Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard

Shortcuts

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

Noticeboard archives
Administrators' (archives, search)
347	348	349	350	351	352	353	354	355	356
357	358	359	360	361	362	363	364	365	366
Incidents (archives, search)
1153	1154	1155	1156	1157	1158	1159	1160	1161	1162
1163	1164	1165	1166	1167	1168	1169	1170	1171	1172
Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
470	471	472	473	474	475	476	477	478	479
480	481	482	483	484	485	486	487	488	489
Arbitration enforcement (archives)
325	326	327	328	329	330	331	332	333	334
335	336	337	338	339	340	341	342	343	344
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

User:Eds Etd reported by User:Demetrios1993 (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

Previous version reverted to: 17:49, 24 November 2024

Diffs of the user's reverts: Eds Etd alone has four reverts; it reaches six if we also count 77.29.61.254, which is obviously them. For example, besides Pelagonia, check the activity of both in Novgorod Republic, hours apart from each other. Assuming I am right, this is a clear violation of WP:LOUTSOCK as well.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 21:10, 24 November 2024

Comments:

The editor has done it before too, see 1 and 2 as example. They also refuse to discuss their changes every time. StephenMacky1 (talk) 21:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indefinitely blocked. See block log for details. I've also blocked their IP for 48 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Left CTOPS notice on talk page Daniel Case (talk) 20:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[[User:]] reported by User:The Black Revolutionary 2006 (Result: No violation and stale)

Page: 2012 Empire State Building shooting

DogeGamer2015MZT (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:

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:
n/a

No violation and stale. Also a mess that I'm not going to bother cleaning up.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Therealslimfan reported by User:Some1 (Result: Blocked one week)

User being reported: Therealslimfan (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:

15:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Talk:Murder_of_Laken_Riley#See_also

Comments:

Editor is still reverting after an EW warning on their talk. 3 different editors have reverted them so far. Their latest revert also includes a WP:PA in the edit summary and their talk page comment defending their reverts aren't that WP:CIVIL either. Some1 (talk) 23:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 00:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Perez90 reported by User:CaribDigita (Result: No violation)

Previous version reverted to: [6]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff] I added to the comments area that this his been talked about by academics plus media. To which they vandalized the page subsequently.

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

Comments:
No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. The first edit submitted as a revert is merely the edit the next three reverted to (as I have noted in the past, a common mistake). I would also add, in addition to the partial malformation here, that the edit-war warning should be a formal {{uw-editwar}} made on the user's talk page, not in an edit summary. Daniel Case (talk) 20:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also, contrary to the above, note that the article talk page has seen no new edits in two and a half months. Daniel Case (talk) 20:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:91.11.93.69 reported by User:Cooldudeseven7 (Result: Blocked one month)

User being reported: 91.11.93.69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

15:33, 26 November 2024 (UTC) "Bro, I Did Not Say That T.U.F.F. Puppy Has a TV-Y7 Rating! I'm Telling You This, It Has a TV-Y7-FV Rating! Oh, and Please Stop Putting Children's in There, Cause IT'S, NOT, FOR, CHILDREN, AT, ALL! It Also Did Not Rated TV-Y at All!"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

15:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC) "Not adhering to a neutral point of view (UV 0.1.6)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

16:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC) on T.U.F.F. Puppy "Reverting edit(s) by 87.173.81.149 (talk) to rev. 1254560650 by Cooldudeseven7: TV-Y7 does premiere on childrens networks, so there for it would be more factual to say that this is a childrens show. It is premiered on childrens network. (I am trying to resolve peace, please input what you think) (UV 0.1.6)"

Comments:

1st. In the page history, another user made the same edit. It seems this user is trying to repeat that- We also see very close edit warring. He is insulting other users via another IP as said by his edit descriptions previously. "WIll you please stop changing that back, you stupid man?!" was an example of this. The user has done other evidences of edit warring as well, as seen in the page history of T.U.F.F. Puppy, a primary page related to his editing, but with a different IP. I have used another users diff as evidence of resolving as the same edits were made.

Other edits made by this user with offensive text:
1
2 Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 15:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked the IP for one month for block evasion.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks! Cooldudeseven7 _{join in on the tea talk} 17:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pugnacitas reported by User:10mmsocket (Result: No violation)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

diff
diff

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:

Brand new user. I initially reverted the change made and left a welcome notice on user's talk page plus an edit summary on the article to discuss on the article talk page. User then reverted with an notice in the edit summary to discuss on talk page, and I left a 3RR and WP:BRD note, again with an invitation to go to the article talk page. User ignored all and reverted again. 10mmsocket (talk) 18:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No violation – there must be four or more reverts within a 24 hour period for the 3-Revert Rule to apply; the links you have provided do not meet these criteria. Daniel Case (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is an edit war independently of the three-revert rule, but WP:ONUS applies and 10mmsocket would have to seek a consensus before restoring the material. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Helpingothers1234 reported by User:SunDawn (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

User being reported: Helpingothers1234 (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:

02:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC) "Caution: Removal of content, blanking on Tyler Chapa."
02:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Tyler Chapa."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

11:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC) "/* Criminal history */ new section"

Comments:

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:2607:fea8:639f:8740:8138:a840:ad4d:ee4f reported by User:Mac Dreamstate (Result: /64 blocked for a week)

Previous version reverted to: [8] – revision without subjective terminology

Diffs of the user's reverts:

[9] – Canadian IP reverting once
[10] – twice
[11] – thrice
[12] – going..
[13] – going some more..

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [14] – 3RR

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: ongoing article talk page discussion

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [15]

Comments:
A Canadian IP, currently 2607:fea8:639f:8740:8138:a840:ad4d:ee4f, is back to edit warring at Naoya Inoue's article, having previously backed off in April after page protection. This time round, IP is fixated with the words "perfect" and "impressive" remaining in the article, despite MOS:PUFFERY recommending against doing so, and user Deaxmann striving to de-pufferise the article.

As well as disputing content, IP has also conduct issues, being uncivil towards User:Deaxmann and myself: [16], [17]. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP's grasp on how editing works appears to be misguided. Apparently, because an article has contained certain words (now under dispute) for six years, there is no reason to ever change it: [18]. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked – for a period of one week The 2607:FEA8:639F:8740:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) range, to be precise. Unfortunately, Mac, they are not the first editor to think that language in an article must considered set in stone after a certain time. Daniel Case (talk) 21:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. But to which MOS/guideline should I point such editors? I don't think it's WP:CCC, as there's nothing in the article for which consensus has been needed so far. Maybe WP:STABLE? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:24, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

v t e Noticeboards
Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles and content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Wikipedia noticeboards