Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
    Shortcuts
    Update this page

    This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule.

    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:174.196.104.11 reported by User:Wowzers122 (Result: /23 blocked from both articles for a week)

    [edit]

    Page: 2024 United States presidential election in Kentucky (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Letcher County, Kentucky (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: 174.196.104.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [1] [2]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [3] - Dec 31 "these are the correct results according to Dave Leips"
    2. [4] - Dec 31 "Per source of Dave Leips"
    3. [5] - Jan 1 "These are the correct results per Dave Leip’s. Don’t undo this edit again."
    4. [6] - Jan 1
    5. [7] - Jan 1 "these are the correct results per Dave Leip’s. Don’t undo this edit again."
    6. [8] - Jan 1 "per source of Dave Leip’s"
    7. [9] - Jan 1 "These are the correct results per source of Dave Leip’s"

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

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

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

    Comments:
    All the differences on both pages concern whether to use the numbers from a website called Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections (which cites the Kentucky State Board of Elections as its data source) or the Official 2024 General Election Results provided by the Kentucky State Board of Elections. The number for "other" votes on the page before the edit warring was 126 for Letcher County (per election board), which the IP insists on changing to 146 (per Dave Leip).

    I should also note that @Mad Mismagius: reverted all but one and the current IP edits on these pages without warning the user or attempting to engage in talk page discussion. I made one revert and left a warning on the user's talk page, who later reverted my revert.

    Also, there are two other IPs (now dormant) that made identical edits on these pages with similar edit summaries. One on Dec 27 "Correct Letcher County votes" and another on Dec 29 "these are the correct results according to Dave Leips". Wowzers122 (talk) 05:52, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked – for a period of a week 174.196.104.0/23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · block user · block log) from articles. Daniel Case (talk) 06:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have had to deal with this IP address as well. The issue seems to be that they are conflating "third party candidates" with write-in votes. Chalandray (talk) 22:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:174.93.89.27 reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: 1 week partial block for both parties)

    [edit]

    Page: Salim Halali (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 174.93.89.27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 18:44, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Source is about Bone."
    2. Consecutive edits made from 18:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC) to 18:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 18:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Well, if the dispute is about sources, this peer-reviewed academic source should settle the matter."
      2. 18:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC) ""
    3. 18:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266885362 by M.Bitton (talk) - No need for the talk page. Just click on the link for Bône in this article."
    4. 16:29, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266617369 by M.Bitton (talk) - Be that as it may, it is now known as Annaba."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 18:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Salim Halali."
    2. 18:45, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "/* January 2025 */"

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    This edit partially reverts the biography to a previous state. And anyway, I blocked you for edit warring, not 3RR. PhilKnight (talk) 19:34, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes it does revert it to the stable and well sourced version (the one that actually makes sense, given that Annaba has been known as such for centuries). For the rest, no comment. M.Bitton (talk) 19:37, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Horsechestnut reported by User:CurryTime7-24 (Result: Protected)

    [edit]

    Page: Eagle Rock, Los Angeles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 23:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266922310 by CurryTime7-24 (talk)"
    2. 20:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1266911668 by CurryTime7-24 I am in the process of deleting unnecessary text so that what remains is referenced, cited information, but can't complete this process if you keep on deleting my work before I have finished editing. Please give me time to complete my edits. Horsechestnut. Please do not delete this User talk:CurryTime7-24

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 21:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Eagle Rock, Los Angeles."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    User has also been using the account Cjcooper to pursue this edit war. They have been warned on both accounts. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Page protected – One week by User:Daniel Quinlan per a complaint at WP:RFPP. EdJohnston (talk) 03:09, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Hippo43, IP 2a01:4b00:b90c:6700:* reported by User:Mathnerd314159 (Result: Blocked from article for a week)

    [edit]

    Page: French mother sauces (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Hippo43 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 2A01:4B00:B90C:6700:6C91:81FE:34E1:80E0 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), also 2A01:4B00:B90C:6700:A9B8:61A6:B4BA:3525 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and other IP's with the same prefix

    Previous version reverted to (Hippo43): Special:Diff/1261641655

    Previous version reverted to (IP): Special:Diff/1262083607

    Diffs of Hippo43's reverts:

    1. Special:Diff/1266765594
    2. Special:Diff/1263376343
    3. Special:Diff/1262689543
    4. Special:Diff/1262458566

    Diffs of IP's reverts:

    1. Special:Diff/1266834913 (probably same IP)
    2. Special:Diff/1263386233
    3. Special:Diff/1262743746
    4. Special:Diff/1262467272

    There are a few more, just look at the recent history which is nothing but reverts.

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1262739350 (IP), Special:Diff/1237541954 (Hippo43, the IP warned them)

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Special:Diff/1261449232, discussion is still on talk at Talk:French_mother_sauces#Table_of_sauces

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to Hippo43's talk page: Special:Diff/1266963033

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to IP's talk page: Special:Diff/1266962827, Special:Diff/1266962969

    Comments:
    I made the table, so of course I would like to keep it in, but at this point neither the IP nor Hippo43 seems interested in a discussion at all. Please end this month-long edit war. :-( Mathnerd314159 (talk) 00:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Blocked – for a period of one week Both editors, from the article. Daniel Case (talk) 05:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:EclipseExpress reported by User:JlACEer (Result: Blocked from moving pages for 2 weeks)

    [edit]

    Page: Floorless Coaster (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 01:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "EclipseExpress moved page Floorless Coaster to Floorless Roller Coaster over redirect: The title was "Floorleess Roller Coaster" before it was changed to "Floorless Coaster". "

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    This is a new user who needs to be warned about moving pages without discussion. I need help restoring this. There seems to have been an intermediate move to a misspelled page, so I cannot restore it to the way it was. —JlACEer (talk) 02:58, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Reverting a revert that explicitly pointed towards WP:RMUM is a problem. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:GachaDog reported by User:64.32.125.197 (Result: Reporting editor blocked 48 hours)

    [edit]

    Page: Crunchyroll (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: GachaDog (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. 17:06, 15 December 2024 "We don’t need an owners field to put bigger companies as the owner"
    2. 15:03, 25 December 2024
    3. 03:01, 28 December 2024
    4. 06:43, 31 December 2024
    5. 03:36, 3 January 2025 "Because you can’t use the owner field to indicate top-level ownership if it differs from the direct parent. Crunchy roll is a Joint venture of SPT and Aniplex"



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: December 2024

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

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

    Comments: Hello, here I have a user who still removing the infobox field from articles related to streaming services, media companies, conglomerates, etc., without reason, explicitly saying that it should not be used to indicate which top-level property if It is different from the parent company if all this is demonstrated with or without sources than if they actually own the same company. 64.32.125.197 (talk) 07:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Because Crunchyroll is under Crunchyroll LLC. and is a “JOINT VENTURE” of both Sony Pictures Television and Aniplex. SPT is under Sony Pictures Entertainment which is under Sony Entertainment which is under Sony of America and the parent compamy Sony corporation. Aniplex is under Sony Music Japan which is under Sony Corporation. So yeah, Sony is not the direct owner of Crunchyroll. It’s owned through a joint venture, so that’s why i removed sony from owners field GachaDog (talk) 05:14, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 48 hours First, Gacha's reported reverts are a) stale at this point and b) spread out over a period of several days so they would not have been a violation even if reported in a timely fashion. Second, in the interim, 64.32 has clearly violated 3RR in the last day or so. Since editing on all infoboxes is a contentious topic, I have blocked them for 48 hours and alerted them to CTOPS (I left a notice on the article's talk page a while back, also). Daniel Case (talk) 05:36, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:76.68.24.171 reported by User:Migfab008 (Result: Blocked 3 months)

    [edit]

    Page: Khulna Division (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 76.68.24.171 (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. [12]
    2. [13]
    3. [14]
    4. [15]


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

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

    Comments: This user keeps making disruptive edits in Khulna Division. Also, this IP address is violating WP:NPA by making personal attacks. Also violating block evasion as well. I warned the IP address to the talk page but did not respond (see WP:COMMUNICATION). Further information will be discussed on the ANI noticeboard. Migfab008 (talk) 13:11, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    — Cerium4B—Talk? • 17:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    I'm not going to block for one edit; what does it mean? A machine translation of the subject header works, but I tried the body and got nothing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Wait I’m translating it. — Cerium4B—Talk? • 17:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    “Breed of a beggar, dog. Breed of Bengali medium. You know nothing about wiki edit(with slangs), why have you come here? Tell me Where do u live? Otherwise I’ll call army and peel your skin. Breed of roadside slum.”
    N.B chasa, baal has no English translation but a serious slangs in Bengali language, I’ve not added this in the translation.
    It’s like this @Bbb23 — Cerium4B—Talk? • 17:41, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bbb23,
    again with another IP
    user talk:Cerium4B#Bari koi tor fokirnir jaat? — Cerium4B—Talk? • 17:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's disgusting. Unfortunately, a range block that encompasses both IPs is too wide and has too much collateral damage. I've rev/deleted the posts and semi-protected your Talk page for one day.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Bbb23,
    Thank you so much for your time.
    You gave me a lot of support, and it means a lot. 😊 — Cerium4B—Talk? • 18:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:138.88.222.231 reported by User:Muboshgu (Result: Already blocked)

    [edit]

    Page: Paul Pelosi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: 138.88.222.231 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 17:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Citation"
    2. 17:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Link"
    3. Consecutive edits made from 15:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC) to 15:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 15:38, 3 January 2025 (UTC) ""
      2. 15:40, 3 January 2025 (UTC) ""
      3. 15:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Links"
      4. 15:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Vineyard"
      5. 15:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit California"
      6. 15:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Links"
      7. 15:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Citation"
    4. Consecutive edits made from 15:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC) to 15:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 15:18, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      2. 15:21, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
    5. Consecutive edits made from 18:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC) to 03:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 18:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      2. 18:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      3. 18:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      4. 18:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      5. 18:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      6. 18:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      7. 03:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      8. 03:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
    6. Consecutive edits made from 18:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC) to 17:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 18:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      2. 18:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      3. 18:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      4. 18:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      5. 18:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      6. 19:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      7. 19:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      8. 19:28, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      9. 19:34, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      10. 19:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      11. 23:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      12. 01:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      13. 01:21, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      14. 15:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      15. 15:09, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      16. 15:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      17. 15:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      18. 15:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      19. 15:17, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      20. 15:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      21. 15:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      22. 15:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      23. 15:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      24. 15:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      25. 15:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      26. 15:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      27. 15:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      28. 16:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      29. 16:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      30. 16:20, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      31. 17:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      32. 17:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      33. 17:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      34. 17:26, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      35. 17:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      36. 17:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"
      37. 17:42, 2 January 2025 (UTC) "Edit Career"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 15:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Paul Pelosi."
    2. 17:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Paul Pelosi."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    Comments:

    EW with IDHT and copyvios. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User uses disingenuous edit summaries ("Edit Citation") to reassert edits [16], as noted by the difference between successive attempts [17] (addition of three do-nothing spaces to cite template). signed, Willondon (talk) 18:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:GreenMeansGo reported by User:Iljhgtn (Result: No violation)

    [edit]

    Page: Wounded Knee Massacre (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to: [18]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [24]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [25]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [26]

    Comments: I do not often use ANI, as I feel that it is far preferable to discuss and find a peaceful resolution, but in this case I feel my hand has been forced. I attempted to speak with the edit warring editor many times, and even asked them to self revert on many occassions, both on their own talk page as well as the article in question's talk page. They mockingly said "Have fun I guess." about coming to ANI, though I would have much rather we continued to discuss the subject and the sources in dispute on the talk page. At this point they are 5 edits in to a edit war and I politely stopped at 3 edits so as not to violate WP:3RR. I am a bit surprised it came to this and I apologize in advance to any admin who may now need to block the offending editor and revert to the prior consensus and stable lead on the article which had been present for many months before this editor aggressively became involved just today.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Iljhgtn (talk • contribs)

    • Well, the first edit is just a crappy source that I randomly found pop up in a change on my watchlist. The two edits are consecutive. I have attempted to discuss the issue on the talk page and offer a resolution. But since this seems to be a slow-motion edit war by OP going back months, we may have some OWN issues to unpack. GMGtalk 18:36, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And again, I would just say that any points to be made should be made on the article talk page, but that reverting 5 times (or 4 depending on how you count them), still is in violation of the 3RR rule which is pretty clear and strict. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:41, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I see three reverts, 1. 2, and 3. This maybe could maybe be a revert, depending on how long that source has been sitting in the article and if you're squinting hard enough. Iljhgtn also has made three reverts. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This edit counts as a partial revert not of the full text with all sources included but absolutely includes the primary material being discussed in the talk page. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:45, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That was captured in my first diff. Consecutive edits are a single revert. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The request currently stands out there for the editor to self-revert and for the discussion to resume on the article talk page. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh good lord. You've been warring on this since at least 2023. GMGtalk 18:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Where have you been in this discussion since you mentioned that this article is on your talk page? My first seeing you there was today, and you proceeded to force a new version of the lead and revert in rapid succession to your desired version. Again, I am happy to discuss this on the article talk page if you would self-revert and continue the discussion there. Iljhgtn (talk) 18:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If you dispute a single source, I think that made sense for removal, due to the letter submission aspect of it, but in general I think it would have been best to discuss further on the talk page as well as maybe provide some reliable sources of your own or dispute the content of the other sources at the point of the talk page, and not simply to angrily enter into a series of reverts.
    Here were some of the other sources by the way, and I don't think you've disputed the reliability of these: LA Times, Rapid City Journal, The Oregonian.
    Though you've now removed all of these from the article. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Cool. Go...like...get consensus. Just because you made a change and reverted it for a year and half doesn't mean you have consensus. GMGtalk 19:04, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Consensus is not always clear, and does not always merely side with a majority. Consensus is also reflected at least in part by reflecting what the reliable sources say. All I have asked is that we have a discussion around the reliable sources, and you self-revert in the meantime. Your response has been only to be dismissive and to not engage with the point raised, which is that we must WP:STICKTOTHESOURCES. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a partial revert of a November 30 edit. I would not consider this part of 3RR for today. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Tamilfilmsbuff reported by User:Kailash29792 (Result: No violation)

    [edit]

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

    User being reported: Tamilfilmsbuff (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 05:04, 4 January 2025 (UTC) to 05:04, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
      1. 05:04, 4 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1262246919 by Srivin (talk)"
      2. 05:04, 4 January 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1262236945 by Kailash29792 (talk)"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    Also at Dharmam Engey. His edits don't match the sources, and reverts good edits that do. Also biased towards the subject as he removes mixed/negative reviews, as seen in Kunkhumam. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    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. There's only two, their first edits to the article in a couple of months. And, if there are issues at other articles, maybe this is properly handled at AN/I. Daniel Case (talk) 05:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    User:justthefacts reported by User:The Cheesedealer (Result: Warned user(s))

    [edit]

    Page: 2025 New Orleans truck attack

    User being reported: User:justthefacts

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 02:07, 04 January 2025
    2. 18:01, 03 January 2025
    3. 07:40, 03 January 2025

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [27], the whole section

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

    Comments:

    User insists on adding irrelevant material in the lede. Irrelevancy aside, he fails to get consensus to include the challenged material (by 2 users at least in the talk page) per WP:ONUS and edit-wars instead to get it in.

    I'd love to add also that he argued that the religion of the suspect in the lede is Absolutely relevant to the potential motive for the attack and therefore in this[29] edit summary which can only imply that he believes that being a Muslim is enough of a motive to commit terrorist attacks.

    User:Andra Febrian reported by User:HiLux duck

    [edit]

    Page: Talk:Subcompact crossover SUV (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
    Previous version: [30]
    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [31]

    Comments: This editor has reverted many useful edits, and most of my edits, other users' edits, without explaining their reverting of edits with citations [32].

    User:إيان reported by User:AndreJustAndre (Result: )

    [edit]

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

    Previous version reverted to: [33]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    • Note: WP:1RR is active on this page.
    1. [34] (removes 1885 which I added)
    2. [35] (removes 1885 and the quote "The man credited with coining the word ‘Zionism’ in 1885, Nathan Birnbaum," which I added)

    See [36], [37]

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

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Zionism#§_Terminology

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

    Comments:

    Note attempt to invite user to self-revert 1RR violation. Yes, consensus required is also active on this page, but 1RR is still being violated here. Andre🚐 07:59, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=1267314658"