Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard

Update this page

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:Ashur4ever reported by User:Dr.K. (Result: Indef)

Page

Kirkuk (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Ashur4ever (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 04:28, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
2. 04:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 02:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC) to 03:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 02:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Demographics */"
   2. 03:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   3. 03:14, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   4. 03:25, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   5. 03:26, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   6. 03:29, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   7. 03:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   8. 03:44, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   9. 03:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 23:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC) to 23:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 23:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   2. 23:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC) ""
5. Consecutive edits made from 23:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC) to 23:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 23:07, 2 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Demographics */"
   2. 23:08, 2 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   3. 23:13, 2 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Demographics */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 04:19, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Kirkuk. (TW★TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

SPA POV edits on Kirkuk. Blanking, apparent vandalism, removal of sources. Will not stop. Dr. K. 04:41, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely – by User:Coffee per WP:NOTHERE. Unfortunately this verdict seems correct. The account seems to have been created for the purpose of ethnic edit warring. EdJohnston (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Mambojazz1 reported by User:Mscuthbert (Result: Blocked)

Page

Isaiah Richardson Jr. (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Mambojazz1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 17:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "Again. Please READ THE ACTUAL ARTICLES!!!! Isaiah Richardson Jr's music has absolutely no relation to tourists. He has studied languages his entire life and grew up in Asia part of his life. He has been playing Jewish music since age 13 at Juilliard!"
2. 16:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "missing information as well as false information"
3. 16:18, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "added pertinate information. Still much missing"
4. 19:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC) "Lies"
5. 19:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC) "Lies"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 17:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "User warning for unconstructive editing found using STiki"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Reversion after User:Voceditenore gave final warning on user page. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

• I am tempted to punt on this right now thanks to Voceditenore's fixes that have made a nice, readable stub. I'll leave the report open and if Mambojazz1 reverts it all back before the end of the day, I think a block could be considered. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Blocked – 31 hours by User:Jayron32. EdJohnston (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Electricburst1996 reported by User:Cebr1979

Page

Plushophilia (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Electricburst1996 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4

Though it started before that with these other reverts as well:

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [1]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [2]

Comments:

This user feels strongly about an image but, regardless of having been shown/told why the image is there, they are resorting to edit warring to get their way... despite knowing full well that edit warring is wrong: 1, 2, 3, 4.Cebr1979 (talk) 23:45, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

A notice was placed on their talk page but, immediately removed so am @Electricburst1996: pinging them here now.Cebr1979 (talk) 23:49, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

...and now they have removed this whole notice from this very board!Cebr1979 (talk) 23:50, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

This case involves more than two editors. Four editors were involved, actually. Oh, and may I mention that Cebr1979 has a long-term history of personal attacks against other users? ElectricBurst^{(Electron firings)}_(Zaps) 23:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

The number of editors has nothing to do with anything. We're talking about the number of editors who have broken the very serious 3RR rule... and that's only you. I have never issued a personal attack towards you so I'm not sure why you brought that up, it has nothing to do with anything either. However, you deleting posts by others in order to suit your needs does have something to do with something because... you've done that before and have been told it's wrong: 1, 2.Cebr1979 (talk) 23:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to note that the diff provided for dispute resolution doesn't tell the entire story. The current diff for resolution could also be considered as this under the RfC heading. Electricburst1996 has agreed to consider a compromise, which is showing a willingness to work with other editors. He's also agreed to leave the existing image and article alone in good faith while I look for a more suitable image. Any punishment from this seems like it would just be punitive, since discussion appears to have yielded positive results. Note: This comment is saying nothing about his removal of this report or behavior outside of the article and associated talk page, but I believe those issues are better handled elsewhere. --Lithorien ^{Talk • Changes} 01:37, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Huh? Your diff for resolution didn't even exist when I filed this report (and there's no way you couldn't have known that when you came here since you had only made it 11 minutes prior). "He's also agreed to leave the existing image and article alone in good faith" is not good faith since he only agreed to that after being notified on his talk page of this very notice (and responded with a personal attack, I might add... an accusation he is quick to constantly throw at others). In regards to everything else, none of that happened until after this was filed either! As for the deleting, that can/maybe will go to ANI later, ya. It wasn't part of the case (nor did I imply it was), I was merely pointing it out/reminding the user of it so as to prevent him attempting it again. While it's great you notified this board of the outcome, your post really is bizarre.Cebr1979 (talk) 02:23, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

...and I hadn't even noticed until now that Bjelleklang just recently blocked the reported user for edit warring as well.Cebr1979 (talk) 02:43, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Just an outside comment: "just recently" = over 13 months ago. only (talk) 02:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh, right! Didn't notice the year. Have stricken, thank you!Cebr1979 (talk) 02:53, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:VanEman reported by User:Apriestofgix (Result: Warned)

Page

Frederick Trump (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

VanEman (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 00:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC) to 00:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 00:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 708143556 by Apriestofgix (talk) birth name usually mentioned in first line of early life."
   2. 00:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Early life */ Correct punctuation"
2. 21:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Early life */ birth name Trumpf"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 00:34, 4 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Frederick Trump */"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 00:32, 4 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Trumpf */"

Comments:

User continues to make edits that have been discussed on the Talk page and not adopted due to a lack of sources, or conflicting sources that have resulted in not adding that content to the main article. Apriestofgix (talk) 00:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

• Result: User:VanEman is warned for edit warring on Frederick Trump. This user made several reverts on March 3 and 4 and has never used the article talk page. EdJohnston (talk) 18:33, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Apriestofgix has deleted referenced information about Trump when there was no agreement at all on the talk page. He has deleted information from the "career" section that was referenced and had to do with Trump's career. VanEman (talk) 18:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:79.27.106.92 reported by User:Binksternet (Result: )

Page: Santo & Johnny (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 79.27.106.92 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [3]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [4] – 19:13, 3 March. Restoring Nikka Costa after being reverted.
2. [5] – 06:52, 4 March. Restoring Nikka Costa.
3. [6] – 07:37, 4 March. Restoring Nikka Costa.
4. [7] – 08:41, 4 March. Restoring Nikka Costa.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [8]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: None.

Comments:

With this edit on 1 March, Catania IP 82.53.45.90 began inserting Nikka Costa into this article. The Catania person changed to IP 79.27.106.92 on 3 March. Both IPs are promoting Nikka Costa, and the more recent one has inserted hoax material at the Nikka Costa biography, saying that her father was shot to death by a famous killer (rather than dying of chronic heart problems.) The hoaxing, the excessive promotion and the edit warring make this person disruptive to Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 09:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:103.27.235.22, 103.27.235.24, 103.27.235.25 reported by User:Crovata (Result: Semi)

Page: Oghur languages (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 103.27.235.22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 103.27.235.24 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 103.27.235.25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [9]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [10] - add of the pseudoscientific theory Sun Language Theory, IP 103.27.235.22
2. [11] - same, but now IP 103.27.235.24
3. [12] - same, but now IP 103.27.235.25
4. [13] - 4th revert by IP 103.27.235.24
5. [14] - placed speedy deletion template IP 103.27.235.24
6. [15] - reverted template IP 103.27.235.25
7. [16] - reverted template IP 103.27.235.22
8. [17] - extended template IP 103.27.235.22
9. [18] - 4th revert by IP 103.27.235.22
10. [19] - 17th edit overall by IPs

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: none, only through edit summary, due to resemblance to a previous sockpuppets

Comments:There are used intentionally three different IPs so could evade block because of 3RR, and continue doing disruptive edits, like Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PavelStaykov#13 February 2016. The connections with a pseudoscientific theory, although are a real branch of Turkic languages, are based on OR and that Hunnic wasn't Turkic (similar POV like PavelStaykov socks).

• Result: Semiprotected Oghur languages six months, due to an IP-hopping edit warrior. Let me know if he moves on to other articles. For background see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PavelStaykov. The IPs come from RackBank Data Centers in India. You might consider reporting them at WP:OP to see if a {{webhostblock}} may be justified. There is a chance that all the PavelStaykov socks come from webhosts. EdJohnston (talk) 15:46, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Macaque123 reported by User:Volunteer Marek (Result: Blocked)

Page: Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Macaque123 (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. [20]
2. [21]

This article is under a 1RR restriction. When you click "edit this page" a big warning shows up which explicitly states "Editors are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction when reverting logged-in users on all pages related to the Syrian Civil War and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, broadly construed. When in doubt, assume it is related, and don't revert." So the user is well aware of the restriction. They are also well aware of it because they've been notified [22].

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [24] and [25]. Five days, two threads, no response on talk.

Comments:

I'm also having trouble understanding the user's edit summaries which are close to being incomprehensible. In addition, the actual text changes and reverts, also mangle the grammar in the process.Volunteer Marek (talk) 18:40, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

• Blocked – 24 hours for WP:1RR violation. This editor seems to be limited in their use of English, and this can make it hard for others to understand them. EdJohnston (talk) 21:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Spirot67 reported by User:Ymblanter (Result: Blocked)

Page: The Daily Beast (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Spirot67 (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. [26]
2. [27]
3. [28]
4. [29]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [30], [31]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [32]
Crystal clear case of 3RR.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Comments:

Blocked – 24 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 21:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Redheylin reported by User:Dan56 (Result: )

After being warned on their talk page not to revert again and engage in an edit war and that there was an RfC opened at the talk page to discuss the contentious material they continue to add to the article, Redheylin reintroduced their material, for a fourth time, knowing the warnings, policies, implications, etc. They did not engage the RfC or the talk page of the article in question AT ALL. Dan56 (talk) 04:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Diffs of Redheylin edit warring:

• 02:58, 5 March 2016
• 03:40, 5 March 2016
• 04:09, 5 March 2016
• 04:48, 5 March 2016

Diffs of my attempt to discuss with Redheylin at their talk page:

• 03:11, 5 March 2016
• 03:50, 5 March 2016
• 03:59, 5 March 2016
• 04:12, 5 March 2016 (warning)

Diffs of my attempt to discuss at the article's talk page:

• 04:08, 5 March 2016 (opening an RfC)
• 05:08, 5 March 2016

Discussion

The subject of this page is a linguist and spare-time web-reviewer of music whose reviews are often quoted as Wikipedia sources. User:Dan56, whose main interest as an editor is also in pop music albums, watches this page and removes/reverts any mention of Starostin's reviews. He has done this many times, the history shows. He claims that (a) there is no source on the web that meets his standards of reliability that states that Starostin reviews albums, (b) that the title of Starostin's website, entitled "George Starostin's Album Reviews" does not constitute a statement from Starostin that he reviews records and (c) that it is in his opinion of no importance that he does so. He has therefore reverted inclusion of this statement three times today. He has issued an edit-warring notice on my page, but does not appear to have reported this, so I am doing so. He has been informed by a 3rd party that such a statement is acceptable. He refuses to accept any citation. This appears to me to be contentious, single-issue editing. I request arbitration on this. I shall inform User:Dan56 of this present submission. Thank you. Redheylin (talk) 04:34, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

"He has been informed by a 3rd party"??? What does that even mean SMH. Redheylin clearly has a competency issue, since none of the policies I cited and connected to issues with their sourcing, nor my opening of an RfC in light of this editor's edit warring, has registered with them. I messaged them directly after their first revert, I explained the policies at length in relation to the content after their second revert, and then opened an RfC (notifying this editor both in my edit summary reverting them and in my last message to their talk page. Yet he deflects my efforts at reasoning with poorly thought out statements and ignorance of how WP works. Like wtf is their problem?? Dan56 (talk) 04:38, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

("He has been informed by a 3rd party"??? What does that even mean) It means that User:Qwyrxian has stated, when commenting upon a previous instance of your many reversions at Talk:George Starostin, that

"Dan56 asked for my input as an experienced Wikipedian, and I have to say that Dan56 is completely correct. If no independent source has ever discussed his blog, then it shouldn't be covered here. Well, maybe we could have a single sentence (and I do stress maybe)"

However, I have added such an independent, non-self-published source. I have noticed your last statement to me that; "You're really annoying", and I consider it uncivil, likewise your allegation of incompetence above. I also object to your issuing an edit-war notice without reporting any edit-war. I have also noted that you have modified this page so that it appears that you have reported me here, whereas the edit-history will show that the opposite is the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=708365014

As I have stated, I consider your statement that Starostin has not claimed to review music to be mistaken and contentious, and I do not accept, in the light of his many Wikipedia citations and mentions in published works, that you ought to revert without notice on the grounds that "it is not important". Redheylin (talk) 04:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

First of all, you added a citation that doesn't say anything about him being a reviewer of pop music albums. Second of all, like I explained to you when I first messaged you, biographies of living persons require high-quality sources, and what is determined as a notable subject is based on significant coverage by multiple third-party sources. Thirdly, there are no Wikipedia citations to his blog, as it was considered unreliable in a discussion by WP:ALBUMS members a long time ago (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_44#Georgiy_Starostin) I gave you a warning for edit warring so you wouldn't do it again and I wouldn't have to report you. That's the point of a warning. Like duuuuuhhhh. But then again, you didn't really read any of my messages or warnings carefully, or go to the WP policies I referenced and linked, didya?? You just gave it a quick glance, and said "I'm right anyway" @Redheylin: Dan56 (talk) 05:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I note that, in addition to having altered this page, you have reverted a 4th time, claiming that the citation given, a book on Pink Floyd at;

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cAiL9oTFz78C&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=%22george+starostin%22+reviews&source=bl&ots=Otpqosp3Ec&sig=ccYecSPtiSsgLIqf1NYXJfHVRf8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilxeW73qjLAhUlD5oKHYnkBPoQ6AEIlwEwFQ#v=onepage&q=%22george%20starostin%22%20reviews&f=false

which refers at length to Starostin's reviews of this band, also does not constitute a confirmation that Mr Starostin reviews records - a contention that I consider mistaken and vexatious. It gives the URL of the said reviews and, as I have said, quotes them at length. I consider that your reversion, again without notice or negotiation, is inappropriate and that you have exceeded the 3-revert limit. I request that you refrain from posting on my page, the talk page and here, until arbitration is obtained. Thanks. Redheylin (talk) 05:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

That wasn't a revert since I didn't undo any part of your edit, whereas you readded the same content four times. I tagged your source for not supporting the statement you used it to support, because it didn't. If you had read any of the guidelines on WP:RS and WP:NOR that I cited, you would know better, but you don't because you clearly don't care at all about this being an encyclopedia, only about what you think is notable. "Without notice or negotiation"?? You're ridiculous lmao @Redheylin: Dan56 (talk) 05:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I think it will be obvious that I have added a selection of citations in attempts to meet your requirements and that you have reverted four times on different and spurious grounds without constructive comment. I think it will also be clear that, though you have tried to obtain a consensus, at the place you cite above, that these reviews are unreliable, you have failed to have done so. And I think that your continued false statements and your allegations that I am "annoying" and ridiculous" and "incompetent" are unacceptable. Once again I request that you forbear and await arbitration. Thanks. Redheylin (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

"Allegations"? "spurious grounds"?? Who are you, Atticus Finch? I didn't revert you for a fourth time. The statement you're so hell bent on adding is still in the article, is it not? Dan56 (talk) 05:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:71.174.132.60 reported by User:81.88.60.72 (Result: Blocked)

Page: Talk:Jewish Bolshevism (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 71.174.132.60 (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. Editing talk pages. 81.88.60.72 (talk) 06:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
2. [diff]
3. [diff]
4. [diff]

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

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

Comments:

• Blocked – 3 days. I've also semiprotected Jewish Bolshevism and its talk page. Since this editor is hopping IPs in the range 71.174.0.0/16, a rangeblock may be needed. See discussion of a rangeblock at ANI. Some people have referred to this IP as an antisemitic troll, so whenever he reappears my guess is that most admins would consider his edits revertable on sight. (He has used the website of the holocaust-denier David Irving as a source for references). Besides the IP address reported here, he has also used 71.174.130.100 and 71.174.127.111. Let me know if you think the problem is continuing. EdJohnston (talk) 17:39, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Dongough reported by User:Oshwah (Result: )

Page

Lee Kernaghan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Dongough (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

[33]

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 08:46, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 708388693 by 5.226.137.71 (talk)"
2. 08:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 708388399 by Oshwah (talk)"
3. 08:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Controversy */ Do not reinstate this section. Contact me privately to discuss if you wish (don@leekernaghan.com.au) , or at lease identify yourself"
4. 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 708387995 by 5.226.137.71 (talk)"
5. 08:37, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Controversy */ one sided view, does not accurately reflect Lee Kernaghan's point of view."
6. 08:34, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Controversy */"
7. 01:27, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Controversy */ Inaccurate interpretation of the actual facts."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 08:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Lee Kernaghan. (TW)"
2. 08:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Adding message"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

1. 00:54, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "‎Reversion of content by Dongough"

Comments:

Dongough has ignored my warnings and repeated attempts to get him to discuss his concerns on the article's talk page. I think that this is the only next option, as dispute resolution does not appear to be occurring at all. This appears to be a WP:COI issue as well with Dongough. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:51, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Update: It looks like I've been able to start a conversation dialogue with Dongough on the article's talk page, as well as provide the user with appropriate assistance. So long as the user ceases with edit warring on the article (as of this edit), then it may be okay to drop this report. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Arcenter, 71.179.21.197 reported by User:Oshwah (Result: )

Page: Timothy Parker (puzzle designer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Arcenter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 71.179.21.197 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [34]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [35]
2. [36]
3. [37]
4. [38]
5. [39]
6. [40]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. [41]
2. [42]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. [43]
2. [44]
3. [45]

Comments:

Another IP range (104.244.53.61, 104.244.53.62), as well as another user (Xmaster8621), have also begun adding content to the article Timothy Parker (puzzle designer). Temporary pending changes protection may also be necessary. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

More IPs have been involving themselves in this article and the dispute (as you'll see on the history page). I'm not going to continue listing them. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:33, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Driplivia reported by User:Uncle Milty (Result: )

Page

Aubrey McClendon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

Driplivia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 17:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
2. 17:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
3. 17:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
4. 16:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 708438620 by ClueBot NG (talk)"
5. 16:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Revert vandalism"
6. 16:51, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Undid revision 708438159 by Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

1. 17:41, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "Warning: Violating the three-revert rule on Aubrey McClendon. (TW)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

User:152.208.64.38 reported by User:FA9295 (Result: )

Page

Untitled Unmastered (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported

152.208.64.38 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to

Diffs of the user's reverts

1. 19:28, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
2. 19:27, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
3. 19:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
4. Consecutive edits made from 19:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 19:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 19:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   2. 19:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
5. 19:19, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Music and recording */"
6. 19:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
7. 19:15, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
8. Consecutive edits made from 19:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 19:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 19:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
   2. 19:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
9. Consecutive edits made from 19:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 19:06, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
   1. 19:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   2. 19:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   3. 19:04, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
   4. 19:06, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Notes */"
10. 19:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
11. Consecutive edits made from 18:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 19:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
    1. 18:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Notes */"
    2. 18:59, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Notes */"
    3. 19:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
12. Consecutive edits made from 18:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 18:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
    1. 18:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
    2. 18:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
13. Consecutive edits made from 18:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 18:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
    1. 18:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
    2. 18:21, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
    3. 18:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"
    4. 18:25, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
14. Consecutive edits made from 17:14, 5 March 2016 (UTC) to 17:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
    1. 17:14, 5 March 2016 (UTC) ""
    2. 17:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC) "/* Track listing */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page

Comments:

Long list of edit warring/edit reverting that is currently sparking an edit war at Untitled Unmastered. Persistent addition of poorly sourced or unsourced content. Please note that the editor (IP) has been notified, but the warnings are not selected because they were warned by another user (so I can't select them). FA9295 (talk) (contributions) 19:34, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Comment: as the other editor involved, I've also reported the IP editor at WP:AIV. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 19:37, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Bangla1234 reported by User:Barek (Result: )

Page: Brahmanbaria District (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bangla1234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:59, 5 March 2016‎ - Undid revision 708486195 by JJMC89
2. 21:52, 5 March 2016‎ - Undid revision 708484240 by Barek
3. 21:41, 5 March 2016‎ - ..
4. 08:37, 5 March 2016‎ - Undid revision 708385473 by Oshwah
5. 03:03, 5 March 2016‎ - Undid revision 708350942 by Yamaguchi先生

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

• 21:56, 5 March 2016 (→‎Warning re: edit warring on Brahmanbaria District: new section)

Comments:

User engaged in edit warring over poorly sourced content. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 22:11, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Hoyalawya reported by User:GeneralizationsAreBad (Result: )

Page: Center of Concern (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Hoyalawya (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [46]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [47]
2. [48]
3. [49]
4. [50]
5. [51]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [52]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [53]

Comments:

Adding promo material repeatedly to the page after repeated warnings against promotion and edit-warring. GAB^Hello! 02:48, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Giorgi Balakhadze reported by User:2001:E10:6840:21:20C:6EFF:FE07:58E3 (Result:)

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

Previous version reverted to: page editing. --2001:E10:6840:21:20C:6EFF:FE07:58E3 (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2016 (UTC) Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [diff]
2. [diff]
3. [diff]
4. [diff]

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

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

Comments:
Using pages. 2001:E10:6840:21:20C:6EFF:FE07:58E3 (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2016 (UTC)