Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:26, 1 July 2023

• 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:Paul Polimero reported by User:Squared.Circle.Boxing (Result:Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Tom Holland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Paul Polimero (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Previous version reverted to: Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Comments:
User has been edit warring against multiple editors over the last two or three years, regarding the addition of heights in infoboxes. Since February 2022 their efforts have been solely focused on Tom Holland. Other articles include Hailee Steinfeld and El Rubius. – .O. 12:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely. ANEW likely wasn’t the best place to bring this up, given how slow their actions were. But, in total, they’re basically an SPA that doesn’t understand RS that shows up every few months. So, the indef if the best tool available to stop this disruption. Courcelles (talk) 12:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

User:OldSkool01 reported by User:Seasider53 (Result: Partially blocked 72 hours)

Page: He-Man (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ‎OldSkool01 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
At first I was told the content was irrelevent. Then they said the reference wasn’t an RS. Then I used another reference and that too, I was told, wasn’t an RS. Then I was told to use an official Mattel site for a reference. Which I did exactly that. And was then told the official Mattel site I used wasn’t acceptable either. They keep moving the goal posts. So what am I supposed to do? OldSkool01 (talk) 19:33, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I’ve also asked for a list of He-Man/Masters of the Universe sites that are considered RS. And as far I know, there is no list. So how do we decide which ones are an RS and which ones are not? OldSkool01 (talk) 19:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I guess having a discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard can help if the article's talk page (and perhaps an RfC there) is too article-specific. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Why would I need to have a discussion on the noticeboard when I was already told specifically what site is considered an RS? I was told an official “Mattel site”. And I added that. And was still told no. So how is that my fault? OldSkool01 (talk) 20:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Having a discussion could help because there clearly is a disagreement to be resolved. Not on the edit warring noticeboard, though; the messages here are quickly archived. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

In response to "So what am I supposed to do", the answer is "discussing instead of restoring a change others have already objected to", at very least if that happens without any modification. As and are identical, I'm not buying your excuse. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

What excuse? I told you exactly what happened. OldSkool01 (talk) 20:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

The way "So what am I supposed to do?" was asked seemed to imply justification for the edit warring, by describing a situation in which you saw no other option than to edit war. There was no situation justifying an edit war, though. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 72 hours ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Lapsus Linguae reported by User:Headbomb (Result: Page protected for three days)

Page: Beall's List (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162567794 by JayBeeEll (talk) You've reverted three times now, and (it appears) you're an admin! I've responded to your message on my talk page, which is where you should have started. But I'm going out now. Catch you in a few hours."
2. 22:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162561190 by JayBeeEll (talk) You're very "assholish", to quote yourself. In answer to your question, have you checked my edit history? Your next revert will be 3RR."
3. 20:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162535248 by JayBeeEll (talk) How is the "actual edit ridiculous"?! It's a factual edit. Prove me wrong."
4. 13:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Legal threats */ Add note that points out that a *Canadian* publisher uses an *American* spelling for a word in its name."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:53, 29 June 2023 (UTC) on User talk:Lapsus Linguae "Warning: Edit warring on Beall's List."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

LL was quite clear about their intent to pursue the edit war, despite being warned against doing so. And true to their word, rather than engage because they felt they were personally attack when an edit was called ridiculous, again reverted. There's also civility concerns here (nowhere did JayBeeEll call LL an asshole or anything remotly close to that). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I find it ironic that I'm the one who was reported when the person who reported me broke the 3RR rule before I did. I wouldn't call my statements to which you linked any kind of clear intent to edit war; I was just dealing with someone who refused to actually explain his unprovoked characterisation of my good-faith edit as "ridiculous" and who didn't seem to be aware of the 3RR rule. I did actually quote JBL who called another editor an "asshole", so he seems to have quite a reputation for picking fights.

He finally posted to my talk page, as well as reporting me here, so now I have two places where I have to defend myself. If I actually thought my edit would have been controversial I would have posted to the article's talk page (as I've done in other circumstances), but really, that's where JBL should have taken it first rather than making an ad hominem attack on my good-faith edit. But I will take it there now and open yet a third front on which I will have to waste my time.

--Craig (t|c) 07:44, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Page protected by Randykitty for three days. Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:2600:4040:2836:6200:4049:7164:3363:4bfc reported by User:Linkin Prankster (Result: /64 blocked for a week)

Page: List of programs broadcast by The CW (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2600:4040:2836:6200:4049:7164:3363:4bfc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

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

Comments:

An IP editor with IPv6 starting with 2600 keeps restoring his edits despite being reverted by multiple editors on List of programs broadcast by The CW, they've been asked not to many times in edit summaries. Since it's a dynamically shifting IP, attempts to contact it seem to be pointless. Regardless I've warned them on their talk page as required.

I previously requested protection for the page and the IP range was blocked from anonymous editing for a week . However, they've returned to repeating the same behaviour after the block expired. I ask that they be blocked from anonymous editing or the page be protected for a long while, so the editor might be forced to discuss their changes and seek a consensus first. Linkin Prankster (talk) 08:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of one week I have extended it to the /64, which should blunt the effect of the dynamic IP (assuming, of course, that it is one user with an account with the provider, used at the same location). Daniel Case (talk) 17:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:122.171.23.163 reported by User:EEng (Result: Nominator blocked from article for 24 hours; 122.171.16.0/21 blocked for six months)

Page: Harvard College (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 122.171.23.163 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 08:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162632573 by EEng (talk) + The argument is already made on Talk Page. The verdict is not from your dad, but from Supreme Court of the United States. Harvard follows the law or they jo to jail The USA is built on laws if you dont know that. + President elect has already announced on website and video, that Harvard will follow the court or she will be in contempt of court and will go to jail."
2. Consecutive edits made from 08:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC) to 08:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
   1. 08:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "Undid revision 1162628675 by EEng (talk) + It isn't disputed. The verdict is from the Supreme Court of the USA and the loser in this case is Harvard College."
   2. 08:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Cases */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 08:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Admissions case */ new section"
2. 08:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC) "/* Admissions case */ +"

Comments: Sorry, I lost count and made 4 reverts myself. IP doesn't seem to understand how we decide what to include and not include in articles. Couldn't figure out how to get Twinkle to leave an editwarring warning. Also, he's IP hopping as User:122.171.19.134 as well. EEng 08:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Both editors blocked EEng is blocked from the article for 24 hours because, while he usually doesn't edit war (to my knowledge) and did apologize, a fourth revert not justified under 3RRNO cannot be let go. 122.171.16.0/21 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)), on the other hand, just got off a month block apparently connected to socking, so they are blocked for six months now. Daniel Case (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Yasincansahin reported by User:HistoryofIran (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Comments:

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:08, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:187.255.222.128 reported by User:Barry Wom (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: Netflix Animation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 187.255.222.128 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

Persistently adding the same unsourced information both to this page and also List of Warner Bros. Animation productions, Skull Island (TV series) and List of Legendary Television programs. This has been ongoing for some time. Barry Wom (talk) 16:35, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Tvx1 reported by User:192.76.8.65 (Result: No violation)

Page: List of inventors killed by their own invention (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Tvx1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 24th June, Tvx1's 1st attempt at removing stockton Rush from the article

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 25th June, 2nd attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list
2. 25th June, 3rd attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list
3. 29th June, 4th attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list
4. 30th June, 5th attempt at removing Stockton Rush from the list

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Section on their talk page, where they are warned about 3RR and asked to use the talk page rather than edit warring.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Ongoing talk page discussions about Stokton Rush specifically, and broadening the scope of the article more generally, both of which have a significant number of editors supporting inclusion.

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

Comments:

• No violation. I don't see 4 reverts in a 24 hours period, and whilst the edit-warring is not optimal, at least two other editors have reverted more than three times in the same time period. I will keep an eye on the article and will protect it if edit-warring continues. Black Kite (talk) 19:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Delpl257 reported by User:TheClubSilencio (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: S. Epatha Merkerson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Delpl257 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
This user insists on removing any mention of Merkerson's birth name, even when such information is properly sourced. TheClubSilencio (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• The user, who claims to be the subject of the article, has been editing the article disruptively for years. I've therefore indefinitely blocked her. TheClubSilencio, please do not shout in edit summaries.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:58, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Wasn't trying to shout. Just trying to emphasize my point. The lack of boldface or italic options tied my hands, but I can see why it might come across as shouting. Regardless, was I really talking to S. Epatha Merkerson? I just have a hard time believing that she'd care so much about her own Misplaced Pages article. Perhaps it was a rabid fan? TheClubSilencio (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
    • You should almost never use allcaps in edit summaries. Once in a great while, I will capitalize one word for emphasis, e.g., NOT, but, otherwise, it's not good practice. No way of knowing for sure, but my guess is that she is the subject. I don't find it surprising that she "cares" so much about her article. Unfortunately, I've seen this phenomenon repeatedly.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Kuia34 reported by User:Kate the mochii (Result: reporter warned)

Page: Multiplicity (subculture) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Kuia34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments: I have warned them of the three revert already on the main article's talk page. Also, they were reverting my changes on another article I contributed in recently: .Kate the mochii (talk) 23:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Looks like I did not read 3 revert correctly. I missed the part that all the reverts needed to be on the same page... Kate the mochii (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I take full accountability. However when it comes to the edits they made on different articles that I changed I didn't know that they were to ones that made the edits and i wasn't editing with the intetion of starting an edit war with them on any other pages they have been editing. It should also be noted that *I* was the first person to make a dif of attempt to resolve. here : https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Multiplicity_%28subculture%29&diff=1162656320&oldid=1162612901

My edit note said : "I removed the stuff relating to iatrogenic effects as that is better suited to the D.I.D page. Also the vice article you sourced didn't mention any multiplicity tiktok communities? We can talk about it on the talk page"

Yet they continued to revert the edit Kuia34 (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Declined + Warned nominating editor...

@Kate the mochii:: Reporting someone here typically implies you fully understand the underlying policies (edit warring and the three-revert rule, among others). To reiterate, the three-revert rule isn't an allowance, but even if it were an allowance, you exceeded yours:

Please consider this a warning that any continued edit warring—whether or not it violates the 3RR—can result in anyone being blocked, including someone that files a report here. The safest (and most effective) thing you can do is seek dispute resolution options, including simply using the article's talk page to establish consensus instead of repeatedly reinserting contested material.

--slakr 02:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

User:100.36.106.199 reported by User:Evrik (Result: Blocked one year)

Page: Talk:Wood Badge (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 100.36.106.199 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: See below

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

Comments:
I want to start with two admissions. First, when @100.36.106.199: made their first change, I saw this block made by @Bbb23: and figured I was dealing with a vandal and didn't make a lot of effort to resolve this. Second, I made four reverts today. That said ... the user seems to be on a mission to modify "aggressive archiving". The user is driving an edit war, and to quote our ip friend, "why don't you report me and see how it goes?" I am making this report. --evrik  03:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• Note Because of the IP's pblock, they cannot comment here. Bbb23 (talk) 13:21, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  IP blocked for one year by ToBeFree.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages edit warring