Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Page

King Kong vs Godzilla (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Giantdevilfish (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 16:06, 3 April 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 948857574 by Giantdevilfish"
2. 15:54, 2 April 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 948860417 by Giantdevilfish"
3. 15:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 948861102 by Giantdevilfish"

Comments:

• User added a whole bunch of random pictures of Godzilla to the article that clearly fail WP:IRELEV. They are just random shots of the character from the movie trailer that offer no commentary or relevancy to the article and have nothing to do with the sections in question (ie shot of Godzilla walking in forest under the Preservation section). Despite my trying to reason with him, my edits are constantly reverted.Giantdevilfish (talk) 13:49, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
• The user Giantdevilfish is the one who started undoing my edits for no reason not the other way around as he wants you to believe. Jackiechanbruceleekungfu (talk) 13:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
• (Non-administrator comment) The reported user has cast aspersions against the filing editor and attempted to remove this report from the noticeboard. --MrClog (talk) 14:05, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
•   Blocked – for a period of 36 hours for disruptive editing and interfering with this report.Acroterion (talk) 15:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Page: 2001 in British television (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 82.3.151.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

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

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

Comments:

As I know that IP, the IP from UK repeatedly reverted their edits, which is repeatedly adding Daily Mail and it is not the source to do so, it say that DailyMail does count as a reliable source. But as a result per WP:DAILYMAIL, it says, "The use of Daily Mail as a reference is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist". 2600:6C4E:580:A:B08F:1665:9707:EE06 (talk) 00:26, 4 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

• Result: 2001 in British television has been semiprotected one month. The Daily Mail is not usable a source here. EdJohnston (talk) 01:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Page

Yogeshwar Dutt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Doremon9087 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 06:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 948880246 by Fylindfotberserk (talk)"
2. 15:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 948879231 by Fylindfotberserk (talk)"
3. 15:10, 3 April 2020 (UTC) "Undid revision 947762837 by Fylindfotberserk (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 15:13, 3 April 2020 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Yogeshwar Dutt. (TW)"
2. 15:18, 3 April 2020 (UTC) "Final warning: Vandalism on Yogeshwar Dutt. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

User keeps on adding caste of the subject when there is an established consensus that caste of a WP:BLP requires self-identification [7]. I've explained to them multiple times in the edit summaries and their talk page. This particular user is known for their Brahmin caste POV push and have been reverted and warned by many users besides me.

Pinging Utcursch since one of the discussion happened in his t/p here. Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:12, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Pinging other users familiar with this topic @Sitush, Paisarepa, RegentsPark, NitinMlk, Alivardi, Kuru, Ifnord, Arjayay, and Fowler&fowler:. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

• Fylindfotberserk, they are a suspected sock of the disruptive, blocked editor Pandit9087108. So I've filed a relevant SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pandit9087108. - NitinMlk (talk) 10:45, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
• A simple glance at the user's talk page is more than enough for me to attached a WP:NOTHERE to them. Ifnord (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
• I'm seeing a persistent problem with not including verifiable sources, with an instance as recently as this morning.[8] This is despite previously receiving a final warning for this behaviour (as well as several more warnings since).
  Alivardi (talk) 17:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Page: Second Battle of Quảng Trị (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Đông Minh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [9]
2. [10]
3. [11]
4. [12]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [13] warning was deleted by Đông Minh (Oh ! Phải, bạn là thành viên wikipedia, tôi cũng vậy, bạn lấy tư cách gì mà đặt bảng báo bất lịch sự đó Đông Minh (talk) 13:07, 5 April 2020 (UTC))Reply

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [14] and revision summaries. Đông Minh left this message in Vietnamese on my Talk Page: [15]

Comments:
Tôi vi phạm 3 lần nhưng bạn cũng vi phạm 3 lần, bạn vi phạm trước. Và bạn lấy quyền gì mà cảnh báo tôi. Chúng ta sẽ tập trung vào nội dung tranh chấp chứ. Đông Minh (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mztourist#C%E1%BB%ADa_Vi%E1%BB%87t

Page

Rapunzel (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

188.77.231.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

See page history, it is obvious.

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 16:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Rapunzel (disambiguation). (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Not a 3RR violation, slow moving edit war that resumed immediately after 3 month protect on this page expired. Same user as before as is obvious, different IP. Last was blocked for edit warring. See previous report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive400#User:188.77.231.152 reported by User:Geraldo Perez (Result: Blocked 1 week). User still ignores messages and refuses to communicate. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:49, 5 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Page: Ali al-Ridha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Hasan al-Askari (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: AmirsamanZare (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [16], [17]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [18]
2. [19]
3. [20]
4. [21]
5. [22]
6. [23]

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

Comments:
User arbitrarily wipes sourced content. According to his inflammatory attacks on my talk page, it's apparently just because it makes scholars he admires look bad. I asked him to prove his claims that the content on the two pages were malicious lies, as he inferred, which he ignored and persisted in wiping the content. — LissanX (talk) 01:26, 6 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Page

Brisbane Transport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

EamonM25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 08:29, 6 April 2020 (UTC) "This is the final time I will edit this and this is now on the version it was on prior to the editing spree which nobody had come up to me to talk about. Cya Davey2010"
2. 12:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC) "updated name sourcing, changed it back to yours just so you could see this edit before I put it up full time. Overall delivery, livery status and depots have been removed and only the name, image and fleet number remain as some buses had the same livery."
3. 12:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC) "Sourcing for the Special Livery Section"
4. 3:51, 5 April 2020 "(updated name sourcing, changed it back to yours just so you could see this edit before I put it up full time. Overall delivery, livery status and depots have been removed and only the name, image and fleet number remain as some buses had the same livery.)"
5. 13:24, 5 April 2020 "(Sourcing for the Special Livery Section)"
6. 10:23, 4 April 2020 "(In this, I have changed all issues that you have described to me for this to count. I have kept the fleet list as I believe it adds crucial detail that makes this page one of the most interesting bus pages in Wikipedia. All copyright changes have been made via wikimedia commons and shall be visible by clicking on each individual image.)"
7. 15:25, 3 April 2020 "" (no edit summary)
8. 14:50, 3 April 2020 "" (no edit summary)

12:05, 3 April 2020 "" (no edit summary)

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 10:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on EamonM25. (TW)"
2. 13:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC) "3rr notice"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

User is currently edit warring at Brisbane Transport, I've repeatedly told them to source their content via edit summaries as well as on my talkpage, and even went as far as pasting the entire article to their subpage (User:EamonM25/Brisbane Transport) however none of this has had any effect, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 10:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

It isn't necessary to ban as I already said I have given up editing pages. I understand he has a task to do and I respect that, all, in the end, I was trying to make the page a lot better.