Page: Altaic languages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:68AB:3511:3ACB:5016 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221589310 by Warrenmck (talk) You've reverted at least 4 times now, please stop, this is sourced content and important to the article. You've broken WP:3RR yourself while trying to warn me to not do the same thing."
2. 20:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221576696 by Warrenmck (talk) That's not how Wikipedia works. You need to get a consensus before removing sourced content. You keep talking about a discussion but leave no link, nor do you back your claims of a "scholarly consensus". Clearly, there's disagreement between scholars and it's important to show both sides. Robbeets is just as reliable a source as Vovin, if not more."
3. 13:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1220312786 by Warrenmck (talk) There's no consensus on the Talk page. The only thing eating up a lot of space are the many sources by Vovin, who, while dismissing Altaic, has proposed much more niche theories with far less evidence. He doesn't seem like a trustworthy figure on the subject, yet he's given a lot of space here."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "/* Altaic languages */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 20:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "/* Proto-Altaic Forms */ Reply"
2. 20:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "/* Proto-Altaic Forms */ Reply"
3. 20:33, 30 April 2024 (UTC) "/* Proto-Altaic Forms */ Reply"

Comments:

This is a sticky one, and I think I need to make it clear that I actually am guilty of a fourth revert if we consider the one made by the logged in user (which I suspect a sock issue of due to the identical edits). My fourth edit was made in response to a mid-talk-page-discussion revert, but I should have caught that was technically the fourth and will own up to that.

There's been a big issue on Wikipedia with macrofamily articles and big lists of in-universe content being presented as real. Altaic is a proposed macrofamily which had historical acceptance by has now fallen well outside the academic mainstream, though it's probably not the easiest thing to determine from this article. There was a larger discussion in the past year or so about excising a lot of these lists, but only Altaic has had issues with significant pushback. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 20:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I'd like to say a few things.

I assumed it was up to the person removing sourced content to gain consensus on the Talk page, not the other way around.

This user has made many edits on this page from a clearly biased perspective. The whole point of the article is to explain what the theory is, not to debunk it in every sentence.

The user is warning me and reporting me for something he is doing himself and was first to do, being edit warring and break the 3 revert rule. 2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:68AB:3511:3ACB:5016 (talk) 20:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Please see WP:ONUS and WP:BRD. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 20:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The solution to both is consensus, which he/she did not have. Given that the user is biased against the theory and using its page to try and debunk it, it's safe to assume no reasonable consensus or compromise can be reach. 2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:68AB:3511:3ACB:5016 (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The problem is that the onus to gain consensus is on the person supporting the inclusion of disputed content. That would appear to be you. If no consensus can be reached, then the content does not belong in the article. Simple as that. It can be frustrating, I know. It's the worst possible system with the exception of all the others. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 21:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

In that case, I'd like to mention that I noticed the table was removed back in July of 2023 for WP:UNDUE. This is completely unjustified. Like I've been trying to say, the point of the article is not to debunk it. People should be able to read what the theory proposes and then read the criticism. Saying it's been given undue weight is like saying teaching the theory of evolution on the evolution page is undue because it's too convincing.

Also, the person in his/her first revert said to see the Talk page. But there was no consensus on the Talk page and he still has yet to link the discussion he keeps referencing. 2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:68AB:3511:3ACB:5016 (talk) 21:09, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

You're the one who needs to demonstrate consensus, per WP:ONUS. And if the content is that convincing, then you should have no problem establishing consensus. Wikiprojects, noticeboards, and RFCs can all help with that. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 21:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I'll leave it here but again, the purpose is not to convince, it's to explain the theory. What would consensus even look like? Do I need a 2:1 majority or something? 2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:68AB:3511:3ACB:5016 (talk) 21:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Persuasion is how Wikipedia articles are built. You can see the page on consensus, which is a fluid concept. While not a vote, numbers certainly do play a role. Basically, when you get broad agreement on the talk page (not unanimity) then you have consensus. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I just want to be clear that my edits to Altaic languages have been done in conjunction with the talk page and both the Linguistics Wikiproject and WP:FTN due to the risk of this looking like an issue with WP:RGW considering how systematic this issue has been on Wikipedia. I also routinely tag other linguists to look at my edits, as I did in the discussion about the edit war in question to avoid just overly relying on my own perceptions and judgement. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 21:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:RGW is laughable. I've seen your edits and reverts. 2A02:C7E:3011:FC00:68AB:3511:3ACB:5016 (talk) 21:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 years ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Page: Federal subjects of Russia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: GOLDIEM J (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]
5. [6]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [7]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [8]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [9]

Comments:

User is edit warring to restore unsourced claims into the infobox. They claim sources are not required as "Russian law says" the Ukrainian territory is a part of Russia and "It's real". Cambial — foliar❧ 22:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Since when have I claimed that sources are "not required?" Given that the article lists these same regions in the Wikitable further down the article, I feel confident in saying that there's bound to be citations for this provided later on in the article. Furthermore, you made original edits and I reverted them. Then you attempted to restore your reverted edits without bothering with the talk page at all. I, conversely, have been attempting to confer with you to reach a consensus. The only edits of yours I've undone were attempts to restore what I reverted. I have not at all attempted to restore my own original edits that you reverted. So you're the one who keeps changing it to how you think it should be. That's literally the only reason I kept reverting you, not because I wanted the article to be a certain way, but because I thought we needed to reach a consensus first before proceeding any further. GOLDIEM J (talk) 22:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

This page is about edit warring. You broke 3rr on the article to restore unsourced material. Citations later on in the article do not support the unsourced content that you have repeatedly reinserted without sourcing. Cambial — foliar❧ 22:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, let's see what the admins think of this. I could've very well reported you for the same behaviour you're alleging me of, but reason number one I've never done that before and don't know how, and thing number two I'd prefer to be cooperative and be productive and reach a consensus. So you can thank me later for letting you go and instead choosing to talk. GOLDIEM J (talk) 22:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Except that I haven't broken 3rr and I'm not adding original research to the article. But you are. So you would have no basis on which to make such a report. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Except you didn't even revert a previous edit initially. You made an original edit that changed the map to an outdated version. So I reverted it. You need to reach a consensus before attempting to restore a reverted edit.

Anyway, can we let the admins deal with this now, please? I don't wish to discuss further while the review is ongoing. GOLDIEM J (talk) 23:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

When you restore material lacking a source, you need to add reliable sources that support the content - especially when the existing cited scholarship directly contradicts it. Instead, you edit warred to keep original research in the article that contradicts the cited scholarship. The fact you're unable to see why that behaviour is inappropriate is why a sanction against you is necessary. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Fun fact, you edit warred too if I did. Also, I wholly disagree that there is any contradiction in the sources, and your arguements don't make a lot of sense to me. In case I need this in my defense, let me just say that I was not entirely familiar with 3rr beforehand and that I do not believe I was acting in bad faith. Please leave it there while review is ongoing. GOLDIEM J (talk) 23:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 24 hours. Honestly, Cambial Yellowing should have been blocked for longer, partly because of their block log and partly for having the chutzpah to file this report. Bbb23 (talk) 23:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

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

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Maybe just leave it in there and then start the talk page thingy like I suggested several times before? Would be kinda cool if you took other users into consideration."
2. 12:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221854606 by Moxy (talk)"
3. 11:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "I saw what was linked but it still doesnt explain anything. What I meant is that if other articles also mention vice-chancellors and vice-presidents then it would only make sense if this did too. It would make sense for certain types of articles to follow a certain pattern. After I last revered Nikkimaria there were edits by several other editors and noone seemed to have a problem with the vice-chancellor being mentioned. If you want it so bad for it to be removed then discuss it on talk page."
4. 22:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221768509 by Nikkimaria (talk) That doesnt explain anything. Please stop edit warring and making unreasonable reverts. Discuss it on talk page whether it should be removed or not. Otherwise it can stay as is."
5. 09:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221622634 by Nikkimaria (talk) If we can show the vice-president of US in the infobox of USA as well as vice-presidents of other countries in their infobox then there is no reason why the German vice-chancellor cant be shown in the infobox for being the third highest ranking official of Germany. Some countries even have up to five leaders in the infobox anyways."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 12:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Germany."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: no ongoping tlak in this cases at time of this post ...but we have talked about honorary titles before.

Comments: Somewhat new editor...if there willing to go to talk perhaps block can be avoided. NEW TALK Talk:Germany#Honorary titles in infoboxMoxy🍁 12:22, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 13:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Kenosha unrest shooting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 128.92.27.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC) ""
2. 16:45, 2 May 2024 (UTC) ""
3. 16:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. 16:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC) ""
5. 19:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Kenosha unrest shooting."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked for 31h by EvergreenFir for disruptive editing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: [10] – stable edition, correctly labelling Hamed as British only.

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [11] – first revert, with a spurious edit summary of "Not constructive".
2. [12]
3. [13] – not a revert, but re-adding the disputed content with a new source rather than discussing at article talk page.
4. [14] – reverting my revert, with no response to talk page message left for them, inviting them to continue discussion at article talk page.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [15]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Discussion at article talk page. No responses to my most recent posting after almost two months.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [16]

Comments:

User:ActionHeroesAreReal mistakenly insists on Naseem Hamed being labelled as British-Yemeni. Hamed was born in the UK, is a British national, has never lived in Yemen (from where his parents hail), is not notable for his ethnicity, and has only ever competed under a British boxing licence. User chooses to ignore all the various BLP lead section guidelines including MOS:ETHNICITY, MOS:IDENTITY, and MOS:FIRSTBIO. After initially using an unreliable content aggregator as a source, they have now brought up one source which labels him as such, but the sole inclusion of this fails NPOV, WP:WEIGHT, and WP:FRINGE.

I briefly considered WP:DR, but believe it is unnecessary because this is a clearcut case of a user not understanding the above guidelines, and refusing to engage in discussion. Without making this a conduct issue, they do appear to make a habit out of not using sources correctly or misinterpreting them, and have received numerous warnings by other experienced users. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 17:41, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

• No violation. There was edit-warring in March, but there is no violation weeks later. Based on a very cursory review of ActionHeroesAreReal's edits, I think the best place to address the user's edits is WP:ANI. Include whatever evidence you feel is appropriate, but at a minimum you should include previous edit-warring, not only on this article but on others, and you should also note personal attacks in edit summaries. I'm not comfortable unilaterally blocking without more evidence, and this is not the board to provide that evidence.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Azad Hind (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 06:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC) "This the real info, flag and emblem Azad Hind and it is not a vandal"
2. 16:47, 2 May 2024 (UTC) ""
3. 10:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 17:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC) to 18:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 17:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 18:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC) "Emblem change"
5. Consecutive edits made from 14:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC) to 16:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 16:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   3. 16:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Azad Hind."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I am reporting this user due to repeated addition of suspected original research. User has refused to communicate regarding warnings by other users. Also triggered edit filter: Special:AbuseLog/37631579. MiasmaEternal☎ 08:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: This user has already been reported at WP:ANI#NOTHERE disruption – 2804:F14:80EE:5A01:C1B6:4511:8DE3:83A7 (talk) 08:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely by me for WP:NOTHERE after investigating at ANI. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:45, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Ishaaq bin Ahmed (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 197.231.201.171 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221867506 by Neuropol (talk)"
2. 13:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221866547 by Neuropol (talk)"
3. 13:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1221861674 by Neuropol (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Ishaaq bin Ahmed."
2. 13:31, 2 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Ishaaq bin Ahmed."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

1. Update: User has initiated a discussion with me on my talk page.

• Stale - Aoidh (talk) 08:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Siege of Plevna (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Thegon12345 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 10:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
2. 01:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
3. 01:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 01:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 01:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 01:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 01:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 11:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Siege of Plevna."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

WP:LTA, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KızılBörü1071. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of indefinitely Aoidh (talk) 14:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

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

User being reported: Mar485!123 (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 14:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 14:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:38, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   2. 14:39, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   3. 14:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"
2. Consecutive edits made from 14:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 14:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   2. 14:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"
   3. 14:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
3. Consecutive edits made from 14:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   2. 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"
5. Consecutive edits made from 14:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 14:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   2. 14:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"
6. Consecutive edits made from 01:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC) to 02:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 01:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 01:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   3. 01:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Allergen Immunotherapy */"
   4. 02:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"
   5. 02:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"
   6. 02:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Helminthic therapies */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Immunotherapy."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• They insist on changing the colour of the text to red (see diff), despite being asked numerous times to refrain from doing so. M.Bitton (talk) 14:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

They are also removing sourced content and replacing it with unsourced content. They are a student editor. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 14:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Aoidh (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Worcester, England (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2A02:C7C:8512:5300:7107:681:51A1:B6E (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [17]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [18]
2. [19]
3. [20]
4. [21]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [22]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [23]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [24]

Comments: Now up to 9 reverts. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 31 hours by User:Smalljim (rangeblocked). - Aoidh (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Thirty Seconds to Mars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 209899Geovanni (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 14:25, April 27, 2024

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:08, May 2, 2024
2. 15:56, May 2, 2024
3. 22:25, May 3, 2024
4. 16:06, May 4, 2024
5. 17:35, May 5, 2024
6. 18:33, May 6, 2024

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 18:21, May 5, 2024

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Thirty Seconds to Mars#Is or are (Diff along with Diff of talkback notice on user's talk page)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 20:25, May 6, 2024

Comments:
Not a 3RR report but an edit warring report, editor is changing "is" to "are" despite explanation by numerous editors why this article would use "is", and has made no attempt to discuss this outside of some of their edit summaries. - Aoidh (talk) 20:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Abu Lu'lu'a Firuz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Apaugasma (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [25] (08:36, 29 April 2024)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [26] (08:36, 29 April 2024)
2. [27] (20:18, 29 April 2024)
3. [28] (09:17, 4 May 2024)
4. [29] (08:35, 6 May 2024)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [30] (19:03, 1 May 2024) [31] (22:59, 6 May 2024)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [32] (20:16, 29 April 2024) [33] (21:22, 29 April 2024) [34] (15:26, 2 May 2024)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [35]

Comments:
User keeps deleting the discussed WP:RS for "Piruz Nahavandi" and is in violation of WP:3RR. They have reverted other users as well while going against the WP:Consensus, and are acting as if they own the page. User claims the WP:RS is an example of circularity, but they have yet to show any concrete evidence of the circularity and are the only one to claim it is. Furthermore, user has stated that the Hiro source is an RS, but is now going against the discussions & consensus. Attempts to discuss on the talk page have led to the user continuing to make changes on the article page while reverting multiple editors. Apaugasma falsely claimed that there is rough consensus when they are the only one arguing against the source, and persistently reverted edits/removed the WP:RS: 1 2.--Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

• Closed As far as I can see it is the filer here who is continuing to attempt to insert disputed content and it is also the filer who appears to have consensus against them at Talk:Abu_Lu'lu'a_Firuz#Sources_for_the_name_Piruz_Nahavandi. Discussion to continue at the reverse filing above. Black Kite (talk) 11:21, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Abu Lu'lu'a Firuz (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ronnnaldo7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [36] (22:47, 28 April 2024)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [37] (18:50, 29 April 2024)
2. [38] (18:09, 1 May 2024)
3. [39] (23:34, 5 May 2024)
4. [40]] (22:59, 6 May 2024)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [41] (19:03, 1 May 2024) [42] (14:46, 2 May 2024)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [43] (20:16, 29 April 2024) [44] (14:51, 2 May 2024) [45] (15:26, 2 May 2024)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [46]

Comments:
User keeps adding disputed content "Piruz Nahavandi" despite clear opposition on talk, in last (5 May) diff against rough consensus (especially re inclusion in the lead) on talk. User has consistently refused to follow WP:ONUS and has let other users do all the consensus-building. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 09:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

You can add another revert by Ronnnaldo7 that was made after the above report was submitted: 22:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC) -- Toddy1 (talk) 01:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Done. I'll also note there's a retaliatory report below, with further demonstration they don't understand WP:ONUS (believing RS must automatically be included) and some aspersions (there has been talk about abuse of power re you focus on Arabic work, your lack of acceptance with the addition of the Persian language name is an example of WP:POV before). With rough consensus I was referring to [47][48] and re inclusion in the lead to [49], where despite [50] still [51]. Thanks for your time, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 07:46, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Please note my final revert was in an attempt to bring it to a neutral state until the resolution is reached, which is Iskandar323's version. I have since been reverted and don't plan on making changes anymore as a result. Further discussions will be continued on the article's talk page on my end. Also, my edits were independent WP:GoodFaith edits per WP:Bold that were based on the discussions we had on the talk page in including the WP:RS. Apaugasma has been the one to persistently revert edits, whereas mine have not been reverts (With the exception of the last one, which was in WP:GoodFaith to bring it to Iskandar323's version per above).--Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 08:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Note that Iskandar323 has explicitly stated I don't have a version [52][53], so this is clear misrepresentation. Nevertheless, I tend to agree with Toddy1's suggestion below. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 08:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Note that I was referring to the article version (which was Iskandar323's latest edit as a neutral third party), and not Iskandar323's version/view of it all; therefore, I believe your claims of misrepresentation are baseless. Furthermore, your personal attacks of calling me incompetent are unwarranted, but I digress. Anyways, I'm glad you agree with Toddy1's suggestion below, as do I.--Ronnnaldo7 (talk) 09:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

I know this is getting too long and I'm sorry, but this is just too rich to omit here: if it's not Iskandar323' version, since he just made a cosmetic edit while opposing at least part of your edit on talk, it must be your version. So you reverted to basically your own version though calling it "Iskandar323's neutral version", against consensus on talk, "in an attempt to bring it to a neutral state"? I find the denial and misrepresentation here more concerning than the edit warring itself. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 11:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Ronnnaldo7 has said that he/she was going to just drop this. I recommend that this (and the retaliatory report by Ronnnaldo7) should be closed with no action. If he/she resumes edit-warring, then the report can be resurrected.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:28, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

• User warned that continuing to insert disputed content will lead to a block. Black Kite (talk) 11:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Social Darwinism (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 79.31.103.194 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [54]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [55] 11:32, 6 May 2024
2. [56] 13:27, 6 May 2024
3. [57] 15:15, 6 May 2024
4. [58] 15:21, 7 May 2024
5. [59] 04:52, 8 May 2024

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [60]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [61]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [62]

Comments: We've been seeing similar edits [63][64] and blanking [65] on this article from IPs in recent weeks. Page protection may be warranted. Generalrelative (talk) 05:27, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I've requested semi-protection at WP:RFPP. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 06:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Meanwhile, one more revert from the IP:

6. [66] 06:03, 8 May 2024

Generalrelative (talk) 06:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Aoidh (talk) 11:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

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

Previous version reverted to: 13:45, 29 April 2024

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:50, 7 May 2024 to 16:55, 7 May 2024
2. 17:03, 7 May 2024 to 17:05, 7 May 2024
3. 17:11, 7 May 2024
4. 17:21, 7 May 2024
5. 17:26, 7 May 2024

Diffs of the IP's reverts:

1. 13:46, 7 May 2024
2. 16:29, 7 May 2024
3. 7 May 2024 to 17:02, 7 May 2024
4. 17:07, 7 May 2024
5. 17:17, 7 May 2024
6. 17:22, 7 May 2024

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:10, 7 May 2024 (Template used: Softer edit warring notice for new editors)
2. 17:30, 7 May 2024 (Template used: Violation/potential violation of the three revert rule)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Original discussions occurred on the editor's talk page instead of the article's talk page

1. User talk:Rsparkles 7 May 2024 to 17:09, 7 May 2024
2. User talk:Rsparkles 17:14, 7 May 2024 to 17:46, 7 May 2024
3. User talk:WlKlCZECH11 22:01, 7 May 2024 to 22:17, 7 May 2024
4. Talk:Cameron Stewart#Allegations of sexual misconduct

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

1. Rsparkles
2. IP 2600:1700:B92:900:D6B:599:4ADE:99EC

Comments:

I'm not a checkuser so I don't know if Rsparkles is also the IP editor or if this is multiple editors doing the same thing. Rsparkles & the IP editor have been removing part of the controversy section (specifically, that Stewart was dropped from comics projects which is cited by industry outlets) & minor rephrasing of parts. Two different editors tried discussing this on Rsparkles' talk while Rsparkles kept restoring their preferred version; during this, I suggested bringing it to the article's talk in an edit summary and gave Rsparkles an edit war notice & then a 3RR notice. Even without the IP's contributions, Rsparkles has gone past 3RR. To restore to the stable version of the article (29 April 2024) would take me past 3RR, so I'm bringing this here instead. Thanks! Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:33, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

I am involved, as I reverted and warned IP user 2600:1700:B92:900:D6B:599:4ADE:99EC (talk · contribs), but I'd just like to say that this seems to be a violation of WP:NPOV as the section is well-sourced and it appears to be an attempt to sanitise the individual's entry on Wikipedia. Rsparkles (talk · contribs) behaviour (continuing to revert after being warned about WP:3RR) is clearly problematic so may warrant sanctions, but I think perhaps applying pending changes protection might also be justified as this also occurred in January which was left unchecked until March. Adam Black ^{talk • contributions} 03:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I think Adam Black hit the nail on the head here; this isn't the first time this has occurred where a mix of IPs and just registered editors try to sanitize this subsection. I did go to RPP before the edit war escalated but it hasn't been reviewed yet. Sariel Xilo (talk) 03:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

The other thing I want to flag is that after I put the notice here, a new editor (WlKlCZECH11 (talk · contribs)) started to engage in the exact behavior as Rsparkles (from article changes to the language used in the edit summary). When I put a notice on edit warring on their talk, they did not respond but oddly Rsparkles did (included a link to the discussion above). Rsparkles later denied that they are also WlKlCZECH11; not sure if the best practice is to also put a notice at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations or to wait until this discussion resolves. Sariel Xilo (talk) 04:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected by User:Dennis Brown for 1 month. Aoidh (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Comic Con Arabia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:21, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Correct first line"
2. 18:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "I added correct information about comic con arabia not saudi comic con"
3. 18:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Added good version of original comic con arabia"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."
2. 18:34, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."
3. 18:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "rm as now moot - by all means update the article but please don't paste that stuff back - please take a look at different articles and word things to how articles are worded here if that makes sense"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User is adding promotional content to the article and is edit warring over it, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 21:08, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

3 different IPs had added this crap yesterday here, here and here which I suspect are all the warrer, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 21:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

• Note Reported user got g-locked for Lock evasion. Nobody (talk) 09:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

  Oh okay fantastic, Obviously withdraw this now that the account's meta-locked. Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 09:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of indefinitely as global lock evasion. - Aoidh (talk) 11:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Ben Roberts-Smith (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported (IP Address 1: 94.200.83.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
User being reported (IP Address 2: 2001:8F8:1D63:6485:17CD:3B73:BC40:4AD0 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
User being reported (IP Address 3: 2001:8F8:1DB8:D0CC:17CD:28BA:D210:BE90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [67]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [68]
2. [69]
3. [70]
4. [71]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [72]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [73]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [74]

Comments:

Three IPs provided as editor is IP hoping around addresses in the United Arab Emerites. TarnishedPath^talk 06:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Please refer to Special:Diff/1222837817 for an admission by the editor that the different IP addresses are them. TarnishedPath^talk 06:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

It's a statement, not an admission - I've not tried to hide that there are different IPs. 94.200.83.10 (talk) 06:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your further admission I guess. It will make it easier for an admin to determine that you violated 3RR. TarnishedPath^talk 07:45, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Quite probably. Obviously ignoring 3rr is far worse than making egregious BLP violations and wildly ignoring established consensus like you. 2001:8F8:1D63:6485:17CD:3B73:BC40:4AD0 (talk) 09:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

There was no BLP violation. Stating there was indicates that you have no understanding of BLP. There's no excuse for you violating 3RR. TarnishedPath^talk 09:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

There absolutely is a BLP violation, and the RfC responses demonstrate that. Starting that there wasn't inductees that you have no understanding of BLP 2001:8F8:1D63:6485:17CD:3B73:BC40:4AD0 (talk) 11:45, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:BLPPUBLIC, "In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it". The fact that you still haven't self-reverted after 4 reverts speaks against you. TarnishedPath^talk 11:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

It's a BLPCRIME violation which trumps BLPPUBLIC. The is not a criminal conviction. We cannot call him a war criminal in wikivoice. The other responses to the RfC all understand this. I'm not going to revert to a version that violates such a fundamental policy. There are also not multiple RS that explicitly call him a war criminal, despite your repeated claims. 2001:8F8:1D63:6485:17CD:3B73:BC40:4AD0 (talk) 11:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

For interest, Not longer ago I looked over talk archives in order to see which editors were involved in previous discussions in order to alert them to current discussions. While doing so, I found your claim of established consensus lacking. TarnishedPath^talk 10:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• I've blocked the IPv4 for 3 months and 2001:8F8:1D00:0:0:0:0:0/40 for 72h, both for block evasion (User:Orchomen).--Bbb23 (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

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

User being reported: 91.217.105.54 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222868951 by Czello (talk) That's not what it says at all. Here is the English version of the source "kaszanka must have made its way to Poland from either Denmark or from Germany, through Silesia. Wherever it first came from, it is eaten to this day." It seems you are edit warring in behalf of the previous user, Revirvlkodlaku."
2. 12:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222861710 by Czello (talk) The source material states it is not a historical fact. What is stated on this page is just wrong interpretation."
3. 10:32, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222702719 by Revirvlkodlaku (talk)"
4. 08:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "The place of origin is still unknown and the source referenced is in a foreign language"

Comments:

Deletion of sourced material, refusal to discuss on talk despite request to. Oddly their last edit summary quotes something that supports the text they are deleting. — Czello ^(music) 12:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

I did not receive any request on the talk page and the previous editor deleted my request on talk page.

The text "it originates from Germany" and "kaszanka must have made its way to Poland from either Denmark or from Germany, through Silesia. Wherever it first came from, it is eaten to this day" from the reference are 2 totally different statements.

The reference is also from a pop-culture editorial website. They have no sources of their own cited. 91.217.105.54 (talk) 13:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Kaszanka (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Revirvlkodlaku (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. [75]
2. [76]
3. [77]
4. [78]

User deleted my post on their talk page when I made claim of edit warring.

The edits were commented properly, user reverted with disregard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.217.105.54 (talk • contribs)

They're well within their rights to remove your comments; meanwhile you seem to be removing sourced information without justification. Perhaps you should discuss it on the article's talk page. — Czello ^(music) 11:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Reporter blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Demographics of Somalia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222938168 by Apaugasma (talk)"
2. 21:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222933437 by ClueBot NG (talk)"
3. Consecutive edits made from 12:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC) to 20:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 12:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222849023 by Cordless Larry (talk)"
   2. 20:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. 05:30, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Clan structure */ Restoring vandalised content"
5. 16:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Clan structure */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 19:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Demographics of Somalia."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 12:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Genealogical tree */ new section"

Comments:

Also edit warring at Somali people. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Also on Samaale. Knows how to edit talk page [79] but does not respond to messages like [80]. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 21:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:18, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Argentina–Brazil football rivalry (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Raúl Quintana Tarufetti (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:59, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Not a siingle porpose account. And if I were, that´s not a reason to remove well referenced information from the articles. I started the discussion, I gave 7 neutral and serious sources (2 from FIFA), and the other user reverts and reverts."
2. 05:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "The one who removes referenced content from the article is YOU. And FIFA´s official sources you are removing..."
3. 04:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222797415 by Svartner (talk) 7 serious sources (2 from FIFA, one of them with the list of matches) are enough. Please, see this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Argentina%E2%80%93Brazil_football_rivalry#Count_of_matches"
4. 23:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222795920 by Svartner (talk) Officiasl FIFA sources are enough. Go to the discussion."
5. 22:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC) "Taking out all the vandalism"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."
2. 21:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "/* May 2024 */ You are both edit warring. Look at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I have no interest in this topic."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 22:35, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Demography of the Roman Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Deusestlux (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [81]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [82]
2. [83]
3. [84]
4. [85]
5. [86]
6. [87]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [88]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [89] But also on user talk page: [90]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [91]

Comments:
We haven't edited since the warning, but since we may have both engaged in edit warring beforehand, and since he has been totally unresponsive in attempting to discuss the issue, my only way forward is to seek admin help via reporting, for the alternatives are a) keep reverting, surely risking a block, or b) give up the issue entirely. My goal here is to simply get them to engage in a discussion of the matter.

Soooo, it seems going back to reverting Deusestlux (talk · contribs) is all I can do? No response from them, and no response here. MrThe1And0nly (talk) 07:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

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

User being reported: 서아7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 06:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "Wikipedia pages with editing battles are unreliable articles. It was a correct point that it was mostly remanded, and the history remains.Controlling speech just because it's a new account damages Wikipedia's credibility.You should stop remanding and creating stupid articles. Wikipedia loses its value if it posts incorrect information."
2. 04:30, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "현재는 돈을 weverse에게 지불하면 사무소 소속자 이외에도 누구나 개설할 수 있다"
3. 14:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "나는 사실을 지적하고 있다

kpop에 익숙해져라 나도 BTS는 좋아해"

1. 14:38, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "낡은 정보를 싣지 마라

원래 한국의 기사는 틀린것이 있기 때문에 소스에는 불충분 원래 영어 원어민은 거의 한국 콘텐츠 안봐"

1. 13:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "-"
2. Consecutive edits made from 08:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC) to 08:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 08:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "o"
   2. 08:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "o"
   3. 08:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "The organizer pays weverse"
   4. 08:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC) "It is currently being used by people other than hybe members, so it has been removed."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours Aoidh (talk) 13:59, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Ail al-Kahiay Campaign (1798) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Skibidi36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "I'm reverting this edit for vandalism again, majority of historians as well as the arab wikipedia agree that this is a Saudi victory."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Resuming same edit-warring that's been going on for weeks after previous block Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks EvergreenFir (talk) 16:43, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Ail al-Kahiay Campaign (1798) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Resuming same edit-warring that's been going on for weeks, after previous block Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of indefinitely EvergreenFir (talk) 16:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Buchanan Corner, Indiana (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Reywas92 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This User Has Been Edit waring With Me, I Have Tried to Keep it Civil, & I Am No Longer Editing The Page Due To It, I Need Administrator Intervention to Stop This User From Undoing Constructive Edits, A Source is Still A Source Wether it Is One Sentence or Multiple Pages. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 15:14, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Reywas92 - Why are you reverting when WP:3RRNO does not apply? Poor sources are not vandalism.

• Two of these edits were removing copyrighted content copied and pasted from findagrave.com. These others were of his readding of unreliable and inappropriate sources, but I understand I should have just let them stand until Paul actually understood WP:RS. Reywas92^Talk 15:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

they were not copyrighted, i used quill bot to change them, if you did a side by side comparison you will se that they are not the same. also i have just found more sources for the cemeteries, but im just going to post them in the afd not the article because aparently we are going to make up guidelines stating that family cemeteries cannot be listed. 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 16:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Using a tool to paraphrase would still seem to be in violation of WP:PARAPHRASE EvergreenFir (talk) 16:31, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

I compared them. The first passage was identical to the entire findagrave.com text, the second consisted only of the first sentences of its findagrave.com entry. I have requested revdel. NebY (talk) 16:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@PaulGamerBoy360 - You are in the wrong here. Reywas92 is correct regarding your sources and edits. A sources it not "still a source" if that source is not reliable. Why are you edit warring with Reywas92? EvergreenFir (talk) 15:22, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

No, I have read the guidlines & it says you may still use an "unreliable source" as long as you can find more sources to support the facts, there were more sources to support the fact on the intro paragraph, and only one of the sources on the intro paragraph was "unreliable" all the other were reliable, i was in the proccess of finding more sources to support the cemetaries, no guidelines state that family cemeteries cant be listed, I have stopped editing that page. besides even the small "generally unreliable" sources add up with the same information shows that the information is most likely true, they all support eachother, i am in the proccess of finding more sources, but for ofline sources to be found, people need to see that the offline sources are needed. Removing the paragraphs from the article will prevent others from finding the needed sources. (And it seems the discussion about the reliablitiy of Find-a-Grave revolved areoud the people side, and not the Cemetery Side of the Site) 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 (talk) 15:54, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@PaulGamerBoy360 where on WP:RS or WP:V does it say that you can use unreliable sources? At WP:USERGENERATED on WP:RS it specifically lists FindAGrave as one of the "[e]xamples of unacceptable user-generated sources". EvergreenFir (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• I'll close this as stale, but I wouldn't object to the discussion above continuing a bit. Not excessively, though, as it's no longer about edit warring. PaulGamerBoy360, if something remains unclear about copyright or verifiability, the Teahouse is a good place to ask. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
• Stale ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:43, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223356038 by 109.76.198.112 (talk)"
2. 15:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223355380 by 109.76.198.112 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 15:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Reverting Edits */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Reverting "good faith" edits by IP users, and only giving them uw4s. Please check. If I'm wrong, and the IPs are vandalising, then that's a trout for me Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 15:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the inaccurate information for this notice. I wasn't familiar with the Edit Warring section in Twinkle. Myrealnamm (💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 15:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I cannot believe that anyone who has read the diffs or edit summaries of my changes can actually think my edits were vandalism. We all make mistakes sometimes but my edits were made in in a good faith effort to follow WP:UGC and I clearly explained as much in my edit summaries. Thanks. -- 109.76.198.112 (talk) 16:02, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

• No violation Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

The user also reverted my good faith edit here (I removed a link from a word that was literally linked in the previous section) and gave me a uw4 here. This is not edit-warring, of course. This should be moved to ANI. 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:ADC9:2C9F:7B0:FC19 (talk) 16:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Multiple (see below)
User being reported: Unfriendnow (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [92] is a partial revert of [93] at Agnelli family (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
2. [94] is a revert of [95] at Andrew Cavendish, 11th Duke of Devonshire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
3. [96] is a revert of [97] at William Cavendish, Marquess of Hartington (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
4. [98] is a revert of [99] at Rose Hanbury (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [100]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [101]

Comments:
Since being unblocked (after using a sockpuppet User:Namenotimportant00 to conduct a wide-ranging edit war), four of ten edits have been to continue these edit wars. Of the remaining six, one is a revert of precisely the same nature (but it is a first revert, not a repeat of an earlier reverted edit), one is inappropriate canvassing, and one is the same kind of unsourced trivia that resulted in the block in the first place. 108.35.216.149 (talk) 00:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 00:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Later-no-harm criterion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1222974899 by Aydoh8 (talk)"
2. Consecutive edits made from 01:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) to 01:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 01:48, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "removed irrelevant and unrigorous political commentary"
   2. 01:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "removed irrelevant and unrigorous speculation about election strategy"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: You are a suspected sockpuppet."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC) "/* This article needs serious revision */"

Comments:

Likely use of anonymous IP edits in attempt to evade 3RR. –Sincerely, A Lime 05:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Pinging @Aydoh8 who warned @Affinepplan. Sorry you got dragged into this :(

I believe users @64.112.229.118, @47.230.61.20, @Affinepplan are the same person.

Short timeline:

1. @64.112.229.118 attempts to delete portions of article. Reverted by @Ankermast.
2. @64.112.229.118 responds by adding a disparaging Template:Multiple issues message insulting authors of the page. Reverted by me @Closed Limelike Curves.
3. @Affinepplan (believed to be same user as above) reverts to restore the template. (1st revert.)
4. ~1 week passes, with intervening edits from unrelated users.
5. I notice the restored template and revert.
6. @47.230.61.20 (believed to be same user) reverts to restore the template. (Second revert, first in 24 hour period.)
7. I notice the unusual activity and request page protection, as well as warning @Affinepplan. I do not restore.
8. @Aydoh8 takes notice and restores the previous version of the page. @Affinepplan restores (Third revert.)
9. @Aydoh8 reverts again and informs @Affinepplan their actions may constitute edit warring. @Affinepplan nevertheless reverts a fourth time, ignoring warning.

–Sincerely, A Lime 06:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Closed Limelike Curves I was going to bring this to AN3 anyway if they kept going. Looks like they've stopped. I also recommend you file a sockpuppet report at WP:SPI as well. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 11:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

• Result: Since User:Affinepplan and User:Closed Limelike Curves have both edited the artice on May 11 I conclude that the edit war is not over. So I have put extended confirmed protection on the article for one month. That will exclude the main warring parties (and any IPs) from editing the article directly. Please try to reach agreement on the talk page and see WP:DR if you are stuck. User:Affinepplan may have been editing logged-out and they are warned not to continue that. EdJohnston (talk) 03:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Narendra Modi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Abhishek0831996 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [102]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 1
2. 2

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [103]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [104]

Comments:

• User is removing important edits on the PM of India's page, who is involved in an election currently.
• He has a history of being biased towards editing.
• He has reverted my edits twice, in which great care had been taken to ensure neutrality
• I wrote a message on his talk page and the guy simply removed it!
• This is the first time im filing such a complaint, so please excuse me if Im doing anything wrong; in which case I shall learn and adapt. I see someone disrupting the process and hence have filed this. Pharaoh496 (talk) 11:55, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

noex

Page: Snell's law (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Casteiswrong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [105]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [106]
2. [107]
3. [108]
4. [109]
5. [110]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [111]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [112]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [113]

Comments:

Reported user is actively edit-warring against several editors (includng me) to impose original research in the article and removes srongly sourced content that has been in the article for a quite long time. They have already been warned by an admin for edit warring and also by me, but they keep going on their disruptive path and made not less than 5 reverts within 24 hours.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Not fair, one user alone is charged with edit-warring while a team of editors with the same objective do not cumulatively break the same rule. This is a conflict between two scholars, Selin and Rashed, where the former is more objective while Rashed adds original research not even mentioned in the original manuscript translation. I am happy to remove all content and just stick the primary source, including my diagram derived from Selin's book and its translation. The readers will decide what to make out of it. Casteiswrong (talk) 13:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

You are putting your own POV and reverting edits before consensus. The editors have warned you multiple times. Furthermore the issue regarding historicity of Snell's law has already been discussed by wikipedians https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Snell%27s_law#Elaborate_on_Ibn_Sahl's_authorship_of_the_law You cannot push your pov by going against the consensus of other editors. Hu741f4 (talk) 15:48, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Australian Labor Party (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: I would be bias if it was allowed (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1223227860

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Special:Diff/1223337759
2. Special:Diff/1223438180
3. Special:Diff/1223455886
4. Special:Diff/1223458796

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1223457507

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Australian_Labor_Party#Seeking_a_broad_consensus_to_re-situate_the_ALP's_ideology_in_accordance_to_reliable_sources.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1223460616

Comments:

There is longstanding consensus that the fields in the infobox that the editor is editing should not be modified unless broad consensus is obtained in talk. This is evident by another editor previously placing code in the infobox stating <!-- It is important to seek and gain broad consensus on the article talk page before changing this -->. Editor has ridiculously attempted to reverse the onus to obtain consensus in talk by claimed that others need to obtain consensus for why the editor's changes shouldn't happen. TarnishedPath^talk 08:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Notably after the editor was reverted by an admin after the editor's fourth revert, told to not continue, take it to talk and obtain consensus an IP has shown up and reverted three more times (Special:Diff/1223465905, Special:Diff/1223468614 and Special:Diff/1223476797). In the last edit by the IP they left the edit summary "I don't want an edit war, but Labor has a centrist faction" which is almost identical phrasing that the editor uses on the articles talk page in their edit at Special:Diff/1223479083 when they wrote "Simply put, Labor has Centrist factions. I don't want an edit war". I'm not going to open a SPI between a single account and a single IP for obvious reasons but there certainly is some loud quaking. TarnishedPath^talk 13:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

  Added CTOPS notice to talk page per WP:CT/CID. Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Destruction under the Mongol Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 46.44.180.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "Out of scope in an article on 'destruction under..." . Despite the valid source, the link to the subject matter is very weak and actually seems biased to force in the unrelated (nevertheless important) subject of climate change. This section should be moved to a corresponding article."
2. 21:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "I am not the same who did the edit in February. Despite this section does have a valid reference, and apart from my valid POV that is also part of the discussion, environmental impact is simply out of scope for an article about "Destruction under ...'. No need to argue with WP on this. If you edit out my deletion again, how about adding similar paragraphs on the deeds of Nazi Germany, early communist China, Stalin era Soviet Union? This section should never have found it's place here from the..."
3. 21:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "Irrelevant to the topic, subliminal inclusion of a positive of element of genocide. See the discussion and my previous reasoning for removing this section. Imagine the same applied for the deeds of Hitler Stalin Mao and their likes. Climate change topics are important yet do not weigh up to massive genocide."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Violated 3RR, has made no effort to discuss on talk page instead of edit warring. It was previously agreed upon that the deletion of a section of this article needed consensus. Air on White (talk) 22:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

The IP user has been blocked for violating 3RR without an admin commenting on this report. Air on White (talk) 00:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – 24 hours by User:Daniel Quinlan for 3RR violation. EdJohnston (talk) 02:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I blocked them as part of reviewing a request to protect the article on WP:RFPP. It wasn't based on this report. @EdJohnston: Thanks for the ping. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 02:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: The Amazing Digital Circus (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: L.R. Luther (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223682422 by Eldomtom2 (talk) who males up these rules anyway? The visual editing info details whats being said. #diff-undo"
2. 17:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "When you edit the page via "Visual Editing" It doesn't say anything about the media needing to claim where it's based or inspired by at all."
3. 16:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223668014 by Eldomtom2 (talk) Again, please stop removing this. It's getting annoying. #diff-undo"
4. 10:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "For a millionth time. Please do not change this. It's important to add info that makes the article more accurate. Do not break TOS"
5. 22:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1223393565 by Eldomtom2 (talk) its important to add thia for accuracy #diff-undo"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on The Amazing Digital Circus."
2. 17:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on The Amazing Digital Circus."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:20, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox? */ reply"
2. 12:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox? */"
3. 17:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Can we please remove the "inspired by" section in the infobox? */"

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 18:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

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

User being reported: 146.196.34.177 (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 14:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC) to 15:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 14:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 15:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 08:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) to 12:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 08:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 11:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   3. 12:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Ancient history */"
3. 06:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC) to 19:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 19:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Ancient history */"
5. Consecutive edits made from 17:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC) to 17:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 17:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 17:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC) "/* Ancient history */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Final warning: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Dausa."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This IP user is persistently adding unsourced content to the article. VK wiki100 15:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I have reverted the latest edits as unsourced and left a 3RR warning. I won't block, because I am now involved. PhilKnight (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

The IP has now reverted again, following my 3RR warning. I think they can now be blocked. PhilKnight (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

I've blocked them for 48 hours. Jake Wartenberg (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Los Angeles (Lol Tolhurst, Budgie, and Jacknife Lee album) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Wp:pointy and wp:own: wikipedia is a collaborative project."
2. Consecutive edits made from 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) to 02:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
   1. 02:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "wp:trivia that's trivial content as it didn't happen. wp:undue"
   2. 02:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Right url, showing professional reviews only"
3. 00:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "wiki is not"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 06:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) "Edit-warring report"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 05:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) on Los Angeles (Lol Tolhurst, Budgie, and Jacknife Lee album) "None of what you're writing makes any sense to me, and I have already made my point behind my edits clear. Again, if you're this dedicated to these changes, please bring them to discussion, or else you will be reported for edit-warring."

Comments:

Notice was removed as improperly filed(???) so here it is again.

Carliertwo came to Los Angeles (Lol Tolhurst, Budgie, and Jacknife Lee album) and changed a couple things which I disagreed with. I undid, explaining my reasoning and noting BRD (this was the second reversion), only for them to redo their edit multiple other times (including a second undo in which I warned them of this very report), explaining their reasoning but not following instructions to go to a talk page rather than continue to argue in edit summaries. Carliertwo has an extensive history of being reported on this board, so surely they know exactly what trouble they're causing.

QuietHere (talk | contributions) 20:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: George Washington University (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 73.134.81.186 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 13:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC) by Tobby72 (Added image and paragraph regarding 2024 events to Controversies section)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1221695979 by Tobby72
2. 22:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1221880335 by Randy Kryn
3. 13:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1222015962 by Tobby72
4. 14:59, 5 May 2024 (UTC) Partial revert of CanonNi (image)
5. 01:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC) Revert of ElKevbo (Removed image and different paragraph regarding 2022 events moved by ElKevbo)
6. 13:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1222637235 by ElKevbo
7. 17:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC) Undid revision 1223285595 by ElKevbo

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 13:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 21:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC) Discussion started by ElKevbo

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 18:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments:
The editor has engaged in a slow edit war over content that could be perceived as negative. They have reverted multiple editors, and after the warning and attempt to engage in discussion by ElKevbo, the editor responded then reverted one minute later. Even if the editor is correct about the current event, their actions violate the spirit of the edit warring policy by hampering discussion. Redraiderengineer (talk) 18:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 72 hours from article. Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Page: Marc Gafni (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Netanya9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [114]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [115]
2. [116]
3. [117]
4. [118]
5. [119]
6. [120]
7. [121]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [122]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [123]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [124]

Comments:
Note: Netanya9 is continuing to revert after this report was made (#5, #6 & #7). Skyerise (talk) 23:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely pblocked from editing the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2024 (UTC)