Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:25, 16 June 2012

• WP:AN/3
• WP:AN3
• WP:AN/EW
• WP:ANEW
• WP:AN/3RR

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

Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)

Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Twinkle's ARV can be used on the user's page to more easily report their behavior, including automatic handling of diffs.

User:Alan.Ford.Jn reported by User:Jesuislafete (Result: )

Page: Croat–Bosniak War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Alan.Ford.Jn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:
• 5th revert:
• 6th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:
I've posted here before, but no one responded. I am hoping this time someone will look at this.

User Alan.Ford.Jn has on multiple occasions reverted all edits by by myself and another user to an older version. Note that Alan.Ford.Jn has never used the discussion page to explain their edits. I have made an effort to source all the additions I have added so user Alan.Ford.Jn could have no excuse to delete my contributions; unfortunately, it has had no effect. In this first reversal user adds the summary "Removal of sourced information" in spite of the "(-2,561)" negative number recorded in the edit history. In fact, looking at the page's edit history shows consistent negative numbers in accordance to the removal of text: (-1,255)‎ , (-1,656) , (-3,499)‎, (-1,810) ‎, (-2,250)‎ . In another edit Alan.Ford.Jn wrote: "Encyclopedia of Human Rights, Second Edition says nothing about attack within Kakanj?! provide online WP:RS source)", which although somewhat difficult to discern their language, appears to be mocking the Encyclopedia of Human Rights as an unreliable source that does not even mention the attack in Kakanj (simple Google search showed that it did.) Another round of reverting has Alan.Ford.Jn saying "are you kidding me? you haven't even read the article, haven't you realised that you put wrong paragraph into wrong section with false data? April 1993 comes after December 1992, not before?!" Even though I find it difficult to understand the language, user Alan.Ford has not attempted to use the discussion page to discuss what article, what false data, and what other problems he seems to have with additional edits by other users. He made just one post on 10 June, which provided no insight or explanation on the article. It consisted of a few brief sentences attacking me by saying my edits were "nationalistic propaganda".

I even left a note on Alan.Ford.Jn's talk page but they never responded. From April 18, 2012 to June 10, Alan.Ford.Jn has made 13 edits, all on the Croat-Bosniak War page; the last edit before April 18 was on 20 September 2011. I don't know why they only concentrate on reversing on page, and although I don't think they are attempting to troll, it is disruptive. --Jesuislafete (talk) 05:11, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

A problem with the edits of Alan.Ford.Jn is that he would do large reverts on ethnically-disputed articles while never commenting on the talk page. Now finally he has left his first talk page comment of 2012, and it is here. The point of his comment is to accuse the editor on the other side of ethnically-motivated edit warring. This is not very satisfying. Alan.Ford.Jn has already been notified under WP:ARBMAC and was blocked for a week back in Augusts 2011 for a similar issue (see his talk page). I think that a topic ban under WP:ARBMAC might be considered but it would need some study of his past edits, which I don't have time for at the moment. EdJohnston (talk) 15:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

His refusal to use the discussion page and sporadic editing history is very strange. As said before, there is a large gap between his edits, and it seems he focuses mostly on reverting things to his pleasure and not the good of the article. --Jesuislafete (talk) 05:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:173.74.164.212 reported by User:Somedifferentstuff (Result: page protected)

Page: Progressive tax (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 173.74.164.212 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Talk page discussion:

Comments:

I'm trying to nip this edit-warring in the bud. I reported this user less than a week ago, that case is currently third from the top of this page. This user is relatively new to Misplaced Pages (around 50 edits) and doesn't understand how WP:OR works, nor does he appear willing to learn. (His last comment on the talk page included, quote: "I may not have[REDACTED] editing experience (irrelevant), but I actually have an undergrad in Economics. Why[REDACTED] let's economic illiterates like you edit is beyond me.") An administrator placed a note on his talk page after my last submission. That post can be seen here The other part of his reverting is made up of the re-adding of material to a section that is tagged with a "pro and con list" tag, not understanding that the point of the tag is to incorporate that material into the article. He has subsequently posted an edit warring warning on my talk page. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 09:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

User Somedifferentstuff fails to understand he is engaging in the same behavior he is accusing me off

He unilaterally engages in removing sourced material. He started with this edit then went on to unilaterally remove material that previously existed as a consensus by declaring all by himself "Need a better source" without ever bothering to discuss it on talk page. Currently he continues to remove material backed by 7-8 sources. It's plainly obvious he hasn't read all the sources listed. I tried to explain to user he needs to educate himself better in economics. His inability to understand basic economics is not my problem. Please check entire history for confirmation. - 173.74.164.212 (talk) 02:37, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Since you're both at fault, I full protected the page. Seek dispute resolution. With regards to 173 specifically, Misplaced Pages is a collaborative project. If you continue to insist that you're right, he's wrong, you have a degree, he's an idiot, it's far easier for me to simply block you from editing and unprotect the page. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:53, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

• Both at fault??? Did you look at the talk page? I explained there that the first bullet point, which has 3 sources, violates WP:OR. The first two sources don't even mention progressive taxation, the topic of the article. The third source doesn't list a page number. The next 2 bullet points don't even mention progressive taxation, another violation of WP:OR which User:173.74.164.212 has stuck back into the article. He also reverted material that had been incorporated into the article from the section tagged with a "pro and con list" tag. Don't take my word for it, investigate it. I am very disappointed in how you guys have handled this. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 09:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC) --- I have added another comment to the article talk page. Somedifferentstuff (talk) 10:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I must have missed the part of WP:EW where it says that as long as you're right, and as long as you start discussion, then you're exempt. Although you are indeed a party to the edit-war, you were not blocked at this time. Rather than misread the policy and rail away because both of the edit-warriors were not blocked, why not read it now? After all, blocking is a last resort - if you came here expecting a block, then perhaps you have the wrong idea about them? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Bozo1789 and User:Nmate reported by User:Canuckian89 (Result: Both blocked.)

Users being reported: Bozo1789 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Nmate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I stumbled across these two people while using Huggle. In the past day, seem to have nothing else to do but continuously revert each others edits across some Eastern Europe related articles. I cannot say exactly which info is correct and which should be removed, but I do know that these two are far past WP:3RR against each other. Canuck 09:53, June 14, 2012 (UTC)

Reverting samples below

• 1:
• 2:
• 3:

Comments: I am not personally involved in this, but merely acting as a third party in reporting their edit war. Canuck 09:53, June 14, 2012 (UTC)

Relevant links: Bozo1789 (talk) 09:54, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Bozo1789 is an obvious sockpuppet of User:Iaaasi whose edits are possible to revert on sight under WP:BAN. I am reverting edits made by the previously confirmed socpuppets of the site-banned user Iaaasi , and Bozo1789 began restoring them one by one with which he betrayed that he is also a sockpupet of Iaaasi. Additioanally, Bozo1789 does not even deny that he is a sock of Iaaasi. for more information, see:.--Nmate (talk) 09:55, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

"When reverting edits, care should be taken not to reinstate material that may be in violation of such core policies as neutrality, verifiability, and biographies of living persons". Ada Kaleh was never part of Serbia, it is not a verifiable information, but a false one

Nmate also restores vandalism [http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ilona_Szil%C3%A1gyi&curid=21488719&diff=497527122&oldid=497526613}

"Anyone is free to revert any edits made in defiance of a ban. By banning an editor, the community has determined that the broader problems, due to their participation, outweigh the benefits of their editing, and their edits may be reverted without any further reason. This does not mean that obviously helpful edits (such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism) must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor, but the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert." Bozo1789 (talk) 09:58, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 31 hours for Bozo1789, and 72 hours for Nmate, who has an extensive history of blocks for various reasons, including edit warring. No evidence is given to support the claim of sockpuppetry, and even if there is such evidence, edit warring on such a scale without taking other action (such as a SPI report) is not constructive. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:25, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

User: Crzyclarks reported by User:Scientiom (Result:3 blocked )

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

Previous version reverted to: The following is the version from before beginning of edit war on Marriage today:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk-page discussion was ongoing when edit-warring began - ; Another editor had also asked him to stop edit warring: User_talk:Crzyclarks#Edit-warring

Comments:

• Additionally, it should be noted that the user in question has a long history of edit-warring to push his views / how he wants an article to be across as can be seen on his talk page

As I recall, when a new edit is undone, you're supposed to take it to the talk page before reverting it. You didn't do that, so I reckon you broke the rule. Crzyclarks (talk) 12:14, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

That's not related to the 3RR rule in that I have not broken it. And you have continuously, across several articles, in multiple instances, with several other editors, reverted the edits of others to suit your views. --Scientiom (talk) 12:19, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it's related. You shouldn't have reverted, but gone to the talk page. To suit the facts, although being right is not the point, in most instances recent edits should have been taken to the talk page, as in this case, rather than getting into an edit war. Crzyclarks (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll also add, that I was right in the instance that I was blocked, it was an obvious breaking of rules. Regarding the warning on Kony 2012, it wasn't an edit war, but more of a series of edits that compromised on what the other person said. Crzyclarks (talk) 12:26, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Did someone forget to add User:Knowz to this report? All three of you are, by definition, edit-warring, and all 3 of you will be blocked. Before I do so, is there any good reason why you have left User:Knowz out of this report? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 48 hours Note: the 3rd warrior was blocked, but unblocked as they had not been appropriately warned (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:38, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Rolandhelper reported by User:Achowat (Result: 48 hours)

Page: Misplaced Pages:Barnstars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Rolandhelper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert: ***

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: WT:WPWPA#...

Comments: ***This Diff gets an asterisk because it's not from User:Rolandhelper but from an IP. An IP with no other edits and reverting to the same strange addition. I'm not sure how this notice board handles generally that, but I know that if it looks like a duck... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Achowat (talk • contribs)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Normally, I'd block 24 hours for this, but logging out and continuing to revert doesn't garner any favors from me. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:2.25.186.230 reported by User:Miesianiacal (Result: )

Page: Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2.25.186.230 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (see also: 2.27.81.7 (talk · contribs), 2.27.80.162 (talk · contribs), 2.27.90.175 (talk · contribs), and 163.167.171.212 (talk · contribs))

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert: 22:22, 13 June 2012‎ (reverting this edit)
• 2nd revert: 11:42, 14 June 2012 (reverting this edit)
• 3rd revert: 21:40, 14 June 2012 (reverting parts of this and this edit)
• 4th revert: 22:04, 14 June 2012 (reverting this edit)
• 5th revert: 15:26, 15 June 2012 (reverting this edit)
• 6th revert: 20:06, 15 June 2012 (reverting this edit)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

• Anon user was made aware of WP:3RR at this time (20:33, 30 May 2012).

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• between 21:55, 7 June 2012‎ and 15:51, 14 June 2012‎
• A direct request for participation in discussion was made at 15:44, 14 June 2012‎.
• 20:12, 15 June 2012

Comments:
This user has shown a consistent pattern of reverting (often with edit summaries consisting of only or little more than "rv" (, , , , ) and declining participation in talk page discussions.

This has now spread to other articles as the anon seems to be following my edits to start more edit wars (adamantly refusing to follow the editing cycle, including starting or engaging in discussion at talk pages, per WP:BRD); the latest at Vincent Massey. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 22:35, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Irvi Hyka reported by User:Athenean (Result:72 hrs and ARBMAC restrictions logged )

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

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: Bright line violation of 3RR, 4 identical reverts of this edit on June 10, all in less than 24 hours. 3RR vios don't come any clearer than this. What makes it worse is that he thinks he is fighting for the WP:TRUTH . Attempts at discussion by this user are perfunctory at best , and he anyway reverts even after I initiated the discussion . User has also been edit-warring across multiple articles, as detailed here Misplaced Pages:ANI#User:Irvi_Hyka_for_the_third_time_in_recent_weeks. In addition to a block, a formal warning of ARBMAC sanctions is in order.

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours It should be noted that the editor HAS received formal ARBMAC warning in February 2012, and has now been placed on formal restrictions not to break WP:1RR or move any related articles (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:31, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

User:XB70Valyrie reported by User:AdventurousSquirrel (Result: Not blocked; dispute resolution taking place)

Pages: Political activities of the Koch family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Koch family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: XB70Valyrie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

On Koch family page

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:

On Political activities of the Koch family page

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning given by Arthur Rubin:

Section on talk page with attempts to resolve dispute:

Comments:

User:XB70Valyrie originally attempted to add a controversy section into the Koch family page. He was involved in an edit war there and it was determined that, regardless of other problems, the content wasn't relevant to the page. He moved on to the Political activities of the Koch family article and added his controversy section in. Following the bold, revert, discuss cycle, I reverted it and asked to begin discussion on the talk page. He immediately reverted me to add it back in, but I left it so as to not be pulled into an edit war. While I made attempts at civil discussion, he reverted Arzel twice when Arzel tried to take out the section so that it could be discussed first.

On the talk page for Political activities of the Koch page, he made several personal attacks and accused other editors of edit warring and filibustering. He continually accused me of changing my argument 'over and over' when I had only made one simple argument that he did not responded to. He has been more and more hostile with each edit he makes and is throwing a lot of accusations around. He posted a warning on my talk page about edit warring even though I only reverted him once, and it was to initiate the talk page discussion. His actions have been the opposite of civil and I believe he should be blocked, at least temporarily, to cool off. It might also be beneficial to block him from editing the pages he has been warring on. In total, he has reverted 4 different editors to add the same controversy section into the article. I've done my best to be civil but he is throwing out a lot of attacks and accusations. I hope the evidence speaks for itself. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 00:55, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I am an uninvolved and topic neutral third party who found this dispute by having Arzel's talk on my watch list. I just want to add that I endorse the statement above - there are seriously WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:AGF violations. I also want to add that the editor in question did in fact breach 3RR at least on Political_activities_of_the_Koch_family, but Squirrel seems to have misunderstood 3RR and only provided three diffs. The editor is at 5RR by my reading. SÆdon 01:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

There's no doubt he's edit warring, but today's (i.e., the last 24 hour's) count is only 3 reverts each. He violated WP:3RR on Koch family a day or two few days ago. I was going to report him, but decided not to, because I would have been away from my computer for 6 hours after the report. Perhaps I was wrong. There were clearly 4 reverts on Koch family during June 13, 2012 (UTC). — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:57, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I might have read the timestamps wrong. I'll take your word for it because I'm too lazy to doublecheck atm :). SÆdon 02:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

• Not blocked. XB70Valyrie did violate 3RR at Political activities of the Koch family yesterday (15 June). However, since then, the user has not edited either of these problematic pages - blocking the user now might not be the best course of action, as the edit war seems to have calmed down a little. I notice that a dispute resolution case has been opened, which should help matters: if he is willing to negotiate this dispute, it would help to have him able to edit (and we may find that dispute resolution is successful). Nevertheless, XB70Valyrie's overall attitude to this dispute has been very negative; if dispute resolution fails and XB70Valyrie continues to adopt such an attitude, it might be worth taking the issues to WP:ANI. I would advise everyone else involved to remain civil and urge people to focus solely on the content disputed, rather than the conduct of other editors, during discussion. ItsZippy 17:18, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

User:24.183.49.183 reported by User:O.Koslowski (Result: blocked for 24 horus)

Page: Mark Weber (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 24.183.49.183 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Please see the whole talk page.

Comments:
The IHR is well known for its denial pamphlets returning to the holocaust, and Mark Weber as its director has made several revisionist publications. He is an important piece of the extreme right. The IP's reversals made him seem like an ordinary guy who just happens to be the director of the IHR. The IP has been reverted by several editors and still pretends it's just me who has a problem there.

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours ItsZippy 14:38, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Crzyclarks reported by User:Knowz (Result: 1 week)

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

Previous version reverted to: (I'm not sure what this means)

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: I have asked both (see below) the warring editors to cease on their respective talk pages, and am not going to get involved in this conflict (see below).

Comments:
This has been going on for a while now, User:Crzyclarks and User:Scientiom (the latter is also on the verge of breaking 3RR - having reverted thrice) have been edit warring on Marriage even before and got blocked for it - indeed my involvement last time got me blocked as well (later unblocked on appeal). This time I have stayed out (I accidently reverted an edit because of Twinkle but I'm not going to get involved in this, considering what happened last time) and warned both of the mentioned editors to cease the edit-warring, but this continues despite my efforts. --~Knowz 17:43, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

It was only 3 reverts, then I went to the talk page. One of them was not really a revert, as I took the person's objection into account and compromised on the wording. Crzyclarks (talk) 17:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Crzyclarks, you can't just game the system like that - what is happening is indeed edit-warring and it needs to cease. --~Knowz 17:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't gaming the system. Specifically, the first revert listed there isn't a revert. Since they insisted on that wording, when my block expired I just added some information in so that it's accurate. Crzyclarks (talk) 17:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

The aggravating factor is that Crzyclarks already has two blocks for edit warring on Homosexuality, Same-sex marriage and related articles. He started edit warring immediately after his last 48 hours block expired. The new block should be at least 1 week long.--В и к и T 18:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Well my edit was correct in Homosexuality, the edit I kept reverting was synthesising and the current version is what I was reverting to and got banned for. I didn't start edit warring, I kept the wording that they wanted but added a couple of things so that what was being said was not false, but fact. Crzyclarks (talk) 18:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

As I recall, I'm not banned from editing on things that I was previously banned for. Crzyclarks (talk) 18:25, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

• Blocked for a period of 1 week. Straight off a 2 day block into an edit war again? Not happening. Black Kite (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

User:HacksBack reported by User:Saedon (Result: 31h)

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

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:
• 5th Revert after being notified about report

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: This all happened very quickly and I have not had time to engage in talk page discussion yet. I have started a discussion at Talk:Hijama#Where_to_begin.... WP:CIR may be an issue here, as the user has left vandalism warnings on my talk page as well as the article talk page

Comments:
This user is attempting to add poorly sourced, POV information that is likely WP:OR about a related but separate topic to this page and has been reverted by myself, User:Bobrayner and User:A13ean.

SÆdon 20:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

• Blocked for a period of 31 hours. Black Kite (talk) 21:19, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

User:74.111.4.108 reported by User:JohnBlackburne (Result: )

Page: Son of Man (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 74.111.4.108 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

• 1st revert:
• 2nd revert:
• 3rd revert:
• 4th revert:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Son of man#Far too few secondary sources Comments:

--JohnBlackburne_deeds 21:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring