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:108.44.242.138 reported by User:MrOllie (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: Modern monetary theory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 108.44.242.138 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257368995 by MrOllie (talk)"
2. 15:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "As noted there is not consensus, if you continue you will be reported to the edit warring noticeboard I've already contacted all the people you have been defaming, and they agree you are basically defaming their work"
3. 15:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "removing that MMT supports a zero interest rate policy is POV pushing, sorry dude, it is supported by secondary sources"
4. 15:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1256886571 by MrOllie (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 15:33, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 15:22, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "/* This article is incredibly flawed and inaccurate - likely vandalized. */ Reply"

Comments:

Pro-fringe pov pushing. Note that one of the edit summaries contains a threat about defamation. IP has also been calling other users vandals in the linked talk page discussion. MrOllie (talk) 15:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

MrOllie along with others have been defaming the works of a number of living MMT economists by implying they support universal tax increases as a primary response to inflation and that Murray Rothbard (who has been dead since 1995) has commented on MMT. The sources clearly establish a litany of ways MMT proposes to deal with inflation, both secondary and primary, and which are not limited to taxation. Recently New School NYC professor Andrés Bernal, among others, have come to Wikipedia try to explain some of of this to Ollie and Avatar, but neglected to mention the secondary sources also support more than just taxation as a way to address inflation from an MMT framework. Additionally, 0 sources state the MMT support a universal tax increase to combat inflation, not even the out of context quote in the WSJ hit job, making that implication something between a misleading fabrication and WP:UNDUE for the lede.

Mr. Ollie and Avatar have been engaging in edit warring against a broad number of people for months, including people inside and outside academia, and have only referenced 1-2 sources throughout the whole ordeal compared to the nearly dozen plus WP:RS sources they've reverted with often no reason given. Rather than taking an honest look at the Vox, Bloomerg, and many other sources in question they prefer to try to find ways to ban as many people who disagree with them as possible, and then stating no RS was given in talk. The most recent phrase in question, specifically "According to MMT, governments do not need to worry about accumulating debt since they can pay interest by printing money" has actually had no proper source presented for it whatsoever, is contradicted by the included source in any version of the lede, and Ollie keeps acting like the lede is untouchable by anyone just because another IP hasn't presented RS. There's even a Bloomberg article where the founder of MMT founder specifically advocates against excessive interest payments because of inflation worries, and is why he advocates a 0 interest rate policy. 108.44.242.138 (talk) 15:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Daniel Case (talk) 21:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

User:5.107.87.236 reported by User:Belbury (Result: Semi-protected one week)

Page: Malabar Muslims (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 5.107.87.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "sanghi vandalism by IP 207.96.13.12. Undid revision 1257392475 by 207.96.13.12 (talk)"
2. 17:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "indian sanghi vandalism. Undid revision 1257392239 by 207.96.13.12 (talk)"
3. 17:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "indian sanghi vandalismUndid revision 1257391973 by 207.96.13.12 (talk)"
4. 17:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "vandalism. Undid revision 1257389432 by 207.96.13.12 (talk)"
5. 16:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257379424 by 207.96.13.12 (talk)"
6. 16:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257379058 by 207.96.13.12 (talk)"
7. 16:31, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257377410 by ItTollsForThee (talk)"
8. Consecutive edits made from 16:22, 14 November 2024 (UTC) to 16:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
   1. 16:22, 14 November 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 16:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC) ""
9. Consecutive edits made from 15:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC) to 16:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
   1. 15:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC) ""
   2. 16:06, 14 November 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Malabar Muslims."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:28, 14 November 2024 (UTC) on Talk:Malabar Muslims "/* Mappila are descendants of lower caste hindus */ new section"

Comments:

Edit warring with User:207.96.13.12 (who has also gone beyond 3RR after a warning). 207.96.13.12 opened a talk page thread but the other IP has not responded. Belbury (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• The article has been semi-protected for one week by another admin.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

User:5.59.181.17 reported by User:Ymblanter (Result: Blocked 24 hours)

Page: Nikolai Sudzilovsky (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 5.59.181.17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [2] + [3]
2. [4]
3. [5]
4. [6]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [7], also gave them a contentious topics alert

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: The talk page has a discussion on the topic from 2008, but, well, who reads talk pages.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [8]

Comments:

• The IP is edit-warring trying to insert nationalistic bullshit into an article on a contentious topic. Their only conclusion was that I am a "Russian editor".Ymblanter (talk) 19:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours. I have also warned the IP about their nationalistic aspersions. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  I have added a CTOPS notice (ARBEE) to the talk page. Daniel Case (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

User:92.53.13.55 reported by User:StephenMacky1 (Result: Blocked 1 week; page protected for a month)

Page: Šar Mountains (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 92.53.13.55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 19:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC) "No I see coordinated attack and bully from organized Bulgarian internet brigade. Why are you constantly obsessed with my country? And despite giving practical source you are still vandalising the page. If bigger Wikipedia moderators tolerate this let it be but individuals like these are destroying this website credibility. Undid revision 1257595118 by StephenMacky1 (talk)"
2. 18:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC) "Please explain how this is vandalism. It would be required against you indeed. Undid revision 1257589859 by Jingiby (talk)"
3. 18:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC) "It is an improvement because ~56% of Shara belongs to N. Macedonia and the local context is missing out, btw I live on the mountain and you can check it by the IP. Anyway I added a practical source Undid revision 1257588676 by Jingiby (talk)"
4. 18:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC) "As it writes this is Macedonian tradition and I added the local context about the name because it missed out in the article and it is well known among population here, you don't need academic sources but can simply check it in Google Translate. Just tried to use my knowledge and contribute to a better content :) Undid revision 1257583073 by StephenMacky1 (talk)"
5. 17:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC) "Added English source Undid revision 1257573778 by Βατο (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Persistent edit warring and also making personal attacks. Note that the IP is also partially blocked for edit warring. StephenMacky1 (talk) 19:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week. @StephenMacky1:, the IP is not partially blocked Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:36, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  All right. Thank you. Must have been some sort of error then. StephenMacky1 (talk) 19:54, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  Ponyo also protected the article for a month. I have added a CTOPS notice to the talk page Daniel Case (talk) 22:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Ship man five reported by User:RachelTensions (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Saint John, New Brunswick (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Ship man five (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC) ""
2. 20:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC) ""
3. 19:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC) ""
4. 15:53, 15 November 2024 (UTC) ""
5. 15:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC) ""
6. 12:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Insignificant information to be used as a introduction. The cities are nominally different in size. Outdated population numbers."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: [9]

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 22:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC) "/* Edit war */ Reply"

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 00:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

User:WickedFanAccount reported by User:Happily888 (Result: )

Page: Wicked (2024 film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC) "This is a change I made before you came in. YOU need to start the discussion. Not me. Part I is not a subtitle"
2. 04:53, 16 November 2024 (UTC) "No colon as per source AND sequel title"
3. 03:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC) "no colon in onscreen title"
4. 20:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC) "Onscreen title AND source both use a Roman numeral"
5. 06:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC) "I did."
6. 02:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC) ""
7. 02:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC) ""
8. 02:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC) "Message re. Wicked (2024 film) (HG) (3.4.12)."
2. 03:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC) "Welcome to Wikipedia!"
3. 04:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Wicked (2024 film)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 08:30, 16 November 2024 (UTC) "/* Wicked Part I or Wicked: Part I */ re"

Comments:

persistent vandalism and disregarding of MOS/NC; frequent edit warring. Also WP:SPA. Happily888 (talk) 05:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Let the record show that this was a contribution I made. Changing a "1" to a "I" as per the source listed and newfound information. Someone else added in the colon. I was told I had to start a discussion to get it changed. Why do *I* have to be the one to disscuss? Shouldn't the person who MADE the change do that? WickedFanAccount (talk) 11:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• @Happily888: What "persistent vandalism"?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:42, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  I haven't looked too deeply into the page history but I can see that the reporter looks like they have made four reverts during the last 24 hours, and may have broken 3RR. Fathoms Below (talk) 15:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Shawndmxk reported by User:Barry Wom (Result: )

Page: Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Shawndmxk (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [10]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [11]
2. [12]
3. [13]
4. [14]

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

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

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

Comments:

User:Signofgehenna reported by User:Create a template

Page: Orbital (novel) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User reported: Signofgehenna (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Consistently reverting or adding back that Orbital is a "science fiction" book, even though there is ongoing discussion about whether or not that is a complete and representative description of its genre. He initially added it on 14 November despite not being classified as such for over a month of the article's existence. Their only argument is Razor and the existence of at least one or two MSM outlets calling it "science fiction".

I added to the talk page that I was removing the classification in the lead, but retained it as one of the genres in the infobox. By keeping it simple as "a novel", this best represented the multi nature of the book as not being a conventional or purely science fiction work. I communicated why I believe this to be the case, to which another person concurred.

He then proceeded to edit my talk page post, perverting what I had said, and then added the description back multiple times, despite me wanting to find consensus before possibly adding back the classification of "science fiction" in the first sentence of the page. This in spite of me attempting to further explain the weaknesses of his argument in the talk page.

Initial version which was the standard for at least a month:
[17]

His edit on Nov 14:
[18] "Added genre. Just because it won The Booker doesn't stop it being fiction about science."

My reversion:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orbital_(novel)&oldid=1257707685 "It isn't strictly that genre"
along with an extensive argument as to why in the Talk page

Unacceptable edit on the talk page: [19]

Their abusive warring:
[20]
[21]
[22] Create a template (talk) 15:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)