Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive474

Page: Safra Catz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 12.133.214.74 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:21, 29 September 2023 (UTC) "I will repeat this one last time. These things have been proven false and need to be removed."
2. Consecutive edits made from 18:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC) to 19:03, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
   1. 18:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC) "These statements regarding Safra's political donations have been proven to be false and biased by an unbiased independent review board in March of 2023. The corrections made better illustrate her moderate political leanings."
   2. 18:59, 29 September 2023 (UTC) "/* Political involvement */ Once again, these statements have been proven false by an independent review board in March of 2023. The edits better reflect Safra Catz's moderate political leanings."
   3. 19:03, 29 September 2023 (UTC) "This page is unfortunately riddled with inaccuracies and assumptions. After a lengthy review by an independent nonbiased review board, it has been found that much of the information in this section is fabricated and or misleading."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 19:23, 29 September 2023 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Safra Catz."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

  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. A series of removals do not, in this case, count as even a single revert since they were fresh. There has been only one revert. There are problems indeed with the editor's edits, but 3RR is not at the moment one of them. Daniel Case (talk) 11:17, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts: Note: These reverts occurred over a longer period than 24 hours

• Arab Christians, the article with the most interaction from multiple editors trying to get Akhshartag to use the talk page

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

• Raphael of Brooklyn, just me trying to request discussion

1. [5] (As IP)
2. [6]
3. [7]
4. [8] (Three days of waiting for discussion on talk page following pings between this and next reversion)
5. [9]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [10] (Previously warned in May)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• Raphael of Brooklyn
• Seraphim Rose
• Saint Apostolos the New

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

Comments:

Despite repeated requests from multiple editors to engage in discussion on talk pages, they've reverted many times (not technical 3RR violations by the 24 hour window standard). See their unwillingness to discuss: "talk to the hand"; "no explanation required". They also reverted Materialscientist's anti-vandalism action here and engaged in an edit-warring BLP violation here. Multiple pings on their talk page and on article talk pages have only resulted in the no explanation needed comment in discussion and "Nobody uses the talk page" in an edit summary. ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:35, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

  Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Daniel Case (talk) 11:24, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

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

User being reported: 86.2.20.23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:37, 1 October 2023 "Undid revision 1177964127 by MrOllie (talk) | Vandalism"
2. 00:14, 2 October 2023 "Undid revision 1178112092 by MrOllie (talk) | it however IS vandalism when it's not badly sourced. I count at least 20 citations. You should aim to IMPROVE sources before removing them."
3. 00:20, 2 October 2023 "Undid revision 1178170276 by MrOllie (talk) | Yes they do, describe what is wrong with them on the talk page and I will refute your points in a cohesive manner."
4. 00:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178171044 by MrOllie (talk) "While you may have good intentions, a citation doesn't need to be a secondary source for something like software. Primary sources are fine to use in this case"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule.", also [12]

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 00:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Badly sourced lists */ new section"

Comments: Related to long term efforts to spam references to nonnotable image board 'soyjak.party', see diff. - MrOllie (talk) 00:27, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Declined Yes, technically the user reverted four times in 24 hours, but they then self-reverted realizing they'd crossed the line, and have left it alone. Daniel Case (talk) 05:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: 2023 NRL Grand Final (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 220.236.126.177 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 07:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178202529 by Happily888 (talk) If you were to go back and watch the game while paying closer attention, those scoring timestamps match up to the game clock, it's as simple as that."
2. 04:19, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Match */"
3. 14:23, 1 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178086569 by 58.106.88.118 (talk) Provided no reason as to how it was "ruined""
4. 12:51, 1 October 2023 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 05:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "Only warning: Vandalism on 2023 NRL Grand Final."
2. 04:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "General note: Removal of content, blanking on 2023 NRL season."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 07:09, 2 October 2023 (UTC) on User talk:220.236.126.177 "re"

Comments:

Recently unblocked IP account who has continued to edit war; not following the recommendations of unblocking admin (ToBeFree) to disengage from disputes. Happily888 (talk) 07:10, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Well I provided reasoning in why the Grand Final edits were justifiable. You escalating this to another ban fixes nothing. There's no case for one. 220.236.126.177 (talk) 07:12, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

You can go ahead and rescind this report, there is nothing to it. 220.236.126.177 (talk) 07:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, the ping in Special:Diff/1178213404 didn't work, but I can't see why. Both the link to my user page and the signature seem to be correct. 220.236.126.177 notified me about the discussion, thanks.

I won't review this report; it would benefit from an independent reviewer. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

You are attempting to re-open an old, already resolved, dispute. The block wasn't lifted for no reason and I don't appreciate you actively seeking out the tiniest reasons to get me blocked again. Just let it go. 220.236.126.177 (talk) 09:21, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

This is a sock of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/CodyCruickshank/Archive, has had many accounts and IPs blocked, has been inserting OR material for years, and apparently will continue to do so indefinitely (unsigned, posted by User:Local Potentate)

Beg your pardon but no I will not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.236.126.177 (talk) 12:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

• Blocked for one year (previous duration). Details in block log.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:09, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

• I reblocked amending the block log. I misread the comments above. I thought the IP left the entire comment about the alleged socking and the refusal to let go, but Local Potentate alleged the socking by the IP (I thought the IP was accusing the reporter) and neglected to sign it. I've now clarified the sequence above.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  @Bbb23 As per the sockpuppet comment made above, 110.175.242.146 appears to be another ip address used by the same person to circumvent their previous blocks. Have a look at the contributions and edit summaries, both are active on the same pages and accuse people of vandalism for reverting their changes, especially on the Manly records page. PhinsUp23 (talk) 13:47, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Looks like. However, that IP hasn't edited since September 21. We don't normally block IPs for block evasion unless they've edited recently. Feel free to let me know directly if they resume editing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: American Indian Wars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2600:1015:A017:1EE6:6547:8F7C:A3F:4E85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:02, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""
2. 12:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""
3. 11:37, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""
4. 00:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178168870 by Dumuzid (talk)"
5. 00:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""
6. 21:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC) ""
7. 18:47, 1 October 2023 (UTC) ""
8. 12:02, 1 October 2023 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User was warned by user:Meters on the IP's talk page, and discussion has happened on the article talk page under the heading "June 2,1924 is the exact end date of the Indian wars." Dumuzid (talk) 16:08, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Aoidh (talk) 16:54, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  I went back and looked at the page history and there's a longer history of this than just under this one IP. The page was protected last month for more or less the same issue, so I've reapplied protection for one month. - Aoidh (talk) 17:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Many thanks for the quick response. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2023 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Escj123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:20, 1 October 2023 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 15:26, 1 October 2023 (UTC) to 17:30, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
3. 13:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""
4. 16:55, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""
5. 18:30, 2 October 2023 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. Talk:Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2023#"Fia" vs "FIA"

Comments: User was warned by User:Dominikcapuan and User:Jochem van Hees on the user's talk page, and discussion has happened on the article talk page under the heading ("Fia" vs "FIA"). The user, in addition to not opening up to dialogue without participating in the latter talk, and insisting on the edit war, also began with the first possible vandalism on my personal user page. — Dominikcapuan (talk) 19:18, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Aoidh (talk) 19:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you so much for the quick response :) — Dominikcapuan (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Aditi Govitrikar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 09:58, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 09:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC) to 09:46, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
   1. 09:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""
   2. 09:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Actors often fake their age..in official records of Grant medical College it's mentioned she graduated in 1994 making her current age 52"
   3. 09:46, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Added more info"
3. 03:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Corrected the DOB..she was from 1989 MBBS batch which makes her dob year as 1971. No-one can enter MBBS at the age of 13 for god's sake"
4. 12:40, 2 October 2023 (UTC) "Corrected the DOB"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 09:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Aditi Govitrikar."
2. 09:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Aditi Govitrikar."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 09:50, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "/* October 2023 */ new section"
2. 10:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "/* October 2023 */"

Comments:

Making unsourced changes, broke 3RR. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:19, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Academic Challenger (talk) 01:46, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: All Creatures Great and Small (2020 TV series) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Drmargi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [13]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [14]
2. [15]
3. [16]
4. [17]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [18]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [19]

Comments:

This should be a straightforward case of Mosnum and the editor has been directed to this specific policy. The editor, who appears to have a long track record of edit-warring, has reverted four times without raising the issue on the talk page, and has referred generally to the entirety of the project—specific MOSTV without citing which specific reference they believe justifies their multiple reverting. MapReader (talk) 05:29, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

• Why don't you use Roman numerals? Another lame MOS edit-war brought to you by experienced users who have clearly lost their perspective on what's important.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:45, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

It's really not the numerals so much as Mapreader's need to be right. MOS:TV and Project TV says we use numerals in series numbers when describing characters. He seems to feel he can unilaterally dictate that MOS:NUM, which handles numbers in most instances, somehow takes precedence, ignoring established consensus across the project. Rather, he takes on this "I am right and you must do as I say" posture, doesn't start a discussion (hands up, I could have, too, but I am so damned weary of this BS over and over) and next thing, we've got an edit war. He was directed to MOS:TV's section on character descriptions more than once, despite what he claims above, so he has no excuse for continuing to push this edit. Funnily enough, I actually prefer one-ten being written out (I write professionally using APA formatting) but in this case, it's incorrect, and I prefer to go with the consensus. ----Dr.Margi ✉ 18:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

3RR is supposed to be a hard standard, designed to stop the edit-warring behaviour which DrMargi has got involved in over many years with many editors, as is clear from a long record of warnings and blocks. Breaching it after being warned and hoping to get away with it really isn’t good enough. MOSTV is a long document and I have reviewed it looking for an explicit requirement to use numerals, rather than follow the widely understood MOSNUM, for references to episodes in TV cast lists, but I couldn’t see it. The other editor had the opportunity to provide a direct reference to any such consensus but preferred to edit war, as they have so many times before. MapReader (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2023 (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) 05:23, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Daniel Case, By my timeclock the timings on the reverts are 17:08 and 22:01 on 30/9 and 00:29 and 06:06 on 1/10, making four within a span of thirteen hours. MapReader (talk) 08:40, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

First revert, second revert almost two and a half hours later, and third revert almost four and a half hours later. You cannot count the edit being reverted to as a revert itself ... all these edits have summaries clearly marked as "undid"). The timestamps are not the issue here. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

The edit being reverted to and the four subsequent reverts are all listed separately above, five links in all. MapReader (talk) 06:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

There is nothing indicating to me that this edit is a revert of another editor. Daniel Case (talk) 04:00, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

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

User being reported: AarushSinha10 (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 05:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC) to 06:08, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
   1. 05:55, 4 October 2023 (UTC) "Laxmi Durga is only in Vishnu, Garuda and Narada Puran not in Markandeya and Devi Bhagwat and I have provided sources in Talk Page."
   2. 05:57, 4 October 2023 (UTC) "The references mentioned describe Lakshmi as Mahalakshmi not Durga. Please go through references carefully."
   3. 05:58, 4 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Nine Main Forms */She is only worshipped in these forms in Madhavacharya Vaishnavism."
   4. 06:08, 4 October 2023 (UTC) "As this article is on Navadurga so only Navadurga should be mentioned rest can be added in the article of Goddess Durga."
2. Consecutive edits made from 19:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC) to 19:21, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
   1. 19:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "This page is of Navadurga and Laxmi has no Nav Durga form according to scriptures.

Brahmavaivarta Purana, Prakriti Khanda-

गणेशजननी दुर्गा राधा लक्ष्मीः सरस्वती । सावित्री वै सृष्टिविधौ प्रकृतिः पञ्चधा स्मृता ।।

Comments-

The above Shloka lists the 5 forms of Mulaprakriti- Durga, Radha, Lakshmi, Saraswati and Savitri. While describing Devi Durga, the Shloka calls Her "Ganeshajanani" or mother of Ganesha. Now we know who's son Lord Ganesha is.

गणेशमाता दुर्गा या शिवरूपा शिवप्रिया । नारायणी..."

1. 1. 19:21, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Hinduism */This article is on Navadurga not Durga. Laxmi's Durga form is not mentioned in scriptures.

Brahmavaivarta Purana, Prakriti Khanda-

गणेशजननी दुर्गा राधा लक्ष्मीः सरस्वती । सावित्री वै सृष्टिविधौ प्रकृतिः पञ्चधा स्मृता ।।

Comments- The above Shloka lists the 5 forms of Mulaprakriti- Durga, Radha, Lakshmi, Saraswati and Savitri. While describing Devi Durga, the Shloka calls Her "Ganeshajanani" or mother of Ganesha. Now we know who's son Lord Ganesha is.

गणेशमाता दुर्गा या शिवरूप..."

1. 19:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "/* List */The Nav Durga form of Laxmi has no scriptural reference. But when it comes to her names then she is described as Bhadrakali and Mahakali also in her Sahasranamam and also Parvati is described as Mahalaxmi but this is just to show the oneness of Goddess.

This article is on Navadurga and Laxmi's Navadurga is not mentioned anywhere not even in Laxmi Tantra. According to Srimad Bhagwatam (A Vaishnavite Text) it clearly mentioned that Durga is wife of Shiva and Laxmi is wife of Vishnu wh..."

1. Consecutive edits made from 13:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC) to 13:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
   1. 13:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Navadurga is a Shaiva Shakta Concept"
   2. 13:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""
   3. 13:27, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""
   4. 13:35, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""
   5. 13:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Brahmavaivarta Purana, Prakriti Khanda- गणेशजननी दुर्गा राधा लक्ष्मीः सरस्वती । सावित्री वै सृष्टिविधौ प्रकृतिः पञ्चधा स्मृता ।। Comments- The above Shloka lists the 5 forms of Mulaprakriti- Durga, Radha, Lakshmi, Saraswati and Savitri. While describing Devi Durga, the Shloka calls Her "Ganeshajanani" or mother of Ganesha. Now we know who's son Lord Ganesha is. गणेशमाता दुर्गा या शिवरूपा शिवप्रिया । नारायणी विष्णुमाया पूर्णब्रह्मस्वरूपिणी ।। ब्रह्मादिदेवैर्मुनिभिर्मनुभिः पूजिता सदा ।"
   6. 13:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""
   7. 13:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "/* List */"
   8. 13:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:35, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "General note: Removal of content, blanking on Navadurga."
2. 19:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "Caution: Frequent or mass changes to genres without consensus or references on Navadurga."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 19:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Laxmi Durga */ Reply"
2. Consecutive edits made from 13:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC) to 02:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC) on Talk:Navadurga

Comments:

Editing/Reverting again without establishing a consensus on the talk page first. WP:DE Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:19, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Using edit summaries to discuss the dispute even after a warning given here [20] WP:EDITCON Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:23, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

It wasn't a edit summary but a reference from the book which is most reliable in all kinds. AarushSinha10 (talk) 06:49, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

My primary sources were rejected, unreplied, and Facebook posts were considered reliable. Other Long Paragraph was about the goddess which is not the topic. AarushSinha10 (talk) 06:50, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I request you to go through the references given by the editor carefully. He has confused Mahalaxmi with Durga. AarushSinha10 (talk) 06:54, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tenryuu ridiculed my sources when i gave it in Talk Page. The article was changed based on a reference from Facebook post. Other things removed were irrelevant to the topic. Secondly I gave references in edit summary because I think I misunderstood the editors request to give reason. I accept that as a mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AarushSinha10 (talk • contribs) 06:44, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:52, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Drive (Incubus song) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Rockmusicfanatic20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [21]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:31 UTC, Oct 3: [22] restore disputed genre "nu metal"
2. 20:33 UTC, Oct 3: [23] restore disputed genre "nu metal"
3. 21:10 UTC, Oct 3: [24] restore disputed genre "nu metal"
4. 15:01 UTC, Oct 4: [25] restore disputed genre "nu metal"

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [26]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [27]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [28]

Comments:
User has been warned repeatedly at Talk:Drive_(Incubus_song)#Removal_of_nu_metal about how the WP:ONUS policy says that disputed material should stay out of the article, but they keep re-inserting it. They are not unaware of the issue: they started a Request for Comment about it.[29] However, they keep re-inserting the disputed material. Binksternet (talk) 16:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)}}

•   Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Aoidh (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Lex Fridman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Pixiedreamgirl390- (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:40, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "This is vandalising the article, the source you are referencing for information is an opinion piece done by Business Insider, it's not even a legitimate news source. Please stop vandalising this page. Referencing should verify stated facts about the individual. You don't quote a statement from an article that gives an opinion on a individual then make a reference to it and call it a sourceUndid revision 1178662542 by Yoshi24517 (talk)"
2. 02:27, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "Please stop taking out your personal opinions on someone's wikipedia article. What you are inserting isn't within the guidelines and does not add biographical context. Kindly refer to my notes on the talk page. Undid revision 1178660810 by Yoshi24517 (talk) -"
3. 02:17, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178659153 by Adakiko (talk)"
4. 01:55, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "tabloid reference to once again slander the person."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:31, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "ONLY Warning: Edit warring (UV 0.1.5)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Seems to be a SPA who is POV-pushing. Most of the stuff they added isn't even sourced. I feel like I may have done something bad myself, so apologies, but what it looks like here, is that this user has only edited one article, and one article only, and that is this article. Some of the stuff they wrote broke some templates as well from what it looks like. While some of their concerns may be valid, they shouldn't revert 4 times just to fix it.Yoshi24517 (Chat) (Online) 02:51, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Kindly note that I've undone all my edits where I had removed all the references and quotes from a Business insider article stating opinions about the person, as a logical agreement can't be made on this. Pixiedreamgirl390- (talk) 03:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

  Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks from article by Drmies. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

The user called Vif12vf has been hounding me and reverting many of the good-faith edits I made in Wikipedia. I have provided very clear rationale for my edit but the said user persists on reverting my edits without providing a reason. I have even tried to talk to them on their user talk page but the user just deleted my message. They also keep treating my edits as disruptive although thy clearly are not. 223.25.63.112 (talk) 06:00, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Reporting someone after they remove your talk-page message but don't revert any other edits of yours is not a way to go about! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 06:04, 5 October 2023 (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. Also sounds like it should be at AN/I/ Daniel Case (talk) 06:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I shall duly rewrite my report at the proper forum. 103.196.139.76 (talk) 06:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

You shouldn't be using two IPs to edit, especially not on noticeboards! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 06:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Stargate (film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 178.66.158.182 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:45, 5 October 2023 (UTC) ""
2. 16:11, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "The source says the two plots are "basically the same". Five years after The Wall was aired on national TV, there appears a film called Stargate, whose plot premise is "basically the same"."
3. 15:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "Provided a reference"
4. 15:25, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "Read the plot of The Wall."
5. 14:54, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "You do not even know what WP:UNDUE is about. The source is the plot premise of The Wall."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:18, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Stargate (film)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:17, 5 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Undue addition to lead */ new section"

Comments:

Besides the clear WP:3RR violation, this IP appears to be the same user as the currently blocked 178.66.158.208 (talk · contribs). DonIago (talk) 17:08, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, this is clearly block evasion. Re-blocked, last edit reverted, page semi-protected. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:37, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: The Platform (radio station) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: McGregorNZ (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• Note: edited while logged out as 222.152.255.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Evidence: See talk page edits. McGregorNZ: talk 222.152.255.243: talk

Previous version reverted to: link

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. McGregorNZ - 10:03 6 Oct Undid revision 1178849206 by Furius (talk) to remove incorrect information
2. McGregorNZ - 05:33, 6 Oct Undid revision 1178806847 by Furius (talk) because it was false information
3. 222.152.255.243 - 06:47 5 Oct Undid revision 1178662564 by Adakiko
4. 222.152.255.243 - 06:56 5 Oct Undid revision 1178687282 by Adakiko
5. McGregorNZ - 07:41 5 Oct Undid revision 1178687630 by Adakiko (talk)
6. McGregorNZ - 07:46 5 Oct (continuation) on many occasions, they have debunked the anti-vax movement. Could you also justify calling The Platform 'right-wing' when according to a Curia Market Research April Public Poll (n=1000): 'The Platform had the highest neutral score with 48% of respondents rating them as such.' The Platform did not give priority to white female talkback callers. They gave priority to all female talkback callers.
7. McGregorNZ - 02:21 5 Oct (No ES)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: EW Notice 09:51 6 Oct

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

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

Comments:

• McGregorNZ appears to be a wp:SPA having only edited articles related to Sean Plunket and Plucket's affiliations: Mass media in New Zealand and The Platform (radio station). Gives claims in wp:ES unsupported by locatable sources or citations. Whitewashing article of criticism.
• McGregorNZ EW while adding apparent promotional content to Mass media in New Zealand: [1] [2] [3]

Adakiko (talk) 11:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

I have invited @McGregorNZ: to discuss his disagreements with us on Talk:The Platform (radio station). I think if we can talk things through, hopefully we can avoid blocking him. Andykatib (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 12:40, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [30]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [31]
2. [32]
3. [33]
4. [34]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [35]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [36]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [37]

Comments:

The user keeps stubbornly reverting my reliably referenced edits despite having a discussion in his/her talk page and adjusting the edits accordingly.KHE'O (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

• KHE'O, it's not entirely clear why you're filing this report immediately after an uninvolved user, Nemoralis, warned you both, and without any edits to the article having happened in between. The last message at Talk:Askeran was written over two years ago. Instead of filing an edit warring report, please create a new section there and describe your proposed changes, with arguments for them. Simply invite AntonSamuel to the discussion afterwards with a short message on their talk page ({{please see}}). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:10, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
•   Warned ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:10, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Portal:Current events/2023 October 5 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
CatmanBw CatmanBw (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. 13:01 6 October UTC
2. 13:06 6 October UTC
3. 13:13 6 October UTC

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [38]

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [39]

User previously warned for personal attacks, ANIMr.User200 (talk) 13:27, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

The user reporting me above has reverted more than 3 times (manually) using sources that don't even mention the claims they were writing down. Later on, they tried to use completely unreliable/unheard of/non-neutral sources to verify the claims that were unverifiable the first time. It is clear disruptive editing, vandalism, and they are also trying to game the system by saying I'm the one who reverted 3 times when they did first. CatmanBw (talk) 13:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

@CatmanBw: Please provide diffs of the reverts you mentioned. Also, your accusations of vandalism are yet another personal attack. Be careful, because you risk being blocked, not necessarily for edit-warring, but for repeated attacks against other users.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Sorry; I was referring to the content, not the user.

Here you go:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) CatmanBw (talk) 14:07, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't work that way. Calling another user's edits vandalism is a personal attack. Saying it's the "content" not the user is a distinction without a difference. And they are not vandalism.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:29, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay. What I meant to say is that the user removed a piece of information, claimed it was original research (when it wasn't); the article cited mentions the information. Then they proceeded to look for different reasons to remove it when it's a valid piece of information. CatmanBw (talk) 14:38, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bbb23 Also, if you search Mr.User200 reports in the archive, you are gonna find a long history of them being reported for similar behaviour. They were also given many warnings and a final warning before. CatmanBw (talk) 16:05, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of 1 month ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:31, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

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

User being reported: Willbb234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:20, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Transgender Day of Remembrance */ https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/her-death-sparked-transgender-day-remembrance-22-years-later-still-n1233809 no one has ever been arrested, no motive determined. source suggests that there were other motives such as a fight they got into prior to murder"
2. 14:33, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178884984 by Last1in (talk) The RS is a summary of a survey, so report is an entirely reasonable word. I don't see how this is synth?"
3. 14:09, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Employment discrimination */ don't know why this was reverted before"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 14:40, 6 October 2023 (UTC) on User talk:Willbb234 "Warning: Edit warring on Transgender."

Comments:

User appears to be in an edit war and has been warned and reverted by multiple people within the last 3 days. Suggest a topic ban. Raladic (talk) 06:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Please explain how dif 1 and 3 are evidence of edit warring. Also, why did you revert my latest edit as "non-constructive", when it's an entirely valid edit backed up by an RS? This is very confusing. Willbb234 13:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 13:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Cossack Hetmanate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Dan69182 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [40] Diffs of the user's reverts: [41], [42], [43]

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: User talk:Dan69182

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Slow moving edit war in CT/e-e area  // Timothy :: talk  15:33, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Macedonia naming dispute (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Chronograph 1985 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:04, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178918465 by StephenMacky1 (talk)"
2. 18:01, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178917645 by StephenMacky1 (talk) here is a PDF of the agreement, go over it. Thanks. If you revert again I will flag the article and take it up with Wikipedia admins."
3. Consecutive edits made from 17:51, 6 October 2023 (UTC) to 17:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
   1. 17:51, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1178900995 by StephenMacky1 (talk) As per the Prespa agreement, the ethnonym for North Macedonians is in fact "North Macedonian". So if the ethnic term Slavic is in some way inadequate, the edit should then contain "North Macedonian". The Prespa agreement specifically addresses educational material in this regard (of which wikipedia seeks to fulfill and be respected as)"
   2. 17:52, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "More concise language is needed for a very controversial topic settled officially to be encapsulated within very specific language under international law."
   3. 17:54, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Fixed tag"
   4. 17:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC) ""
   5. 17:55, 6 October 2023 (UTC) ""
4. 14:43, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Small edit adding concise language as it was confusing to my students."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:04, 6 October 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Macedonia naming dispute."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Edit warring and persistently violating MOS:MAC. StephenMacky1 (talk) 18:11, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

ChatGPT also considers my edit correct following semantics and logic. ChatGPT is a powerful large language model. Again, the sentence does not seem to follow logic when read as "Macedonians do not consider themselves Macedonian". Thank you. Ed 18:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chronograph 1985 (talk • contribs)

The identifier “North” should be used in this context to differentiate between the ethnic Greek subgroup of Macedonians and North Macedonians. It wouldn’t make sense for Greeks who consider themselves ethnically Macedonian to believe they are unrelated to ethnic Macedonians. Ed 18:18, 6 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chronograph 1985 (talk • contribs)

•   Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:20, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

  I guess North Macedonians on Wikipedia decide what is considered an ethnicity or not. Being ignorant to actual history is not a good look for a wannabe encyclopedia. Ed 21:21, 7 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chronograph 1985 (talk • contribs)

Page: October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 01:07, 8 October 2023 (UTC) "/* Analysis */"
2. 00:09, 8 October 2023 (UTC) "Reverted good faith edit. (Hope this doesn't go over 1 edit max. Apologies if someone previously reverted this. Feel free to revert me if so.) WP:COMMONNAME is Third Intifada; military names have their own section because they don't meet this criteria. Undid revision 1179114123 by Techso01 (talk)"
3. 00:04, 8 October 2023 (UTC) "Not sure why this was deleted. (If reverted for good reasons write on talk.)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 01:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC) "/* October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict */"
2. 01:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC) "/* October 2023 Gaza−Israel conflict */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Over 1RR restoring "The events have been termed the Third Intifada" Andre🚐 01:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Andrevan:. This was an accident. (Since it was a heavily trafficked article and edits were occurring within seconds.) Thanks.

That's why I clarified with Apologies if someone previously reverted this since I was working on a device. My apologies. KlayCax (talk) 01:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi KlayCax, that doesn't make sense, since you've reverted several times to restore content that was removed. Would you kindly self-revert that? Andre🚐 01:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

• The first one wasn't a reversion - at least to understanding - but an accidental deletion due to an edit conflict that was occurring due to multiple edits occurring at the same time. I didn't see this as an edit conflict since I assumed this was just accidentally lopped off.
• The second one was me not noticing it had been reverted. There were many edits going on at the same time due to the rapid, quickfire editing of the article. That's why I mentioned it in the edit summary.
• The last was a legitimate revert. That is because WP:COMMONNAME terms — frequently used by reliable sources — are generally mentioned in the leads of conflicts. (e.g. I added the common name. I didn't add the military names.)

Again, apologies if there was any miscommunication. That's why I wrote in the edit summary that anyone was free to revert if there was a legitimate objection to the edit. (Since I already reverted once.)

I didn't see or interpret it as edit warring. (Since I thought there was only one legitimate, intentional reversion.) It was miscommunication between editors in a highly trafficked and rapidly edited article. KlayCax (talk) 01:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

•   Already blocked ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Partially blocked for 72 hours. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:20, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Ram Nath Kovind (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:56, 6 October 2023 (UTC) ""
2. 16:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC) ""
3. 06:26, 4 October 2023 (UTC) ""
4. 17:08, 28 September (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:10, 4 October 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Ram Nath Kovind."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:09, 4 October 2023 (UTC) "/* October 2023 */ new section"

Edit warring in other articles

1. (Maratha (caste) - [44] [45] [46].

Comments:

Slow burn edit war by caste POV pusher. Keeps on adding caste (Koli) in a BLP contravening self-identification policy per WP:CASTEID. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:18, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet, opened an SPI here. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:22, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, I don't think a permalink to a 2012 discussion that once happened on a topic-specific noticeboard with a participation of ~10 users is strong and helpful enough to be cited repeatedly in this way. If there's something in a current policy or guideline about it, just link to that please. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Well WP:CASTEID is the basis and still cited / enforced consensus in relation to caste in BLPs of Indian nationals, hence why it was discussed in the topic-specific noticeboard. Besides, caste is a contentious topic in the Indian subcontinent, so have to be cautious mentioning it even if we want to disregard that consensus. I see a parallel to the WP:BLPLIST policy, an excerpt from which states - "Categories regarding religious beliefs (or lack of such) or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief (or lack of such) or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources.". Ergo, 'self-identification' is necessary in contentious topics. Regards. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:32, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

  Blocked – for a period of two weeks under CASTE for long-term edit warring without discussion in this and several other articles in topic area. Daniel Case (talk) 06:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Kevin Michael Richardson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Austin012599 (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

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: Austin012599 re-added the terms that are already quite redundant to the pages related to actors who do voice work for numerous animated series despite the fact that it covers live action and voice-over roles. 148.255.239.229 (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Looks like 1 revert. You reverted their edit with no explanation or edit summary. They haven't been warned. You haven't attempted to resolve the issue using the talk page. You didn't notify them about this report. --Onorem (talk) 17:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

•   No violation. Bbb23 (talk) 17:41, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Comment: There is a topic filed under discussion that the term actor covers voice work and apparently the user keeps adding the rather redundant term to the articles he was involved in. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers/Archive_16#Is_%22voice_actor%22_a_separate_role_from_%22actor%22? 148.255.239.229 (talk) 18:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
    • Editors shouldn't be expected to know about a handful of comments on a WikiProject's 2 1/2 year old archived discussion. In any case, that doesn't make this report any more valid. If you had explained your objection, they might have edited differently. --Onorem (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Page: Ardıçlı, Pülümür (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Semsûrî (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)