Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
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 Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring. Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR) An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions. Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Click here to create a new report

User:Hkshkss reported by User:HalJor (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Male dominance (BDSM) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Hkshkss (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Version before insertion of disputed content

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. The original insertion showing the full content (including ChatGPT prompts)
2. Secondary version with cleanup (removing prompts and formatting)
3. [1]
4. [2]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [3] and [4]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [5]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [6]

Comments:

While Wikipedia does not have an explicit policy against WP:AI, it feels more appropriate for summarizing a movie plotline, than it is for describing complex human relationships (as I stated in the Talk page here). Hkshkss has not directly acknowledged any of the stated concerns over AI and needing reliable sources (originally only in the edit summaries, later on their or the article's Talk pages), but only restored the disputed text in response. Please help resolving this content. HalJor (talk) 17:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• The edit summary of Special:Diff/1263046675 seems to show that Hkshkss really views this edit war as a war to be won, with opposing editors having to be "defeated". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

User:1.220.90.182 reported by User:Belbury (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Kathy Staff (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 1.220.90.182 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "statement was only definitely correct at time of installation/writing, anything after that is a mere presumption, hence the use of the past tense being fine here, so no need to revert, thanks."
2. 15:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "rvv, previous version was correct"
3. 11:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "better"
4. 08:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "we don't include unencyclopaedic presumptions; it was there at the time of installation/writing."
5. 19:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC) ""
6. 19:42, 12 December 2024 (UTC) "/* Illness and death */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 15:26, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Kathy Staff."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 17:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "/* St Mark's Church memorial */ new section"

Comments:

Edit warring over whether "She is commemorated in a memorial screen at the church." should be in the past tense, ignoring the talk page. Belbury (talk) 17:54, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Seems like a pretty lame edit war, and ZeroAlpha87 is also edit-warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I find many an edit war on Wikipedia to be lame, but different users feel strongly about different things. I have gone to the effort of providing another source, which is more than can be said for the other user. ZeroAlpha87 (talk) 18:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

This is true. Thanks to Belbury's intervention, a talk page discussion exists and ZeroAlpha87 has joined the discussion instead of continuing to revert. 1.220.90.182 would still be welcome to join the discussion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:28, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

User:91.199.154.94 reported by User:SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (Result: Blocked 1 month)

Page: Angolan Civil War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 91.199.154.94 (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. diff #1
2. diff #2
3. diff #3

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

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

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

Comments:

This IP is also a proxy IP too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk • contribs) 19:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• I almost thought this was stale. It continued an hour after the report was made, though. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
• Blocked – for a period of 1 month ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:48, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
• SpinnerLaserzthe2nd, if the reverts continue from a different IP address, please let me know and feel free to revert block evasion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:49, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

User:German198 reported by User:Adakiko (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: Power Rangers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: German198 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

• Original state
• First edits by German988 01:17, 15 December 2024

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 06:24, 15 December 2024
2. 06:19, 15 December 2024
3. 05:50, 15 December 2024
4. 05:48, 15 December 2024
5. 05:46, 15 December 2024

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 06:22, 15 December 2024

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff] Rather poor attempt here: 15 December 2024

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff] 07:01, 15 December 2024

Comments:

Telling talk page edit by German198 06:23, 15 December 2024 Adakiko (talk) 07:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I would try to inform them about the definition of plagiarism, and how Power Rangers does not fit the definition, but I think they'll refuse to listen.CRBoyer 07:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Oh yeah, another thing. User insists the franchise is dead. But with a new comic book series and a video game these last few months, the franchise isn't that dead, no? Not that the user seems to care. CRBoyer 07:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Plus, Hasbro gave the toy rights to Playmates. An article detailing that was wiped in the user's first edit tonight. CRBoyer 07:21, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Their edit summary was usually "date correction" which does not describe their edit(s). Adakiko (talk) 07:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked for socking and edit-warring.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Uness232 reported by User:217.44.10.171 (Result: Page semi-protected, rollback removed)

Page: Sabiha Gökçen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Uness232 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [7]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [8]
2. [9]
3. [10]
4. [11]
5. [12]
6. [13]
7. [14]
8. [15]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [16]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [17]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [18]

Comments:

217.44.10.171 (talk) 09:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC) Contentious, poorly sourced (not RS), POV content has been repeatedly added (or added by reverting) by one editor since November, without any attempt to gain consensus or discuss on the article talk page, and despite other editors giving good reasons and cause for concern in edit histories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.10.171 (talk) 10:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:35, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
• Uness232 had been blocked less than a month ago by Voorts for edit warring about the Isles of Scilly (diff list). The same type of edit warring that led to the block has now reocurred in the article about Sabiha Gökçen (diff list). I have removed their rollback permission for now, and WP:ONUS applies: Those favoring inclusion of the paragraphs need to find a consensus before restoring them. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:35, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Jypian reported by User:Btspurplegalaxy (Result: Stale)

Page: Juice Wrld (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Jypian (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:

1. 10:42, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "/* File permission problem with File:JuiceWrld.jpeg */ new section"
2. 11:00, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "/* December 2024 */ new section"
3. 11:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "Notification: tagging for deletion of File:JuiceWrld.jpeg."
4. 11:17, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "/* December 2024 */ Reply"
5. 11:21, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "/* December 2024 */ Reply"
6. 11:21, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "/* December 2024 */"
7. 11:33, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Juice Wrld."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

I’m unsure of the process for reporting a user who has uploaded a directly copyrighted image, as I’ve never encountered this situation before. This editor has repeatedly removed my tag on the image in question and continues to restore the copyrighted material. Here’s the link to the image: [19]. Btspurplegalaxy  👁️‍🗨 11:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I got permission and you false reporting

Here is the proof

Jypian (talk) 11:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

he posted them on Flickr not to get me copyrighted for me Jypian (talk) 11:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

His name matches his name on Flickr Jypian (talk) 11:56, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

"Permission to use [an image] in Wikipedia" is meaningless, Jypian; with few exceptions that don't apply here, a compatible license is required. An external website displaying such a license, in this case Flickr with CC0, could be compatible with Wikimedia Commons. And as the image is now on Wikimedia Commons and the English Wikipedia file page has been deleted, there is nothing left to edit war about. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Stale ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:20, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

User:RubberJackal reported by User:Skitash (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Page: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: RubberJackal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [20]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:58, December 15, 2024 (revert of this edit)
2. 14:40, December 15, 2024
3. 15:07, December 15, 2024
4. 15:33, December 15, 2024
5. 15:48, December 15, 2024

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [21][22][23]

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [25]

Comments:
This editor appears to be a WP:SPA as they won't stop edit warring (which they have been doing since May) on the same three articles, while pushing their own WP:OR and not attempting to achieve consensus first. They have been edit warring against multiple editors and deleting (and ignoring) all their warnings from their talk page. Skitash (talk) 15:48, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Skitash has been reverting edits to the referenced articles without providing significant justification or discussion. They have also been deleting warnings for their engagement in edit/revision warring without providing discussion. In their only response to a discussion, Skitash provided sources that countered their own justification (and supported my original edits) but they continued to participate in an edit war. The only other editor to revert my edits was on this day, and I suspect is a proxy or familiar to Skitash for the purposes of this accusation. My account is clearly not a WP:SPA as it has existed for a long time and participated in other unrelated edits. The accusation by Skitash is a double edged sword, as they have not provided sufficient justification for their reversions to my edits and refused to discuss the edits on multiple occasions or provide sufficient justification/response to justifications. RubberJackal (talk) 16:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

It is also my belief that their candor has been attempts at intimidating me, and not sincere attempts at discussion or dissuasion, but are trying to make themselves appear as an administrator or other authority by using aggressive and authoritative prompts and messages. They did not attempt a good faith discussion in response to my original edits and revisions, even when welcomed to participate in one. RubberJackal (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm probably being a little dim here, but most of the sources state Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died by suicide by activating a suicide vest? Regardless of the target, purposefully activating a suicide vest is causing an explosion on purpose?

Also, you stated The only other editor to revert my edits was on this day, and I suspect is a proxy or familiar to Skitash for the purposes of this accusation. It might be advisable that you don't cast aspersions on the editor/s motivation for reverting edits. Knitsey (talk) 16:24, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, my mobile notification that another editor (Bbb23) had replied doesn't seem to be working at the mo. Knitsey (talk) 16:26, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:22, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Str1977 reported by User:Cambial Yellowing (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Science of Identity Foundation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Str1977 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:25, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "more editors on talk support these edits than not - which in any case is closer to the status quo"
2. 20:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "because I used the template from one ref as a template for the next and forgot to change it - you are not following BLP, a policy to protect living people from slander - you are doing the opposite"
3. 19:33, 15 December 2024 (UTC) "rm what you don't like is POV pushing"
4. 21:37, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "I added important counterpoint based on RS and removed nothing - I only moved the video further down to sit next to other TG statements about Butler"
5. 10:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC) "rm anything that contradicts your POV is called POV pushing"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Ongoing discussion at Talk:Science of Identity Foundation#Tulsi Gabbard distanced herself from SIF and Butler and Talk:Science of Identity Foundation#Basic content policies. Str1977 now edit warring, reverting three different editors, to add BLP-related content. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

The dispute on this article is about the policies of WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. The dispute is about another editor (not Cambial) radically removing anything that does not conform to his particular POV. BLP is relevant because he is basically trying to paint a slanderous picture of a living person. Anything, source to RS, that contradicts that picture he removes.

Cambial, who has no history of being involved in this article, has inserted himself (in a purely destructive fashion) in this discussion - and in reverting the article - out of revenge because he has a conflict with me on a completely different article. Str1977 ^(talk) 23:23, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Your groundless accusations of bad faith aside, whether you think you are right does not excuse your edit warring. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

This is a bit more complicated than "WP:BLPRESTORE". The disputed content in this case is context for the rest of the section, and without the context, the neutrality of the section is disputed. Str1977, Hipal, RogerYg, Cambial Yellowing: I think you need an RfC at this point, with a formal closure that can be enforced. I guess I'll start one. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:23, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Orpaul reported by User:PatGallacher (Result: Stale)

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

This user has persistently engaged in edit warring on this article, including violating the 3RR and misuse of the minor edits flag. You can see this from the article history and the user's talk page. PatGallacher (talk) 00:24, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

PatGallacher, it's been a few days and this seems to have already ended. Unless I'm overlooking something, I think this can be closed for now? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:35, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Ok, but I will keep an eye on this. PatGallacher (talk) 00:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! And feel free to re-report. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Stale ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:58, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Genuine23446 reported by User:TLJ7863 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Nuatali Nelmes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Genuine23446 (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 13:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC) to 13:10, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
   1. 13:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Fixed misleading information"
   2. 13:10, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Fixed"
2. 12:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Defamatory and in breech on content controls"
3. Consecutive edits made from 12:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC) to 12:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
   1. 12:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Edited out vandalism and defamation"
   2. 12:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC) ""
4. 12:42, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "/* Resignation of Lisa Tierney */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Keeps removing content despite being reverted numerous times and failing to find a consensus on the article's talk page. TLJ7863 (talk) 13:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Cross-posting from my original post at AIV. Following the edit-warring removals in August of unflattering content by sockmaster Wildhorse13992 and anon sock 202.43.81.128, described at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 210, master once more removed the content without a policy-based rationale on 9 December [26] and 15 December [27]. These edits were reverted, and master Wildhorse13992 ceased editing. New SPA Wildhorse13992 was just created half an hour ago, and has resumed the edit warring and unjustified blanking of unflattering content. Second account has also requested page protection for the article: [28]. Wikishovel (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Page protected Isabelle Belato ^🏳‍🌈 13:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

User:181.115.215.20 reported by User:CurryTime7-24 (Result: Blocked two weeks)

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

User being reported: 181.115.215.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Leprechaun (film)"
2. 18:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Leprechaun (film)"
3. 18:14, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Leprechaun (film)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Vandalism using multiple IPs on Ice Cream Man (film)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

IP-hopping user who persistently makes disruptive edits to genre film articles. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:47, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of two weeks Daniel Case (talk) 20:11, 16 December 2024 (UTC)