blocked)

Page: Persepolis F.C. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Apoel4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [66]
2. [67]
3. [68]

Comments:
Hi. he was banned for WP:DISRUPTIVE. after ban is lifted he is back and doing again. he vandalised the article after warning. and insist to doing it again and again.Shahin (talk) 16:41, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello . Why should I be banned for deleting invalid content?

A false claim is made in this article.

The Asian Football Confederation has never said anything like that. Apoel4 (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked for one week. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 16:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I won't step on Jake's toes, but @Shahin:, you could easily have been blocked too, in fact you had more reverts than the blocked editor. Apoel4 seems, at least on first look, to have a point. The sentence they are removing doesn't appear to be supported by the sources (which all seem to be dead links). They provided an explanation in the edit summary, while you just reverted. I won't do anything myself because this could be obvious vandalism that I just don't understand, but the appearance is that you just weaponized WP:EW to win an edit war. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Shahin has posted on my talk page that edits on Persian WP make it clear that Apoel4 was trying to be disruptive, even if they stumbled onto an actual issue in this particular case. The problem was fixed by Shahin here. So in case it isn't clear, even tho 3RR was probably broken by Shahin, this is apples and oranges, and they've been reminded, and so I no longer think Shahin could legit be blocked for edit warring too. Floquenbeam (talk) 17:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC)