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:AirshipJungleman29 reported by User:176.88.165.232 (Result: declined)

Page: Khwarezmian Empire (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: AirshipJungleman29 (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. [1]
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [diff]

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [4]

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

Comments:
Does not raise any objection on talk page. My contribution came with 3 different sources, 2 of which corraborates the first one. 1 from official government website and 1 from academic paper (which was available online and in English, link attached to the citation). but Airshipjungleman29 did not raise any objection even though I invited him both on talk page and in edit-summary panel. Just kept edit warring without raising any objection 176.88.165.232 (talk) 20:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

The most important part is that, I assert, AirshipJungleman29's behaviour is political: In the current version of the article, the section "Culture, the section he was sabotaging is unsourcedly attributed to Persians: when a content is attributed to Persians without a source, AirshipJungleman29 and HistoryofIran do not dispute it but when triple sourced content attributes the culture into Turkmens, HistoryofIran and AirshipJungleman29 immediately starts edit war. 176.88.165.232 (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• Declined for oh so many reasons:
  • The page is already protected.
  • You're the only one who has actually broken 3RR on this page. (Were it not for the protection this would be WP:BOOMERANG.)
  • Your report is malformed, and the "page" link goes to a completely different page from your diffs.
  • Your link to the attempt to resolve the dispute on the article's talk page goes to the other editor's user talk page; I don't see you trying to discuss this on the article's talk page at all.
• --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 20:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  • The report Has nothing to do with the protection.
  • The report has nothing to do with 3RR
  • Both the page link and 3 diff links go to the same pageç
  • 1. they did not try to discuss their complainment on the article's talk page but their report was not declined. then, how is my report declined? :D Lol. Just state you are siding with them so that you can cover each other. I won't leave it here.

  176.88.165.232 (talk) 21:09, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  The page link does go somewhere else -- to a page that redirects to the article in question. Thus, the "history" link does not show the edit warring.

  I cannot speak as to why another report evaluated by a different administrator was accepted or declined. You would have to ask them. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 21:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  Wait, why did you ignore that he does not raise any objection? He just reverts without arguing anything. The page being protected has nothing to do with their reverts being completely unexplained or my 3RR has nothing to do with their arbitrary reverts. These are just red-herring to cover their faults so that fellows are not penalized 176.88.165.232 (talk) 21:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oh and I didn't even notice that there was already an actioned ANEW report involving you. This report therefore also seems retaliatory. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 21:00, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  They can report without discussing on talk page but I can not report without discussing on talk page? Obviously, corrupted admin sides with his/her fellows. Unsourced content gets free pass when it is about Persians but triple sourced content rejected when it is about Turkmens. You are racists --176.88.165.232 (talk) 176.88.165.232 (talk) 21:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  Please see WP:ONUS and WP:BRD. If you are trying to add content and that addition gets reverted, you are expected to open discussion on the article's talk page.

  And I'd suggest striking your personal attack. Aside from being inappropriate, I wasn't even aware of the other ANEW report when I evaluated this one. My conclusion was reached completely independently, based solely on your behavior. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 21:14, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  Nor WP:ONUS neither WP:BRD has such policy. Otherwise, you could revert any edit and then that editor would have been expected to open discussion. Do you even see how absurd your excuse is? 176.88.165.232 (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

  That's... literally what they both say. Yes, that is exactly what is expected to happen. At this point I'm not going to reply any further as this clearly is a case of I didn't hear that. Note that there are about 850 administrators, many of whom frequent this page. If they disagree with my decision here they are welcome to chime in. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 21:35, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

I have put a CTOPS notice on the talk page since the article comes under the scope of ARBIPA. Daniel Case (talk) 03:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Hariwulf reported by User:Ermenrich (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Merseburg charms (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Hariwulf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [5]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [6]
2. [7]
3. [8]
4. [9]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [10]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [11]

Comments:

New user (started as an IP) adding unsourced material to the article and then simply re-adding it after given links to WP:RS and edit warning templates.--Ermenrich (talk) 00:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

User Ermenrich acted as a totalitarian authority of Wikipedia with the ability to delete edits (without stating clearly the reason for doing so) rather than even considering to build around them. I also edited the page only twice with my account (meaning after having read and agreed on the Terms).

In the 90 minutes of life of my account, I have been warned and reported, while Ermenrich refused to find, together with me, an amicable resolution to the issue (he finds my edit "ludicrous", albeit we are referring to simple phonetics).

I may be new and have quoted Wikipedia on the Talk page instead of the source of the article, however this was on the Talk page itself and to foster discussion.

Also, while not related to this subject, I would like to state my indignation towards the unfriendliness and attitude towards new users here on Wikipedia. I did come across a number of rants addressed at Editors acting in "one-sided", "entitled" and "owning" ways, and apparently I should have better heeded the warning.

No one enjoys facing this amount hostility and issues moments after joining a community with the hope to help it. It is the same as trying to scare away newcomers.

With this in consideration, I look forward to what the Administrators will have to say on the matter. Hariwulf (talk) 01:06, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

...or, instead of ranting about how you've been wronged by my telling you you can't add unsourced material to Wikipedia, you could simply self-revert your addition of unsourced nonsense to the article.--Ermenrich (talk) 01:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  Just FYI, Hariwulf appears to be engaged in block evasion: an IP has continued to reinstate his edits: [12], [13].--Ermenrich (talk) 21:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Earl of Arundel reported by User:Muboshgu (Result: Blocked one week)

Page: Talk:2024 United States presidential election (edit | subject | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Earl of Arundel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Super Goku V (talk): Hatting an ongoing discussion is an act of censorship and will not be tolerated"
2. 01:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Reverted good faith edits by David O. Johnson (talk): Censorship must not be tolerated"
3. 00:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257046489 by David O. Johnson (talk) Reverting attempts to censor discussion on a talk page"
4. 23:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257041182 by Esolo5002 (talk) Please seek consensus on the talk page before closing active discussions"
5. 22:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by David O. Johnson (talk): Please seek consensus on the talk page before closing active discussions"
6. 21:11, 12 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257027093 by David O. Johnson (talk) Hatting without consensus is tantamount to censorship of a talk-page"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 01:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Talk:2024 United States presidential election."
2. 15:32, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "/* November 2024 */ Reply"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 01:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC) on User talk:Earl of Arundel "/* November 2024 */ Censorship must not be tolerated"

Comments:

User violated 3RR yesterday, but had not received the talk page warning, so I warned them rather than report. They responded by indicating that they will not stop. Editor is clearly viewing WP:ARBAP2 as a WP:BATTLEGROUND – Muboshgu (talk) 15:34, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I was reverting attempts to suppress discussion on a talk page. The purpose of the 3RR is to prevent disruptive edits of articles (which I have respected). Moreover, your reversion [[14]] of my NPOV revisions is just another example the kind of partisan-biased wording that is currently rampant across the project. Earl of Arundel (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Actually, 3RR applies to talk pages too. See WP:3RR. — Czello ^(music) 16:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Yup. And I detailed what was wrong with the main page edit with wikipolicy. An WP:IDHT response calling it "partisan" is not promising for future collaboration. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

See exemption #4. Suppression of discussion is vandalism: "On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge.The malicious removal of encyclopedic content, or the changing of such content beyond all recognition, without any regard to our core content policies of neutral point of view (which does not mean no point of view), verifiability and no original research, is a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia." Earl of Arundel (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't recognise the attempts to hat that discussion as suppression of discussion or vandalism. The discussion had descended into debates about whether Haitians eating people's pets, with spurious videos being posted as proof. This isn't constructive to the project. — Czello ^(music) 16:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 16:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

User:2601:243:1A00:4510:D4:B6C6:C0D0:4EC7 reported by User:Vipz (Result: /64 blocked three months)

Page: Josip Broz Tito (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 2601:243:1A00:4510:D4:B6C6:C0D0:4EC7 (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: On article Josip Broz Tito:

1. Diffs listed in the first report
2. Diffs listed in the second report
3. Special:Diff/1257086742

On article Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia:

1. Special:Diff/1257087517 from Special:Diff/1253652929

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1257243658

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

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1254126495.

Comments:
See comments made in the previous report. Classic block evasion. Apart from the aforementioned two articles, Prime Minister of Yugoslavia has also become a target of this single-purpose IP hopper. –Vipz (talk) 23:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of three months 2601:243:1A00:4510:0:0:0:0/64 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

User:TypicallyRyan reported by User:Northern Moonlight (Result: Declined – malformed report)

Page: The Voice (franchise) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: TypicallyRyan (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. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Voice_(franchise)&oldid=1257205985
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Voice_(franchise)&oldid=1257206101
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Voice_(franchise)&oldid=1257206226
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Voice_(franchise)&oldid=1257254774
5. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Voice_(franchise)&oldid=1257255773

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TypicallyRyan&oldid=1257256104

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TypicallyRyan&oldid=1257207461

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

Comments:

• Bonus: Falsely accusing me of being a bot. Northern Moonlight 01:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Bbb23 (talk) 01:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

User:TypicallyRyan reported by User:Northern Moonlight (Result: No violation)

Page: The Voice (franchise) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257255159 by Northern Moonlight (talk) Dude, I read your comment. You dont have a right to make any major changes like yours to an article YOU DONT OWN. Stop messing with it and leave it alone."
2. 00:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257233603 by Northern Moonlight (talk) Listen man, don't mess with the article formatting. I didn't make this article in the first place. It was completely fine the way it was, and if you don't like it then don't bother lookin back on this page. But just please leave it."
3. Consecutive edits made from 20:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC) to 20:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
   1. 20:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Leave them the way they were, no use in getting rid of the colors. It helps people figure out when each season begins or ends."
   2. 20:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257201501 by Northern Moonlight (talk) Same with this one don't get rid of the hosts or coaches."
   3. 20:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257201053 by Northern Moonlight (talk) Dont' get rid of the winners either, please leave them alone."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 20:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Comments:

• Bonus: Falsely accusing me of being a bot. Northern Moonlight 01:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I apologize for the comment. I shouldn't have said that. I was only trying to defend the article. But it's no excuse. TypicallyRyan (talk) 01:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

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. That series of three edits at the bottom is the original edit, not a revert. I would also note that the diff of "effort to resolve differences on the article talk page" is actually a diff of an edit to the reported user's talk page. That won't fly. Attempting to resolve differences on the article talk page (which has not been used for most of the year, much less recently) is to be greatly preferred as this is more conducive to other, previously uninvolved users getting into the discussion and reaching a consensus. Daniel Case (talk) 03:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Hanada12 reported by User:Seawolf35 HGAV (Result: Declined)

Page: 1932 United States presidential election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Hanada12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Name one candidate since 1932 that called their opponent a "fat capon" or a "chameleon in plaid.""
2. 02:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Information and details about the campaign and contention between the candidates."
3. 02:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1257268163 by Jon698 (talk)"
4. 02:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "I think they are worthy of being in the article."
5. 01:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "It provides more information about the campaign, so it does contribute to the article. Also, it was in an earlier version of the article."
6. 22:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC) "/* Campaign */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:12, 14 November 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on 1932 United States presidential election."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Warned and then immediately reverted again. -- Seawolf35 (talk) 02:17, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Has the other party been warned as well? I did not see any indication of this. Thank you. Hanada12 (talk) 02:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I recognize I should have used the talk page, but the other party did the same thing I did and he was not warned, so I believe this demonstrates favoritism towards one side. Hanada12 (talk) 02:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I just warned him. MessageApp (talk) 02:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. It would have been nice if it was done at the same time, to avoid showing favoritism to one side or the other. But I appreciate that you have now notified both sides. Thank you. Hanada12 (talk) 02:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Also notifying User:Jon698 as well, the other editor involved in this. -- Seawolf35 (talk) 02:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. It would have been nice if it was done at the same time, to avoid showing favoritism to one side or the other. But I appreciate that you have now notified both sides. Thank you. Hanada12 (talk) 02:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Declined Hanada just created their account today (well, "today" by North American time) and as such could not reasonably be expected to have been aware of 3RR. They have also been very collegial here. But now that you know that you can't just revert away, Hanada, please behave accordingly. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your consideration. Yes, I was not aware of the rules and I was also shocked at the way the other member was coming at me. But I will be more careful next time, thank you again. Hanada12 (talk) 05:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

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: [15]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [16] + [17]
2. [18]
3. [19]
4. [20]

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

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)