View source for Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive196

{{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}

== [[User:Nlsanand]] and [[User:Kingjeff]] reported by [[User:Walter Görlitz]] (Result: Protected) ==

{{discussion top}}
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|2012 Toronto FC season}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Nlsanand}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Kingjeff}}

Nlsanand engaged in an edit war with me over this subject less than 36 hours earlier.

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Toronto_FC_season]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert for Kingjeff: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&oldid=512256618]
* 1st revert for Nlsanand: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512257397&oldid=512256880]
* 2nd revert for Kingjeff: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512257844&oldid=512257397]
* 2nd revert for Nlsanand including the taunt: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512258475&oldid=512257844]
* 3rd revert for Nlsanand: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512259584&oldid=512259036]
* 3rd revert for Kingjeff: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512260196&oldid=512259584]
* 4th revert for Nlsanand: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512260973&oldid=512260196]
* 5th revert for Nlsanand: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&curid=33616953&diff=512262480&oldid=512261528]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Both editors are experienced and Nlsanand even uses 3RR as a hammer to stop others from editing. He is well aware of the policy.
Kingjeff: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kingjeff&diff=512261077&oldid=512245974]
Nlsanand: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nlsanand&diff=512261122&oldid=512257332] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nlsanand&diff=512261514&oldid=512261122]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: There is an ongoing discussion on the article's talk page that's not getting very far.

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

I invoked 3 revert rule at 02:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC), Walter then insisted on goading a new entrant to undo my edit without first reading the talk page. If you read the talk page, I always explained my edit clearly, and another poster was shown to see what I said accurate. [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 22:59, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I'd add that I took steps to neutralize the wording and told the other editors to take it to admin if they wanted. I'll own what I wrote. [[User:Walter Görlitz]] tried to disprove me first at various points then backed off. He then just tried to get another user to re-start the edit war. [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 23:09, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

* Sorry. I simply pointed-out the discrepancy on the talk page. No goading required. No goading was required for an editor to make 5 reverts on the article though. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 23:12, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

**It wasn't an edit war three days 36 hours before either. It was civil. [[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]] had reverted an edit of mine in good faith. I pointed out that his source was incorrect, by explanation in the talk page. Just to make it clear, it could be disproved in simple words and said that I would invoke the 3 revert rule if he chose not to engage me and simply revert. You can read the talk page and see the sequence. Then, {{userlinks|Kingjeff}} (who chose not to read the same talk page) made the same mistake. Instead, of making {{userlinks|Kingjeff}} aware of the same mistake, [[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]] said (and I paraphrase), "You should go ahead and edit it again" That sounds like goading to me. [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 23:29, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
::: Sigh. It was an edit war. I changed it (my first revert). You changed it back (your first revert). I reverted based on the supplied RS (my second revert). You changed it back (your second revert). Seems like an edit war to me.
:::: From [[:Wikipedia:Edit warring]]: "An edit war occurs when editors who disagree about the content of a page repeatedly override each other's contributions, rather than trying to resolve the disagreement by discussion."
::: My exact comment was "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512227079&oldid=512210341 Then you might want to update the lede to reflect that]". It was simply an acknowledgement to Kingjeff that the lede and body no longer agreed. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 23:54, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I added reliable sources that clearly backed-up my point on the talk page. The first source came last night and I added two more sources. Walter Görlitz added a fourth source. All four sources are credible. I have asked Nlsanand to provide a credible source. He has failed to do so up to this point. He has only provided a message board as a source on the talk page. If you take a look at Nlsanand's edits, on both the article and the talk page, you will see that he has provided nothing more than original research. Whereas I have provided credible sources. [[User:Kingjeff|Kingjeff]] ([[User talk:Kingjeff|talk]]) 23:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
: Kingjeff stopped at the bright line, but as edit warring goes, sources don't give us leave to edit war. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 00:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

:: Nlsanand is clearly creating original research. [[User:Kingjeff|Kingjeff]] ([[User talk:Kingjeff|talk]]) 00:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

:::I want to make thing clear. I believe I am correct and Nlsanand is wrong. Nlsanand is in violation of [[WP:OR]]. He has failed to produce a credible source that backs him up after being asked too. I personally added three sources and Walter Görlitz added a fourth. I don't understand why my name was added here since my edits were in compliance of [[WP:OR]]. [[User:Kingjeff|Kingjeff]] ([[User talk:Kingjeff|talk]]) 03:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

{{od}}I just came across this issue as an uninvolved editor, and removed the disputed statement before I became aware of this discussion.  However, Nlsanand's math/explanation on the talk page is absolutely correct.  Yes there are sources saying they were eliminated on September 12.  However, a routine [[WP:CALC]] clearly demonstrates that this statement is false due to the scenario described at [[Magic_number_(sports)#Subtlety]].  Nlsanand has explained this on the talk page, but is only getting [[WP:IDHT]] in response.  Since the date of elimination really doesn't add anything to the article, I've removed it as per [[WP:BRD]].  Hopefully this puts an end to a rather [[WP:LAME]] edit war.  [[User:Danlaycock|TDL]] ([[User talk:Danlaycock|talk]]) 06:48, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I've protected the article. No comment on the edit warring, but constant reverting can't be tolerated. [[User:Ged UK|<span style="color:green;">Ged</span>]][[User talk:Ged UK|<span style="color:orange;">'''''UK'''''</span>&nbsp;]] 11:51, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
: It's not a matter of IDHT, it's a matter of sources, and it seems both have a point. The fact is the edit war is unacceptable and the actions of the editors should now be addressed.
: And when I say now, I mean that this issue is close to 24 hours old and nothing has been done. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 20:11, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
::I am citing [[WP:CALC]], as another poster has alerted me to it. Again, the math is self-evident. I have still not seen [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] state that he disagrees. He simply keeps deflecting and saying (and I paraphrase) that "There are sources that say they were eliminated on the 12th". [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 20:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
:::@Walter: Agreed, edit warring is unacceptable whether you think your edits are correct or not.  However, I'd point out that you yourself made four reverts within 48h ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=511929846&oldid=511747434], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=511944485&oldid=511940278], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512259036&oldid=512258475], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Toronto_FC_season&diff=512261528&oldid=512260973]) so you're hardly blameless in this.  Yes you stopped short of the bright line of 3RR, but you [[WP:TAGTEAM]]ed with Kingjeff to insert the date of the 12th into the article in spite of the lack of consensus on the talk page.  [[User:Danlaycock|TDL]] ([[User talk:Danlaycock|talk]]) 21:03, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
:::: Fully agree that I made 4 edits over 48 hours, but the fact that Kingjeff and I have the same opinion at the outset does not explain why I reverted in the end and my edit summary is clear as to why I made mine. If you're counting my 4 over 48 then Nlsanand is at seven. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 21:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
::::: Look, then I'm going to point out, another editor also noted how it was clear they were eliminated on the 6th (take a look at the talk page. Furthermore, Kingjeff's talk page contributions showed a general misunderstanding of the issue, and a general unwillingness to engage in discussion (or at least an inability to understand the issue at hand). An experienced editor like [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] understood that when he encouraged this general misunderstanding. [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 22:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

{{outdent|:::::}} Would an admin please step in and block this self-serving editor please after five edits? This should be a no-brainer. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 00:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
:Buddy, anyone who looked at the talk page would see a clear pattern of not engaging in consensus building. I feel like you're trying to use my lack of knowledge of Wiki rules (I'll own it, it's clear that I didn't really fully understand the 3-revert rule) to hide the fact that you're trying to claim ownership of the article and not willing to admit that you got it wrong. Kingjeff's edits were just clearly wrong, so my reverts had to be done. Even if his math was accurate, his edits were still wrong; he was using the 13th, not the 12th. Your most recent posts show a clear lack of civility on your part. I will note that you had the decency never to lie, but you have deflected from the fact that my math was clearly correct (which is supported by at least two other users who have opined on the talk page). You seem to be using your knowledge of the rules to attempt to piss people off, and in this case it at least seems like you're not really doing it with any intent of making the article better. If my violation of a bright line rule warrants a block, I'll accept that from the administrators. However, if you review the content, the talk page, and the malicious editing against which I was defending the article, I don't believe it's warranted. Moreso, I think it calls the pair of you a lot more into quesiton. [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 01:26, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

My edits were wrong? I put in a statement and I sourced it. How are my edits are wrong? A contributor's edits are not wrong just because you disagree. [[User:Kingjeff|Kingjeff]] ([[User talk:Kingjeff|talk]]) 01:52, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
:{{AN3|p}} - Ten days, by [[User:Ged UK]]. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 03:54, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

:: Terrible precedent. I am marking this decision not to block for going well past 3RR and will point to it as my '''only''' reason for doing so myself. --[[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 04:59, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

:::Honestly Walter, you two are lucky not to be blocked. Bright line is one thing, but your behavior through this has been reprehnsible.  [[User:Nlsanand|Nlsanand]] ([[User talk:Nlsanand|talk]]) 15:32, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
{{discussion bottom}}

== [[User:DePiep]] reported by [[User:WaitingForConnection]] (Result: 48 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Hillsborough Independent Panel}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|DePiep}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512243871&oldid=512242527]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512244273&oldid=512243871]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512245028&oldid=512244678]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512253124&oldid=512252685]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512262221&oldid=512261391]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADePiep&diff=512249137&oldid=512243927]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AHillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512248054&oldid=512247044] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AHillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512250606&oldid=512249388] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AHillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512253040&oldid=512252105]

<u>Comments:</u> There was also an attempt to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512249145&oldid=512246539 remove a CSD tag despite being the creator], an [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=next&oldid=512249791 acknowledgement of what 3RR] was after the warning, and the latter two diffs above were reverts of two uninvolved admins, who both concurred with my decision to redirect. <br />
—[[User talk:WaitingForConnection|WFC]]— <sub>'''[[User:WaitingForConnection/FL wishlist|FL wishlist]]'''</sub> 22:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
:I created the page in good faith (the very need to mention this). WFC accused me of 3RR ("technically"?!) when I only had done 3 edits ''in toto'': [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=next&oldid=512249791]. I removed CSD tag? Read my "[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=prev&oldid=512249791 oops]". Here are three edits by WFC, quite early in the process: 1: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512243871&oldid=512242527 change page into redirect] 2: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=512244678&oldid=512244460 again] 3: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hillsborough_Independent_Panel&diff=next&oldid=512245207 adding tag Speedy]. How is that for warring? The notion that some edits were ''reverts of two uninvolved admins'' does not weigh: I am not to know that it is an ''admin'' who edits, nor should it matter. I am to weigh an edit by quality, not by admin's arrogance. Interestingly, and annoyingly, another editor upped that same argument: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=prev&oldid=512262711][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=512264779&oldid=512263282]). In general: WFC does one-sided counting & observing. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 23:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
::My initial redirect was on the basis of [[Talk:Hillsborough disaster#Hillsborough Independent Panel article]]. My second redirect was because I strongly believed that it was in the interests of the reader to be directed to the Hillsborough disaster article ''unless'' the new page went significantly beyond the information there, and based on my belief (which has subsequently proven correct) that other users would concur. Once reverted a second time, I tagged under CSD A10, to get the attention of an uninvolved administrator, who answered the tag by redirecting. I have made no subsequent edits to the page, and have several times attempted to explain my reasoning. My assertion about a technical breach of 3RR was in relation to the corresponding edits DePiep made to the hatnote at [[Hillsborough disaster]] &ndash; in hindsight this was incorrect, as it goes without saying that if a specific article exists, a hatnote should point to it. Nonetheless, 3RR has been breached &ndash; a status quo achieved through a breach of 3RR and editing regardless of the talk page comments made by myself, Struway, Peridon and others cannot be right. —[[User talk:WaitingForConnection|WFC]]— <sub>'''[[User:WaitingForConnection/FL wishlist|FL wishlist]]'''</sub> 00:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
*DePiep, you are just coming off a block for a 1RR violation of ARBPIA restriction.  I've seen you around to think you are intentionally being obtuse here.  You're often quick to note how every admin is arrogant and abusive, yet you claim you don't know one when you see one.  My points on your talk page and the article talk page speak for themselves, and the history at the article is clear. I've tried to just end the problem, but I will leave this up to the neutral 3RR specialists to do the counting, since I've [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=498088298&oldid=497302023 warned you] about 3RR in other cases, and had to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=508062202&oldid=508061885 decline] an unblock request from you just the other day.  [[User:Dennis Brown|<b>Dennis</b> <b>Brown</b>]] - [[User talk:Dennis Brown|<small>2&cent;</small>]]  [[Special:Contributions/Dennis_Brown|<small>&copy;</small>]]  <small><b>[[WP:WikiProject Editor Retention|Join WER]]</b></small> 00:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|b| 48 hours}}. Also for multiple removals of the speedy deletion tag as the article's author (you don't have to "remember" the rule - it says so on the tag '''in bold'''). [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 00:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
::I did not do ''multiple removals'' of the speedy tag. Bbb23 knows by now. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DePiep&diff=512754373&oldid=512746804]  -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 02:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Afgtnk]] and [[User:144.132.28.156]] reported by [[User:Bidgee|Bidgee]] ([[User talk:Bidgee|talk]]) (Result: 24 hours for both) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Sport in Australia}}

'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Afgtnk}}<br/>
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|144.132.28.156}}

'''Time reported:''' 10:12, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

''Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC''
{{Collapse top|title=[[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|User:Afgtnk]] contributions}}
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512578721 05:31, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512578286 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512578950 05:32, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512580137 05:40, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512580833 05:45, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512580371 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512582505 05:55, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512582084 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]]) "Only NSW and QLD" is half the population. If that's the case, AFL is only popular in VIC, WA, SA and TAS.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512583762 06:03, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512583283 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]]) AFL & NRL have roughly same percentage of women following the game. Riverina is league dominated. You have no basis for your argument.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512585555 06:14, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512585059 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]]) You have absolutely no proof or basis for your argument, sorry. Propagate elsewhere please.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512586631 06:20, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512586240 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]]) You have shown nothing, only maode up a bunch f lies. AFL is only popular in Southern Australia.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512589618 06:39, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Edited to mention ratings. Though they are the highest nationally year in year out, I'll leave it at the general statement it is now.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512592051 07:05, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512591726 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512592271 07:07, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Re-corrected sentence.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512592398 07:09, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Added Australian film")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512603794 08:23, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512604437 08:27, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512605264 08:31, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Adjusted incorrent stadium capacity, removed superfluous apostrophes")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512605616 08:33, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Stadium Australia */")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512606343 08:37, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Major sporting venues */  Docklands is not a major stadium.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512607594 08:44, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512607421 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512607805 08:45, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512608097 08:47, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512607805 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512608387 08:48, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512608687 08:50, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Major sporting venues */  Docklands is not a major stadium. It primarily only has AFL played on it, a sport played in only one country.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512609130 08:52, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Stadium Australia */  AFL is rarely played at Stadium Australia.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512609682 08:56, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected to acronym used by governing body")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512610098 08:58, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512610285 08:59, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512609867 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512610654 09:01, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512610138 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]]) Re-added Stadium Australia as a major sporting venue")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512612198 09:09, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Major sporting venues */  Removed subjective claim & double entry")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512612745 09:12, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512612418 by [[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|144.132.28.156]] ([[User talk:144.132.28.156|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512613888 09:19, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512614272 09:21, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Major sporting venues */")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512614606 09:23, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Incorrect history")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512615009 09:25, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512615360 09:27, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Participation */  Spelling error")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512615742 09:29, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512617582 09:40, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Major sporting venues */")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512617949 09:42, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512618162 09:44, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Spelling")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512618759 09:47, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Added Ratings comment")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512619525 09:52, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512619060 by [[Special:Contributions/Bidgee|Bidgee]] ([[User talk:Bidgee|talk]]) Rugby League has the highest ratings in Australian sport, it deserves its own line about ratings")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512620395 09:57, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "NPOV my fucking arse. Either keep the league statement or remove the AFL & Cricket statements. If not consider yourself reported.")</small>
{{Collapse bottom}}

* Diff of warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Afgtnk&diff=prev&oldid=512619945 here]

{{Collapse top|title=[[Special:Contributions/144.132.28.156|User:144.132.28.156]] contributions}}
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512165443 12:09, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "added a link to MMA")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512165575 12:10, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512166068 12:14, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512166531 12:16, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512166704 12:17, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512167021 12:19, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512167175 12:20, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512167450 12:22, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512167562 12:22, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512168586 12:28, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512168730 12:29, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Got rid of un needed information")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512168946 12:31, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Basketball */")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512169088 12:32, 13 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "added a link to tennis in australia")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512578286 05:28, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512577825 by [[Special:Contributions/121.223.184.248|121.223.184.248]] ([[User talk:121.223.184.248|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512580371 05:41, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Added that the NRL draw's high television ratings")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512582084 05:53, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision because rugby league is really only popular in QLD & NSW with proof of participation numbershat are available on Google.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512583283 06:00, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision because not a lot of women like rugby league & the Riverina Region in NSW is Australian rules, so with women being bout half the population of NSW & QLD it much less than half the population like rugby league")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512585059 06:10, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Next to women follow rugby league as shown by membership numbers and the Riverina Region is Australian rules. And put back popular team and individual sports it goes into detail on the sports played in Australia like all other countries have done.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512586240 06:18, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Rugby league is only really popular in QLD & NSW as I have shown, you have absolutely no proof to back up your statements.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512588799 06:33, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "I have provided information to prove my statement, and Australia rules football is the main mainstream winter sport in the Northern Territory and Northern WA so it no just popular in southern Australia. Take your propaganda else where.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512591153 06:56, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512591217 06:56, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "corrected sentence structure.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512591320 06:58, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "corrected sentence structure.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512591371 06:58, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512591726 07:02, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "added that the afl is 3rd highest attedned sports league in the coutry")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512600925 08:06, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512601236 08:07, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure and a paragraph between to sections that are about different things")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512601367 08:08, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512601613 08:10, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Got rid of the word very when talking about rugby league because rugby league isn't more popular than Australian rules football and shuldn")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512601854 08:11, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Got rid of the word very when talking about rugby league because rugby league isn't more popular than Australian rules football and shouldn't be written than way.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512602167 08:13, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512607421 08:43, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Dockland is a major stadium")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512607682 08:45, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "added that AFL actual name is Australian rules football")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512608319 08:48, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512606343 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512609867 08:57, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512608687 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512610138 08:58, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "got rid of un needed information")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512610981 09:02, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512612418 09:10, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512612198 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512612971 09:14, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512612745 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512613170 09:15, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Placed the MCG first on the list as it is premier stadium in Australia, for reasons it has bar's that over look the ground, several entertainment area's, many more cooperate boxes and the Australian sports museum all things Stadium Australia doesn't have.")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512613279 09:15, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512613373 09:16, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512613597 09:17, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512613835 09:18, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512608687 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512614010 09:19, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "corrected sentence structure")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512614664 09:23, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512614746 09:24, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "/* Major sporting venues */")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512614867 09:24, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512615529 09:28, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "correcting the major stadium, stop alining them different that is correct")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sport%20in%20Australia&diff=prev&oldid=512615841 09:30, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Undid revision 512615742 by [[Special:Contributions/Afgtnk|Afgtnk]] ([[User talk:Afgtnk|talk]])")</small>
{{Collapse bottom}}

* Diff of warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:144.132.28.156&diff=512588885&oldid=506536732 here]

The whole thing is a mess. —[[User:Bidgee|Bidgee]] ([[User talk:Bidgee|talk]]) 10:12, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|bb| 24 hours}} [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 14:18, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Bandwidth47]] reported by [[User:KnowledgeisGood88]] (Result: 24 hours) ==

'''Page: ''' {{pagelinks|High Point University}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Bandwidth47}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Point_University&diff=512243281&oldid=512017832]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Point_University&diff=512427276&oldid=512298516]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Point_University&diff=512466019&oldid=512465081]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Point_University&diff=512470803&oldid=512466647]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bandwidth47]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KnowledgeisGood88]

<u>Comments:</u>User Bandwidth47 has deleted a passage of text six times without comment, four times within 24 hours, and four times marking the changes a minor.  I have added comments when replacing the deleted text, and on the talk pages above explaining that the text contains factual references to a reputable national publication and is pertinent to the article.  User has not responded other than by repeated reverts.  <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:KnowledgeisGood88|KnowledgeisGood88]] ([[User talk:KnowledgeisGood88|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/KnowledgeisGood88|contribs]]) 15 September 2012—</small><br />

:Comment by non-admin user:  A quick check of the article showed that [[User:Bandwidth47]] has introduced large tracts of text copied verbatim from copyrighted sources, hence massive [[WP:COPYVIO]] violations.  I rolled the article back to the last stable version (see diff [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Point_University&diff=512659531&oldid=512646519 here]) and suggested that the policy be read carefully before attempting to re-introduce the material. [[User:AzureCitizen|AzureCitizen]] ([[User talk:AzureCitizen|talk]]) 14:36, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
:{{AN3|b|24 hours}}. AzureCitizen, thanks for catching the copyright violations. I have posted a warning about the violations on the editor's talk page to make sure they know about it.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 15:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Sayerslle]] reported by [[User:Wüstenfuchs]] (Result: Both blocked 72h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Hafez al-Assad}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Sayerslle}}

* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hafez_al-Assad&diff=512719714&oldid=512719151]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hafez_al-Assad&diff=512721202&oldid=512720406]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hafez_al-Assad&diff=512722763&oldid=512721985]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hafez_al-Assad&diff=512725068&oldid=512724609]

I told user that he should take the problem to the talk page, but insted he continued edit-warring. He adds this source that can't be verified and the claim is not at all generally accepted by the reliable sources. I don't know who stated this in this documentary, it can be someone's personall oppinion or an interview.

In his edit summary, the User called me "a dictator" ("its hard to talk to dictators") and accused me of censoring.

--<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 20:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

* {{AN3|bb|72 hours}}.  3RR violation on both sides, both editors have a block history including edit warring. --[[User:Crazycomputers|Chris]] [[User talk:Crazycomputers|(talk)]] 21:44, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:CristofolR]] reported by [[User:Ravave]] (Result: Protected) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Salvador Puig Antich}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|CristofolR}}<br>{{userlinks|Ravave}}

In the last days i had a little edition war with CristofolR about the nationality of Puig Antich, when i'd be wrote is a "Spanish anarchist", he was born in Catalonia (region), Spain (country), but the user seems to be dislike and undoing me. A few days another user we warned if we continue with this, we will blocked. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CristofolR&diff=511232875&oldid=511189921 7 september i contact with him in his user tak page with the hope to reach an agreement], but days later [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ravave&diff=512782315&oldid=511237275 he answer me] without reach and acord and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=prev&oldid=512779212 turns to edit]. I  just say he was an Spanish anarchist cause Barcelona is Spain, you see the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&action=history history page for its last editions]

* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=507737945&oldid=507704671] 16-sept
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=507830547&oldid=507744325] 28- aug
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=508549932&oldid=507867886] 22-aug
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=509655475&oldid=508948708] 17-aug
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=512779212&oldid=511187559] 16-aug

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

In the talk page, for reach an agree, i ask days ago to Christofol to reach an agree, but [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=511387117&oldid=473868956 he hasn't]
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Salvador_Puig_Antich&diff=511387117&oldid=473868956].[[User:Ravave|Ravave]] ([[User talk:Ravave|talk]]) 15:13, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

Revision history

6 reverts in one day, user in constant edit war, was warned by other user he would break the rule but still continued.

*{{AN3|pe}} (There were not six reverts in one day.) [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 16:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User: 116.71.16.36]] reported by [[User:Electriccatfish2]] (Result: 72 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Mouse (computing) }} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|116.71.16.36}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mouse_%28computing%29&diff=prev&oldid=512924800]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mouse_%28computing%29&diff=next&oldid=512924826]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mouse_%28computing%29&diff=next&oldid=512925235]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mouse_%28computing%29&diff=next&oldid=512925819]
::'''Note:''' The edit war is still ongoing, so please check the article's history for more diffs. 
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:116.71.16.36&diff=512926265&oldid=512925856]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

*{{AN3|b|72 hours}} by [[User: Kinu|Kinu]]. [[User: Electriccatfish2|Electric]] [[User talk: Electriccatfish2|Catfish]] 16:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Dr. Blofeld]] reported by [[User:AndyTheGrump]] (Result: Declined) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Phallic architecture}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Dr. Blofeld}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phallic_architecture&diff=512894378&oldid=512893728]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phallic_architecture&diff=512904240&oldid=512899358]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phallic_architecture&diff=512915412&oldid=512912780]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phallic_architecture&diff=512927925&oldid=512916772]
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:AndyTheGrump&diff=512916634&oldid=512915615]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
This is a dispute about an <nowiki>{{{{expert-subject-multiple}}}}</nowiki> template I added to the newly-created [[Phallic architecture]] article. As I've explained on the talk page, I think the article needs expert attention, but Dr. Blofeld seems intent on edit-warring over the template without ant discussion beyond an assertion that "it is... ridiculous to suggest that phallic architecture has an 'expert' who is likely to edit wikipedia" (edit summary to this revert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phallic_architecture&diff=512904240&oldid=512899358]) As I've pointed out in the ongoing discussion on my talk page "The subject clearly isn't just 'architecture' anyway - it is as much about sociology and anthropology for a start." (see [[User talk:AndyTheGrump#Phallic_architecture]]). Essentially, as I see it, Blofeld is asserting that there are no 'experts', so nobody can improve the article, in spite of the obvious flaws I've indicated on the talk page, and he seems to want to edit-war over it. He is only at three reverts so far, but clearly refuses to address the issue properly. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 17:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
Does any admin here seriously think that an article on architecture which resembles a penis will have an army of experts swarming to come to wikipedia and improve it. The tag is about as pointless as you can get. I'm not an expert on most of the subjects I edit, I'm a good researcher though and work well if I'm allowed to happily edit without obstruction. I am keen to ''constructively'' address the article providing you back off and stop being a grump basically. I've requested the article from JSTOR you wanted from Bgwhite. If you spent more of your time trying to solve what you think is the problem yourself instead of removing a lot of material, fussing about it on the article talk page and then wondering why other editors think your slopping an "Expert tag" on the top of a highly obscure article is highly inappropriate you'd get on a lot better with your fellow editors. You've gatecrashed this article from the moment I started it and you've put me off working on for fear of you reverting me and me wasting my time. Just back off.♦ [[User talk:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#000">Dr. Blofeld</span>]] 17:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
*{{AN3|d}}. As Andy acknowledges, only 3 reverts by Dr. B. I'm not going to block Dr. B. for edit-warring alone, particularly on a tag issue. Rather than lock the article, how about seeking [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] on the tag.[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 17:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
::I'm open to constructive comments or valid actions. I'm not in the habit of challenging others. Somebody placed a tag on [[Osiandrian controversy]] which I agree with. But I think placing an expert tag in an article on buildings which look like a penis looks more of a joke than the article itself.♦ [[User talk:Dr. Blofeld|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#000">Dr. Blofeld</span>]] 17:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Here's a constructive comment - how about reading [[WP:OWN]]? I have as much right to comment on the article as you. Probably more so, since I seem to be approaching it as a serious subject, not a 'joke article' thrown together for a DYK. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 17:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
::::No more. Dispute resolution doesn't take place here.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 17:50, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:Nikkimaria]] reported by [[User:Rreagan007|Rreagan007]] ([[User talk:Rreagan007|talk]]) (Result: Declined) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Ray Farquharson}}

'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Nikkimaria}}

'''Time reported:''' 03:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

''Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC''

# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray%20Farquharson&diff=prev&oldid=512564651 04:07, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "image placement")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray%20Farquharson&diff=prev&oldid=512650536 12:46, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "tw")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray%20Farquharson&diff=prev&oldid=512673811 15:37, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "tw")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray%20Farquharson&diff=prev&oldid=512788564 01:49, 16 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "tw")</small>

<u>Comments:</u> Upon viewing today’s featured article, I was surprised to discover that there was no image in the infobox, as is standard formatting on Wikipedia when a free use image is available per [[Wikipedia:Images#Images_for_the_lead|WP:Images]]. I then added the available free use image to the infobox along with a couple other parameters to the infobox. Upon viewing the article again a few hours later, I discovered the image had been removed. I assumed it was just a routine case of vandalism of today’s featured article as often happens, so I added the image back.
 
I just now looked at the article again, and I discovered the image had disappeared yet again. I then took a look at the article history, and discovered that [[User:Nikkimaria| Nikkimaria]] had been reverting any additions to the infobox by me and at least 4 other good faith editors within the last 24 hours. This activity clearly violated the 3 revert rule. I then took a look at her user page and was shocked to discover she is actually an administrator. 
 
Not only that, but it also appears from her edit summaries that she was using Twinkle rollback privileges to do these reverts, which is a clear violation of the [[Wikipedia:Tw#Abuse|Twinkle abuse policy]] and would be, on its own, grounds for a block. 

There is absolutely no excuse for this type of behavior by an admin, as an admin is expected to know and follow Wikipedia policies, and should be setting an example for other editors to follow. Per [[Wikipedia:Administrator#Administrator_conduct| Administrator conduct policy]], “Administrators are expected to lead by example… Administrators are expected to follow Wikipedia policies”. 

An admin blatantly violating Wikipedia policies in this manner is totally unacceptable conduct by an admin and must be dealt with accordingly. 

—[[User:Rreagan007|Rreagan007]] ([[User talk:Rreagan007|talk]]) 03:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
:Nope, wasn't using Twinkle, all these edits were manual. I was, however, maintaining the quality of a featured article that was then on the main page, which does allow for some leeway under the edit-warring policy. If, in the process of monitoring changes and vandal edits to that article, I stepped over the line, I apologize for that. I invite Rreagan007 to discuss his/her views on image placement on the talk page, where this discussion belongs, and entreat him/her not to engage in such disputes while an article is mainpaged. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 12:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|d}}. Not the appropriate forum to request review of an administrator's actions or request sanctions. Best would be to work it out in light of Nikkimaria's apology.[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 15:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
::I'm sorry. I didn't realize that the 3 revert rule doesn't apply to admins. [[User:Rreagan007|Rreagan007]] ([[User talk:Rreagan007|talk]]) 03:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:::I didn't say that.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 16:06, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:StillStanding-247]] reported by [[User:Little green rosetta]] (Result: No action) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Parents Action League}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|StillStanding-247}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->


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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->

Only 2 reverts to restore recently disputed content

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents_Action_League&diff=513012549&oldid=513010512]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents_Action_League&diff=513001708&oldid=513001356]


<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parents_Action_League&diff=513013077&oldid=513012207]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parents_Action_League&diff=513004892&oldid=513004880]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

I really did not want to bring this here. I would hope that the editor in question would self-revert and this can be put to bed without admin intervention.

A user added some content which I reverted due to (IMO) being a POV and coatrack edit.  User "Still Standing" undid my reversion (thus reinserting the disputed content) insisting we discuss the issue on the talk page.  I once again removed the content and joined the talk page so that we could get to the "D" in BRD.  I reiterated my concerns about POV and coatrack issues (which from a quick view of the article should be readily apparent) and I'm getting a "I DIDNT HEAR THAT" response.  At least one other editor on the TP at least understands my concerns about the coatrack.  

This user is (or should be) well familiar with [[WP:BRD]] and that its not [[WP:BRRD]]. I suggest that he is being intetionally disruptive.  I request that he self-revert and he not do this again. &nbsp;&nbsp;[[User:Little_green_rosetta|<font color="blue">little</font> <font color="green">green rosetta</font>]]{{SubSup||[[Special:Contributions/Little_green_rosetta|central scrutinizer]]|[[User talk:Little green rosetta|(talk)]]}} 00:32, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:Using a left-wing source (not inappropriate for opinion, but not inherently notable to declare fact or make neutral claims) to make a partisan [[Wikipedia:Coatrack|coatrack]] assertation is bad enough, but not inherently disruptive - but edit warring over including it instead of discussing it? Still knows better than to edit war, so there is no real excuse for it here. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Toa</font>'']] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Nidhiki05</font>'']]''' 01:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::Here are the recent edits by SillStanding24-7, as formatted by the 3rr.php script:

::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=512590329 06:47, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "removing redundant reference; same exact article as the previous ref")</small>
::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=512610130 08:58, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "there is no "gay influence"; that's their conspiracy theory and we can't use Wikipedia's voice for it")</small>
::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=512610452 09:00, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "cited")</small>
::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=512610600 09:00, 15 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "also supported by rolling stone cite")</small>
::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=512796247 02:36, 16 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: ""In Michele Bachmann's home district, evangelicals have created an extreme anti-gay climate." - See talk.")</small>
::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=513001708 22:59, 16 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Talk this over; this is what our sources are commenting on.")</small>
::# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parents%20Action%20League&diff=prev&oldid=513012549 00:10, 17 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted unexplained removal")</small>
::In this list, edits 1-4 by StillStanding-247 are consecutive. The above does not show four reverts in 24 hours, though admins will need to decide whether this is a pattern of edit warring. The submitter of this report is complaining about edits #6 and #7 as 'restoring recently disputed content.'  The question is whether [[Michele Bachmann]] should be named as part of the story of the [[Parents Action League]]. I assume that people who don't think well of Bachmann want to add the material. Apparently StillStanding-247 feels that the connection should be asserted in the article. If Mother Jones is the source of the connection, then the opinion comes from a journal unlikely to be neutral in the dispute. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 01:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Ed, thank you for cleaning up my (poor) submission.  I think you have the overall gist of the complaint.  I would like to point out that I'm not necesarily ''against'' linking Bachman to this article, but I objected to the (in my view) POV presentation of the material amongst other things.  Per BRD the edit in question should be discussed, not ''included'' and then discussed.  3RR has not been crossed, but I feel ISS is demonstrating [[WP:IDHT]] to a tee.&nbsp;&nbsp;[[User:Little_green_rosetta|<font color="blue">little</font> <font color="green">green rosetta</font>]]{{SubSup||[[Special:Contributions/Little_green_rosetta|central scrutinizer]]|[[User talk:Little green rosetta|(talk)]]}} 01:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:#Many of these aren't even reverts or are contiguous, or both. 3RR has not been violated.
:#All of my changes are explained in edit comments and on the talk page.
:#LGR shows many reverts in that time scope, and his talk page posts are evasive.
:I support protecting the page to force him to state his reasons instead of ducking my questions or edit-warring. [[User:StillStanding-247|I&#39;m StillStanding (24/7)]] ([[User talk:StillStanding-247|talk]]) 02:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::Still, don't play the [[WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT|ignorance card]] - you know full well that you don't have to break 3RR to be edit warring. You also know what [[WP:BRD|bold, revert, discuss]] is, so why not follow it? If you have the superior argument and are following process and policy, you shouldn't ''have'' to revert because your idea would be policy-compliant and neutral. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Toa</font>'']] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Nidhiki05</font>'']]''' 02:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:::First, let's not pretend that you're in any way neutral. You side against me consistently, and now you're piling on because this is a false report against me.
:::Second, I'm going to suggest that any admin reading this ignore us both and see for themselves whether LGR is being evasive. It's all in the talk page that I linked to (including the section at the bottom). [[User:StillStanding-247|I&#39;m StillStanding (24/7)]] ([[User talk:StillStanding-247|talk]]) 02:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::::I don't side for or against anyone because this isn't a [[WP:BATTLEGROUND|warzone]]. If I wanted to pretend like I'm in a warzone I'd be playing Call of Duty, not arguing with people I don't know on the internet. Politics isn't my main topic area for that reason - it simply isn't much fun to edit there. When I do comment or edit, I support additions I think are supported by vital policy and it just so happens that many of the additions you support are ones I feel are incorrect. I'm not 'piling on because this is a false nomination' - I noticed the notice on your talk page, examined the evidence, and commented. I haven't endorsed any proposals or anything, I've noted that you know the policy on edit warring and there is no real reason for you to be doing it.
::::[[WP:BRD|bold, revert, delete]] does ''not'' mean 'revert back to my edit while we discuss', it means 'discuss controversial changes if there are objections through reverts and establish consensus before re-adding it'. Still knows our policies, he isn't ignorant. I urge all admins or reviewing editors to examine the material added and the reverts and compare them to applicable policy, and see the clear disconnect. As long as the solution deals with the issue, I'll support it. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Toa</font>'']] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Nidhiki05</font>'']]''' 03:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::::::You're a member of WikiProject Conservatism. Consider that before you pretend to be neutral. [[User:StillStanding-247|I&#39;m StillStanding (24/7)]] ([[User talk:StillStanding-247|talk]]) 03:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not pretending to be anything. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Toa</font>'']] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|''<font color="green" face="Mistral">Nidhiki05</font>'']]''' 03:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::::Just to chime in.  So out of curiosity, why are you deploying red herrings to distract from the point of this report against you?  What does his being a member of a Wikiproject have to do with this report?  Perhaps you can enlighten me?  Is it that you are currently planning a RFC against the Wikiproject therefore you are claiming these members have an axe to grind against you?  Is that what you're accusing him of?  [[User:ViriiK|ViriiK]] ([[User talk:ViriiK|talk]]) 03:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
'''Note''' This is not an isolated incident.  This editor is also violating BRD at a different article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Political_positions_of_Mitt_Romney&diff=prev&oldid=513044430]&nbsp;&nbsp;[[User:Little_green_rosetta|<font color="blue">little</font> <font color="green">green rosetta</font>]]{{SubSup||[[Special:Contributions/Little_green_rosetta|central scrutinizer]]|[[User talk:Little green rosetta|(talk)]]}} 02:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::BRD is essay, not a policy. As it happens, I like BRD and I generally follow it. I do make exceptions, which is allowed. [[User:StillStanding-247|I&#39;m StillStanding (24/7)]] ([[User talk:StillStanding-247|talk]]) 02:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Anyhow, I have things to do. I very clearly haven't edit-warred. This is a false report and should be closed. [[User:StillStanding-247|I&#39;m StillStanding (24/7)]] ([[User talk:StillStanding-247|talk]]) 03:13, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
*'''Result:''' No action. At most three reverts by StillStanding-247 within 24 hours (#5, #6 and #7).  StillStanding has been notified under [[Wikipedia:General sanctions/2012 Presidential Campaign/Log]] but this is not one of the affected articles. If some editors continue to believe that [[Michele Bachmann]]'s name should be included in this article I hope they will find better sources to justify the connection. The addition of her name seems to raise [[WP:BLP]] issues. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 12:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:203.35.135.174]] reported by [[User:Tgeairn|Tgeairn]] ([[User talk:Tgeairn|talk]]) (Result: 48 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|List of social networking websites}}

'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|203.35.135.174}}

'''Time reported:''' 07:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

''Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC''

# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List%20of%20social%20networking%20websites&diff=prev&oldid=513059523 03:54, 17 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Added new website")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List%20of%20social%20networking%20websites&diff=prev&oldid=513086259 06:25, 17 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "New site")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List%20of%20social%20networking%20websites&diff=prev&oldid=513092021 07:18, 17 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Not a spam")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List%20of%20social%20networking%20websites&diff=prev&oldid=513096753 07:43, 17 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "It's notable")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List%20of%20social%20networking%20websites&diff=prev&oldid=513098540 07:53, 17 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>

* Diff of warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A203.35.135.174&diff=513097256&oldid=513096500 here]

—[[User:Tgeairn|Tgeairn]] ([[User talk:Tgeairn|talk]]) 07:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:{{AN3|c}} -- Additionally, editor has repeated recreated articles [[W3leaf]] and [[W3leaf.com]] after speedy deletion as A7 and G11. Also see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W3leaf.com]]. --[[User:Tgeairn|Tgeairn]] ([[User talk:Tgeairn|talk]]) 08:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::See also: 
:*{{userlinks|Abhi1028}}
:*{{pagelinks|123 Connect Safely}}
:*{{pagelinks|123 Connect}}
:*{{pagelinks|Safe Social Network}}
:--[[User:Tgeairn|Tgeairn]] ([[User talk:Tgeairn|talk]]) 08:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|b|48 hours}}. I would have made it longer except there was no discussion with the IP about their edits. Abhi1028 was already blocked as the creator of the non-W3leaf articles listed above.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 16:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Fabyan17]] reported by [[User:Benlisquare]] (Result: Declined) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|South China Sea}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Fabyan17}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_China_Sea&oldid=512833456]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_China_Sea&diff=513107942&oldid=513106327]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_China_Sea&diff=513099630&oldid=513095738]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_China_Sea&diff=513081639&oldid=513001054]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_China_Sea&diff=512972997&oldid=512833456]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fabyan17&diff=prev&oldid=513108506]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fabyan17&oldid=513096830]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
User has been making controversial POV edits without engaging in proper discussion with other editors, and has been mindlessly reverting edits without looking at them, even if they are maintenance edits (such as removing links from the "See Also" section that are already present within the article body per [[WP:MOS]]). --[[User:benlisquare|<span style="border:1px solid yellow;padding:1px;color:#FFFF00;background:red;">'''&nbsp;李博杰&nbsp;'''</span>]] &#124; <small>—[[User talk:benlisquare|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Benlisquare|contribs]] [[Special:EmailUser/User:Benlisquare|email]]</small> 08:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
:Any admin reviewing this should also look at [[WP:ANI#User complaint: Benlisquare - Re: Using derogatory words against editors]]. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 16:26, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|d}}. Please continue any discussion at ANI. [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 20:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Mike18xx]] reported by [[User:Ronz]] (Result: 1 month) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Weston A. Price Foundation}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Mike18xx}} <br />
'''Sockpuppet ip used by user:''' {{userlinks|66.41.95.121}}

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weston%20A.%20Price%20Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=512296182 01:51, 14 September 2012]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weston%20A.%20Price%20Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=512471735 19:46, 14 September 2012]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weston%20A.%20Price%20Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=512493248 21:28, 14 September 2012]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weston_A._Price_Foundation&diff=512610156&oldid=512502715 08:58, 15 September 2012]
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->
<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMike18xx&diff=512908733&oldid=512699211 Mike18xx] (after he threatened to continue edit-warring [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mike18xx&diff=prev&oldid=512699211]
<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Discussion of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:Weston_A._Price_Foundation#Recent_attempts_at_rewriting_and_changing_pov_of_article]]
As to the sockpuppetry, {{user|92.4.165.211}} pointed it out twice [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Weston_A._Price_Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=512732361] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Weston_A._Price_Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=512922476], providing [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:66.41.95.121&diff=427547090&oldid=427526521 this May 2011 diff]. The ip is still being used by Mike18xx as seen [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mike18xx&diff=prev&oldid=512997646 here] followed by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mike18xx&diff=next&oldid=512997646 this].

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
{{AN3|n}}. The accusation that Mike18xx and 66.41.95.121 are the same person seems pretty well-founded to me. My recommendation would be to file a report at [[WP:SPI]] to get a determination. The edit-warring is fairly stale. However, another admin may feel more comfortable taking action than I do.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 18:37, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

*'''Defense''': Oh my goodness gracious! Four reverts in 31 hours...where does the time go? Book him, Dano. Stretch his ass on the rack, then send him to the guillotine.
*In other news from planets in nearby parallel universes otherwise astonishingly similar to the one Ronz is in, Wikipedia editors often do not log in to their named accounts because they dislike (a) logging in every hour, or (b) being logged in for 180hours -- and being logged in is actually unnecessary save for article-creation or when dealing with protected articles.
* ....which reminds me, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Weston_A._Price_Foundation Ronz' attempt] to protect the article was declined.
*In three days of this nonsense, Ronz hasn't found anyone to stick around and help him defend his "critics-soapbox" version of the article; and is now resorting to this more elevated level of "tattling to teacher" after his request for protection was declined.
*He is stubbornly insistent that critics' soapbox sound-bites remain in the second paragraph of the lede of the article, and is unwilling to listen to any reasoning as to why that's a terrible way to write an encyclopedia.
*I though it was very generous of me to retain more critical references than supportive ones, and to not blot out all his references sourced to non-notable militant vegetarian blogs -- which a ''real'' hard-ass editor would have nuked. (Hint, hint.)--[[User:Mike18xx|Mike18xx]] ([[User talk:Mike18xx|talk]]) 18:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
:* '''Comment''' And in the actual Wikipedia universe where a very dim view is taken of using an IP to tag-team edit-war using your registered account against more than one editor (despite your claims), especially when using incivil edit-summaries, why exactly ''shouldn't'' a block be the result? [[User:Black Kite|Black Kite]] ([[User talk:Black Kite|talk]]) 19:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::*Now that Mike has admitted that he and the IP are the same, I would say that the only question is how long the block should be.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 19:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::: 7 previous blocks?  '''Blocked''' for 1 month (same time as last major block). [[User:Black Kite|Black Kite]] ([[User talk:Black Kite|talk]]) 19:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Acoma Magic]] reported by [[User:MrX]] (Result: 31 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Same-sex marriage}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Acoma Magic}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage&oldid=512704397]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage&diff=513007139&oldid=512704397]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage&diff=513029502&oldid=513028281]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage&diff=513031118&oldid=513029960]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage&diff=513160027&oldid=513157763]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage&diff=513243266&oldid=513163468]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAcoma_Magic&diff=513163574&oldid=513033735]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASame-sex_marriage&diff=513038376&oldid=513038166]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
I hate to report users, but in this case the user has continued edit warring after being warned and after removing the warning template from his/her talk page. There also seems to be a refusal to accept consensus, as documented on the article talk page.

(I apologize if I made any mistakes in this report as I have never filed one before.)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
20:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe that you don't know that the first and fifth revert you listed aren't reverts. [[User:Acoma Magic|Acoma Magic]] ([[User talk:Acoma Magic|talk]]) 21:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
::{{AN3|b|31 hours}}. Some admins would count the first diff as a revert. Even so, you made four after that. [[User:TParis]] warned you on your talk page after the fourth diff, telling you that the only reason he didn't block you was because you hadn't reverted again. Then, you went ahead and made a change to the article after that, even though you should well know that undoing other editors' material (which is what you did), even if it is different material, constitutes a revert. I blocked you for 31 hours because of your recent 24-hour block for disruptive editing.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 21:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:Shipofcool]] reported by [[User:Betty Logan]] (Result: Not done) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|1960 in film}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Shipofcool}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_in_film&diff=509152564&oldid=509103688]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_in_film&diff=513008858&oldid=512381479]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_in_film&diff=513021438&oldid=513018847]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_in_film&diff=513236336&oldid=513143277] (bundled with some other edits)
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_in_film&diff=513290169&oldid=513244750]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1960_in_film&diff=513303203&oldid=513300465]


<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shipofcool&diff=513301252&oldid=513116265]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3A1960_in_film&diff=513300370&oldid=371912229]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

This dispute spreads beyond this article. The bottom line is that [[User:Shipofcool]] has been replacing the historic charts on the "XXXX in film" articles with his own revisionist rankings. The problem though was that these revisionist charts aren't complete, since the box-office data is unavailable for many older films. Impartial comments at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3A1958_in_film&diff=513037536&oldid=371912135] were obtained where [[User:Grapple X]] commented that ''If it could be uniformly, and reliably, switched to gross, then I guess that would be alright''. After Shipofcool dismissed my concerns (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1958_in_film&diff=513034895&oldid=513033363]) I took the dispute to the Film project [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1958_in_film&diff=513034895&oldid=513033363] where [[User:Gothicfilm]] commented ''Clearly the same figures - box-office grosses and theatrical rentals - should be used consistently. [[User:Shipofcool|Shipofcool]] does not seem to have listed what his source for grosses on the pre-1990 films would be. If only rental figures are available on the older films, that's what you go with, right?''. Shipofcool has continued with his disruptive editing despite the fact no editor has voiced support for his edits, and the two impartial editors only advocated replacing the lists if the data could be uniformly transformed. This has not been the case, with Shipofcool simply removing the films from the chart where he could not source a replacement figure. He clearly isn't acting in accordance with the approach as advocated by the two independent editors. [[User:Betty Logan|Betty Logan]] ([[User talk:Betty Logan|talk]]) 03:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

*This has gone to an RFC now and Ship has started toeing the line. I don't particularly want him blocked during discussions, so I think we can wrap this up and if it starts up again I'll re-file. [[User:Betty Logan|Betty Logan]] ([[User talk:Betty Logan|talk]]) 16:37, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
**As you wish. {{AN3|not}}. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 16:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Jeremy112233]] reported by [[User:Rhode Island Red]] (Result: stale) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Frank Vandersloot}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Jeremy112233}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_L._VanderSloot&oldid=513300180]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_L._VanderSloot&diff=513293643&oldid=513292504]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_L._VanderSloot&diff=513300808&oldid=513300180]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_L._VanderSloot&diff=513304192&oldid=513303356]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_L._VanderSloot&diff=513306365&oldid=513304806]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJeremy112233&diff=513303908&oldid=512429585]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Frank_L._VanderSloot&action=history]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
[[User:Jeremy112233|Jeremy112233]] is currently engaging in disruptive/contentious editing on the lead in [[Frank Vandersloot]]. The article was revised a few days ago (prior to Jermey's first appearance) to indicate that Vandesloot's company Melaleuca is a [[multi-level marketing]] (MLM) company. The change was supported by numerous references (more than 20[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AFrank_L._VanderSloot&diff=511774220&oldid=511773616]) and by loose editorial consensus after some weak objections had been raised -- the objections were addressed in 3 different forums including the Talk page,[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Frank_L._VanderSloot#Reverting_to_stable_version] and RSN.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_132#.5BMother_Jones_and_Rolling_Stone_articles_as_RS_sources_in_a_BLP_for_a_contentious_claim] After that, the article was stable until Jeremy started reverting today (obfuscating the designation as an MLM) and edit warring over the issue. He has removed the basic MLM description of Melaleuca and instead inserted the following statement in the lead -- "Melaleuca is described by some as being a multi-level marketing company[1][2] and described by others as being a direct marketing company.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8]" This is problematic on many levels. 

First and foremost, the edit is misleading and makes no sense because it describes the company using the vague top-level term "direct marketing company", when in reality, MLM is a sub-type of direct marketing (see [[multi-level marketing]]), so Jermey's edit is akin to nonsensically arguing that Bugs Bunny isn't a rabbit because he is a mammal. Obviously, MLM is a more specific and more appropriate term. 

Second, Jeremy bypased the Talk page and did not attempt to gain consensus for the reversion, despite the fact that the issue had previously been under active discussion by many editors and a rough consensus in support of the MLM designation had been reached. 

Third, the body text of the article doesn't refer to any such nomenclature controversy about "direct marketing" vs "MLM" (the notion has been manufactured by Jeremy and it smacks of [[WP:OR]]), nor do any of the sources added, so it has no place being in the lead (see [[WP:LEAD]]). 

Lastly, the user appeared on the Vandersloot article shortly after having [[WP:HOUND|wikistalked]] me from another article ([[Protandim]]) on which we had a brief and minor locking of horns recently after he was blanking text in the article.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rhode_Island_Red&diff=prev&oldid=512210527][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rhode_Island_Red#Protandim]. I am requesting that the editor be blocked and the article reverted to the last stable version prior to Jeremy's edits.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_L._VanderSloot&oldid=513300180]
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ --> 
[[User:Rhode Island Red|Rhode Island Red]] ([[User talk:Rhode Island Red|talk]]) 03:51, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
:See [[WP:OWN]] - and noting that RIR has clearly been more than a "willing participant" in any edit war at this point, including adding clear violations per [[WP:BLP]] (using opinion articles as sources to make charges of criminal wrongdoing, of "buying judges" etc.).   [[WP:BOOMERANG]] obviously applies here. [[User:Collect|Collect]] ([[User talk:Collect|talk]]) 11:07, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
::Collect, you've been forum shopping hoping to get the answer you wanted but it didn't happen. Every un-involved editor that weighed in on this question after you posted it to Talk[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Frank_L._VanderSloot#Reverting_to_stable_version] and RSN[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#.5BMother_Jones_and_Rolling_Stone_articles_as_RS_sources_in_a_BLP_for_a_contentious_claim] disagreed with you. You have no grounds for that [[WP:OWN]] red herring. Your comment above has no bearing on this particular case of 3RR. I've been following protocol. [[User:Rhode Island Red|Rhode Island Red]] ([[User talk:Rhode Island Red|talk]]) 14:11, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
:::The edit history of that article is exceedingly clear.  Your personal attack is, moreover, a tad unlikely to impress anyone.  The noticeboard here is to try to ''prevent'' edit war, not to work in favour of one edit warrior who reports another - the goal is to have ''no'' such battleground mentality about articles.  Cheers. [[User:Collect|Collect]] ([[User talk:Collect|talk]]) 22:19, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
::::Out of curiosity, I might ask to clarify what you meant by personal attack ("forum shopping" was a simple statement of fact), but that question, like your comment above, would have no place in a 3RR report. Since you are an involved party,[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AFrank_L._VanderSloot&diff=511916471&oldid=511914062] your comment does not appear to be at all constructive but rather is carrying over warrior behavior onto the very page that is designed to prevent it. If you have nothing salient to add, saying nothing is never a bad idea. [[User:Rhode Island Red|Rhode Island Red]] ([[User talk:Rhode Island Red|talk]]) 22:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
This article has popped up on my radar several times recently, so I finally took a look at it.  In addition to the very obvious 3RR violation, Jeremy's text is also [[WP:NPOV]]; it uses the word “accused” in reference to the MLM claim, which is very obviously not neutral—and as such, RIR is correct to remove it per [[WP:BLP]].  But in any case, Jeremy crossed what is widely said to be the bright line. —{{SubSup|[[User:Kerfuffler|Kerfuffler]]&nbsp;|[[Special:Contributions/Kerfuffler|stalk]]|[[User talk:Kerfuffler|harass]]}} 22:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|stale}}. It's been more than a day since either party made any edits to this article. Had I seen this report earlier I would have blocked both, or protected the article. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 16:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Final3211]] reported by [[User:Semitransgenic]] (Result: 72h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Terence McKenna}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Final3211}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513201052&oldid=513151437]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513213915&oldid=513209563]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513345891&oldid=513345380]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513345891&oldid=513345380]

* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513348520&oldid=513348212]

* 6th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513360099&oldid=513356627]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFinal3211&diff=513352941&oldid=513348037]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATerence_McKenna&diff=513356397&oldid=495297370]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
User in question added content that was not properly sourced or formatted, which I reverted [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513151437&oldid=513149469], said user persisted in reverting, so I then attempted to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Terence_McKenna&diff=513343928&oldid=513213915 appease] the editor by wikifying the material - keeping some of the barely usable cites. Unfortunately the editor again reverted, preferring instead to ignore my advice concerning the consultation of [[WP:MOS]] & [[WP:RS]] guidelines. [[User:Semitransgenic|<span style="font- weight:bold; color:black; text-shadow:grey 0.3em 0.3em 0.4em;"> <i>Semitransgenic</i></span>]] <sub><small>[[User talk:Semitransgenic|<font color="gold">talk.</font>]]</small></sub> 12:50, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
:Rules are to be observed not blindly but with a sense of purpose, which you sadly lack. All of your attempts to edit or format the article render it illegible.—[[User:Final3211|Final3211]] ([[User talk:Final3211|talk]]) 05:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|b}} – 72 hours. Final3211 seems to be an account that was created on 15 September to edit war on this article. I've also blocked God the Son one week as a probable sock and have put semiprotection on the article to slow the success rate of any new socks. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 16:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Old-timer0]] reported by [[User:Ian.thomson]] (Result: Warned) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Cat}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Old-timer0}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cat&diff=prev&oldid=512506399] - clearly establishing his anti-science POV-pushing
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cat&diff=prev&oldid=512545056] - dishonestly trying to hide the edit as a minor edit
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cat&diff=prev&oldid=512708206] - his claims that the use of the word "evolutionary" is OR is bunkum
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cat&diff=prev&oldid=513329918] - Not even discussing things.

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Old-timer0&diff=prev&oldid=512711475] - To which Old-timer0 responded by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ian.thomson&diff=prev&oldid=513329829 threatening to continue the edit war until he has his way].

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cat&diff=prev&oldid=512714097] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cat&diff=prev&oldid=513375726], with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Old-timer0&diff=prev&oldid=512662977 an attempt at discussion on his talk page].

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
I am aware that the 4th revert is not within the same 24 hour period, but edit warring is not simply 3rr but continually making an edit against consensus without discussion.  He is repeating an edit against consensus with a [[WP:FRINGE]] agenda, and refuses to discuss the matter except [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ian.thomson&diff=prev&oldid=513329829 threatening to continue the edit war until he has his way].  He is edit warring. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 14:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
:'''Result:''' Warned.  Report again if he continues to revert. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 13:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


This is old-timer0 the claim by ian.thompson who is claiming I am edit warring is without basis as there is absolutely positively no proof that evolution is happening or has ever happened I dare ian.thompson to show the wikipedia community as well as the world a single undisputed fossil that evolved from another life form.In fact I will save him the trouble do not bother looking as you will not find a single undisputed evolving life form in the fossil record also numerous experiments with fruit flies further proves evolution does not happen and has never happened. Mathamatical calculations vaporize the whole idea of life evolving in any way shape or form so ian.thompson would do well to look in the mirror and ask who is the one who is pushing wp:fringe, wp:or and is violating wp:rs by insisting that evolution is a fact when neither he nor anyone else has ever been able to point to a reliable and verifiable source that shows evolution has happened or is happening!  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Old-timer0|Old-timer0]] ([[User talk:Old-timer0|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Old-timer0|contribs]]) 20:35, 19 September 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Please stay out of my mirrors, and keep your anti-science bias away from our articles. [[User:Ian.thomson|Ian.thomson]] ([[User talk:Ian.thomson|talk]]) 23:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Badud]] reported by [[User:Piotrus]] (Result: Indef) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Battle of Klushino}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Badud}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&oldid=513215513]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513393550&oldid=513391879]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513325779&oldid=513324024]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513249321&oldid=513227655]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513215513&oldid=512919788]
Update: Also, 5th and 6th: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513422911&oldid=513422646], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513423808&oldid=513423457]
* 7th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Klushino&diff=513487736&oldid=513467921]
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: this new editor has not been warned yet. A warning will be a sufficient outcome this time, no need for a block (it's a first time violation anyway).

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:Battle_of_Klushino#reverted_GD_edits_by_Badud]], I used informative edit summaries and also tried engaging him on his talk ([[User talk:Badud]])
<u>Comments:</u> <br /> This new editor is adding unreferenced information, and refuses to discuss his additions. In the past 24h he has readded the information four times at the Klushino page, he is also doing the same at the [[battle of Jordanow]]. I tried engaging him in conversation with no result. Others are just reverting him, he needs to stop and realize this is a collaborative project. I hope that a warning from an admin will make him realize that. PS. See also the report immediately below mine (same topic). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<span style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</span>]]</sub> 19:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
*He has just created his user page, not a good sign really. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Badud Welcome everybody , except Russians and their fanboys. I do not talk with commies,bolsheviks and leftists, sorry.] [[User:Darkness Shines|Darkness Shines]] ([[User talk:Darkness Shines|talk]]) 20:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
**Yes, I raised this issue at [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Potentially_offensive_userpage_declaration]]. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<span style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</span>]]</sub> 21:05, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
::*{{AN3|b}} - Indef by [[User:Floquenbeam]], per the ANI discussion. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 13:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Badud]] reported by [[User:Staszek Lem]] (Result: duplicate) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Battle of Klushino}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Badud}}

User ignores notices in article and user talk pages, just reverts non-stop. See article history. [[User:Staszek Lem|Staszek Lem]] ([[User talk:Staszek Lem|talk]]) 19:58, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|n|user is already reported and being discussed in another section here.}} [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] ([[User talk:DMacks|talk]]) 20:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Joekiddlouischama]] reported by [[User:Malley10]] (Result: No action) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Clint Eastwood}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Joekiddlouischama}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clint_Eastwood&diff=513474464&oldid=513474379]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clint_Eastwood&diff=508090438&oldid=507905866]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clint_Eastwood&diff=509175103&oldid=508685201] 
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clint_Eastwood&diff=513464589&oldid=513464394]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clint_Eastwood&diff=513474464&oldid=513474379]


<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Warning posted on talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Joekiddlouischama#Warning:_Violating_the_three-revert_rule]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Attempted to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Joekiddlouischama]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
User has removed entire paragraphs of sourced content and replaced them with rubbish. This has happened five times. User has ignored request to stop.

[[User:Malley10|Malley10]] ([[User talk:Malley10|talk]]) 03:26, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

:{{AN3|comment}} - I don't see any further disruption since Joekiddlouischama received the 3RR warning. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 17:04, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:122.163.195.135]] reported by [[User:Titodutta]] (Result: Range blocked) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Paoli Dam}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|‎122.163.195.135}}

This user <u>(his IP address changes every now and then)</u> is adding [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paoli_Dam&diff=507203445&oldid=507203360#Nude_scene_in_Chatrak this portion] in the article [[Paoli Dam]] and [[Mushrooms (film)]] continuously, which is badly sourced, contains camel case, wrong formatting and most importantly this portion is written in hysterical tone and cheap gossip. Firstly I did not make any changes and posted in help desk and article's talk page for help. In [[Talk:Paoli_Dam#Nude_scene_in_Chatrak_section.21|article's talk page]] it was decided to summarize the portion with reliable sources and without hysterical tone. In between an admin [[User:Lectonar]] stepped in and protected the article twice. I tried to get help from the admin [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALectonar&diff=513396654&oldid=512354034#Paoli_Dam_article_disruptive_edits here] and also [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALectonar&diff=513396654&oldid=512354034#Paoli_Dam_2 here]. In the second help request the admin has mentioned he (i/wa)s busy at that time so can not spend time here. I have talked with few more users like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMaproom&diff=511925608&oldid=511664288#Re:_Chatrak User:Maproom] (who saw my request in help desk), [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADwaipayanc&diff=513484659&oldid=513392445#New_message.21.21 User:Dwaipayanc] (who is the creator of the article Mushrooms (film) and few more users. That's the situation for now. --<span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#ED791A 0em 0em 0.8em,#F55220 -0.8em -0.8em 0.9em,#1D6B00 0.7em 0.7em 0.8em;">[[User:Titodutta|<span style="color:#000000;">Tito Dutta</span>]] [[User talk:Titodutta|<span style="color:#000000;"><big>✉</big></span>]] </span> 06:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
:{{AN3|b}} the range 122.163.192.0/21 (2048 addresses) for 24 hours. If the problem persists after the block expires, you may want to request semi-protection of the affected articles at [[WP:RFPP]] instead. ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 17:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Angkorangel]] reported by [[User:SudoGhost]] (Result: indeffed) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Maitreya}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Angkorangel}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maitreya&diff=prev&oldid=509458384]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maitreya&diff=prev&oldid=513491500]
* 2nd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maitreya&diff=prev&oldid=513488790]
* 3rd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maitreya&diff=prev&oldid=513435597]
* Plus seven more reverts, essentially their entire editing history

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Angkorangel&diff=513489695&oldid=509867463]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Angkorangel&diff=513489695&oldid=509867463]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
This is not a 3RR report, but a general edit-warring report.  Angkorangel is a [[WP:SPA|single-purpose account]] that has been continuously inserting an individual on the [[Maitreya]] article, even though there are no sources that would warrant a mention of this person in the article.  Their only edits to Wikipedia have been to edit war in this way. - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 06:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
:No sources, link spam, and the only substantial mention of him is various Buddhist sites mocking him as a poser.  Though, to be fair, everyone on that particular list is a poser. —{{SubSup|[[User:Kerfuffler|Kerfuffler]]&nbsp;|[[Special:Contributions/Kerfuffler|stalk]]|[[User talk:Kerfuffler|harass]]}} 07:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|b| indefinite}} as a promotion-only account. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 12:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

== [[IP:88.253.207.68]] reported by [[User:Walter Görlitz]] (Result: 24h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Mesut Özil}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|IP:88.253.207.68}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mesut_%C3%96zil&diff=513499949&oldid=513498321]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mesut_%C3%96zil&diff=513422414&oldid=512723496]
* 2nd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mesut_%C3%96zil&diff=513490230&oldid=513425740]
* 3rd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mesut_%C3%96zil&diff=513492358&oldid=513491922]
* 4th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mesut_%C3%96zil&diff=513498321&oldid=513492403]
* 5th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mesut_%C3%96zil&diff=513500301&oldid=513499949]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:88.253.207.68&diff=prev&oldid=513492455]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]
Long talk there. Left comments and talk pointing editor to the talk page.

:{{AN3|b|24 hours}} ~[[User:Amatulic|Amatulić]] <small>([[User talk:Amatulic#top|talk]])</small> 17:13, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:SSZvH7N5n8]] reported by [[User:Bilby]] (Result: 24h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Animal rights}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|SSZvH7N5n8}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_rights&oldid=513295255]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_rights&diff=prev&oldid=513474784]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_rights&diff=prev&oldid=513477840]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_rights&diff=prev&oldid=513479460]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animal_rights&diff=prev&oldid=513495420]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SSZvH7N5n8&diff=513009156&oldid=504906618]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Animal_rights#DeLeeuwa_study]

<u>Comments:</u> The problem is edit warring to insert a copyright violation, even though this has been explained to the user ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SSZvH7N5n8&diff=513478427&oldid=513294845], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SSZvH7N5n8&diff=513493137&oldid=513479141] and talk page discussion). The editor is aware of the problems with 3RR, having warned me about it. - [[User:Bilby|Bilby]] ([[User talk:Bilby|talk]]) 09:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|b|24 hours}} for edit warring and copyright infringements. I have suggested to quote the whole original sentence from the source which would resolve the issue. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 11:50, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:SajjadF]] reported by [[User:AlexJFox]] (Result: No block) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Al-Aqsa Mosque}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|SajjadF}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Al-Aqsa_Mosque&diff=513542871&oldid=512662830 1]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Al-Aqsa_Mosque&diff=513604777&oldid=513581798 2]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [[User_talk:SajjadF#Notice_of_Edit_warring_noticeboard_discussion|Notification for 1RR violation]] 

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[User_talk:SajjadF#Al-Aqsa_Mosque|Contacted editor on his talk page.]]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

Breach of 1RR rule under 2008 Arbitration case regarding Arab-Israeli conflict. 



Contacted editor but on his page rather than article page, this is my mistake I apologise. [[User:AlexJFox|'''<sup>Alex</sup> <small>J</small> <sub>Fox''']]</sub> ([[User_talk:AlexJFox|Talk]]) 
([[Special:Contributions/AlexJFox|Contribs]]) 23:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Just want to say, I made a mistake by reverting the edit twice. 
But, It was done to resolve the biased view brought by [[User:AlexJFox]]. 
Have a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:AlexJFox#Al-Aqsa_Mosque_edit
Thanks. [[User:SajjadF|SajjadF]] ([[User talk:SajjadF|talk]]) 23:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

:How was it biased to restore the more widely used English name "Temple Mount"? Your edit also broke several Wikilinks—in your haste to undo AlexJFox's edit, you never looked to see what effect ''your'' edit was having. —&nbsp;[[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 23:24, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry about the other edits, but "temple mount" is what the jews call it as they believe Solomon's temple was there. Calling a mosque a temple is simply wrong. Just like calling a church a synagogue. Two different faiths. And the term "Al-Aqsa" refers to the whole area and since this article is about "Al - Aqsa" mosque, let us stick to that. Besides, There is an article about the temple mount. And an article about the excavations under the temple mount also mention that they were under Al-Aqsa. [[User:SajjadF|SajjadF]] ([[User talk:SajjadF|talk]]) 23:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

:This is English-language Wikipedia and we use the common English names for things. That's why the article refers to "Al-Aqsa Mosque" and not "Masjid Al-Aqsa". The English name for the elevation on which Al-Aqsa is located is "Temple Mount", not "the Al-Aqsa". —&nbsp;[[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]]&nbsp;<sup>[[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]]</sub> 00:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
::SajjadF has violated the [[WP:1RR]] restriction on this article with his two reverts on 19 September. The first was at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Al-Aqsa_Mosque&diff=513542871&oldid=512662830 14:55] and the second at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Al-Aqsa_Mosque&diff=513604777&oldid=513581798 22:37]. He might be able to avoid sanctions if he will agree to stop reverting until he can get consensus. The existence of a 1RR is clearly marked on the article's talk page. It's true that nobody notified him on his own talk page before the second revert. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 00:52, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

:::Agreed to the above terms, will not revert until i get a consensus on the talk page. [[User:SajjadF|SajjadF]] ([[User talk:SajjadF|talk]]) 10:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
:'''Result:'''  Closed with no block since SajjadF has agreed to wait for consensus. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 14:09, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Strike2216]]  reported by [[User:Zepppep]] (Result: 48h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|List of Major League Baseball players with 2,000 hits}}  <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Strike2216}} 

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_with_2%2C000_hits&diff=513804458&oldid=513804301] 
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_with_2%2C000_hits&diff=513805626&oldid=513805479]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_with_2%2C000_hits&diff=513807039&oldid=513806352]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_with_2%2C000_hits&diff=513808323&oldid=513808058]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_with_2%2C000_hits&diff=513816823&oldid=513816656]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AStrike2216&diff=513808872&oldid=513808304]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_with_2,000_hits#Active_player]

<u>Comments:</u> The editor has been warned multiple times about their refusal to adhere to the edit notice. As recently as last month, they were also encouraged and warned about their edit warring behavior. In fact, an editor went as far to report them to this page. Unfortunately, the submitted last month was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RRArchive194#User:Strike2216_reported_by_User:Bagumba_.28Result:_No_vio.29 rejected] as the admin thought a block to the editor (who does not visit WP daily) might not do much good. Unfortunately, however, the editor continues to a) not engage in conversation or ask questions pertaining to the edit notice (as instructed by the edit notice in big, red letters), 3RR policy, edit warring, etc., b) not adhere to warnings put on their talk page, and c) their behavior continues to be an issue because this is the type of editor who will only perhaps learn if more serious measures are taken. (Update: the user has attempted to remove mention of their behavior to this page with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FEdit_warring&diff=513816703&oldid=513816382 this edit], which was later reverted.)<br />

[[User:Zepppep|Zepppep]] ([[User talk:Zepppep|talk]]) 02:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
*Strike2216 blocked for 48 hours for continued disruptive editing and refusal to discuss, etc.. – [[User:Connormah|Connormah]] ([[User talk:Connormah|talk]]) 03:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:193.233.212.18|193.233.212.18]] reported by [[User:Chetvorno]] (Result: page protected) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Pendulum}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|193.233.212.18<!-- Place the name of the user you are reporting here -->}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&oldid=503652578]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=512178101&oldid=511877494]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=512389757&oldid=512340502]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513361042&oldid=512965004]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513390369&oldid=513363951]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513686397&oldid=513549241]
* 6th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513711325&oldid=513706485]
* 7th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513712941&oldid=513711930]
* 8th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513726801&oldid=513714694]
* 9th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=next&oldid=513726801]
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A193.233.212.18&diff=513722356&oldid=513417979]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3APendulum&diff=513704497&oldid=513360061] Complete discussion is [[Talk:Pendulum#Which formula for the true period should be used?|here]].

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
[[User:193.233.212.18|193.233.212.18]] doesn't seem very familiar with WP, he says edit warring is OK as long as the issue is important.   There's been consensus on the Talk page, with 4 editors opposed to his addition and trying to talk to him; complete discussion at [[Talk:Pendulum#Which formula for the true period should be used?]].  He doesn't engage in detailed debate of the issue, just says his version is the best so it must stay. --[[User:Chetvorno|<span style="color:blue;">Chetvorno</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Chetvorno|<i style="color:purple; font-size:smaller;">TALK</i>]]</sup> 15:12, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

[[User:193.233.212.18|193.233.212.18]] has violated the [[WP:3RR]] with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pendulum&diff=513726801&oldid=513714694]
:and has been warned accordingly. <span style="background-color:lightblue">'''''&nbsp;[[User:Velella|Velella]]&nbsp;'''''</span><span style="background-color:lightblue">&nbsp;<sup>''[[User talk:Velella|Velella]] Talk ''</sup>&nbsp;</span> 15:44, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

::Yes - '''repeatedly''' on [[User talk:193.233.212.18|his talk page]] and the [[talk:pendulum|pendulum talk page]]. As explained to him many times, his formula gives the incorrect interpretation that the pendulum time period can be calculated using a closed formula when it can't, and is far less easy to physically interpret than a power series (the point of expanding in the first place). Everyone has been very reasonable with the IP. The formula is already included in WP in the appropriate place ([[pendulum (mathematics)]]), and is adding it unnecessarily to a [[pendulum#Period of oscillation|section]] where readers will gain very little (if any) understanding. [[User:Maschen|Maschen]] ([[User talk:Maschen|talk]]) 16:20, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|p}} The report is now somewhat stale so I've semi-protected the page. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 16:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

:Thanks - that's a big help. [[User:Maschen|Maschen]] ([[User talk:Maschen|talk]]) 16:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
:Yes, thank you for your help. --[[User:Chetvorno|<span style="color:blue;">Chetvorno</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Chetvorno|<i style="color:purple; font-size:smaller;">TALK</i>]]</sup> 13:03, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Snowded]] reported by [[User:CartoonDiablo]] (Result: Protected, both editors warned) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Psychoanalysis}} <br />
'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Cognitive behavioral therapy}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Snowded}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychoanalysis&diff=513431016&oldid=513424805 diff]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychoanalysis&diff=next&oldid=513456502 diff]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychoanalysis&diff=next&oldid=513632908 diff]

* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cognitive_behavioral_therapy&diff=513430683&oldid=513361227 diff]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cognitive_behavioral_therapy&diff=513479099&oldid=513456336 diff]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cognitive_behavioral_therapy&diff=513634440&oldid=513632915 diff]


<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASnowded&diff=513740664&oldid=513735520 link]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACognitive_behavioral_therapy&diff=513636479&oldid=513635668 diff]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
There is currently a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Family_therapy dispute resolution] about whether or not to include the image. Snowded has asserted that the dispute resolution for removing the image has been solved in the previous one ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACartoonDiablo&diff=513636566&oldid=513487222 diff]) when it hasn't been. 

I asked him to self-revert to which he refused ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACognitive_behavioral_therapy&diff=513635094&oldid=513632258 diff]). As well he has accused me of "trapping" Widescreen who was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=Widescreen&year=&month=-1&tagfilter= blocked twice] for the same thing ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASnowded&diff=513735520&oldid=513710298 diff]).       

As far as I can tell this is a clear breach of WP:BRD since he is reverting when the issue is being discussed in DRN. [[User:CartoonDiablo|CartoonDiablo]] ([[User talk:CartoonDiablo|talk]]) 16:59, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

*{{AN3|p}}. Both editors warned and I will block for repetition. --[[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 17:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

::You need to check a bit further John.   CartoonDiablo has attempted to insert this table/image on three articles and its been to dispute resolution several times.  The clear consensus there was that it was not an appropriate edition in that it gave a false impression and/or was [[WP:OR|original research]].  I've summarised that on his talk page.  In effect he is insisting on inserting the material against that consensus.   The DRN discussion was over, he has added a comment recently and got the same result.  Now none of this is obvious as the discussion has been around the Family Therapy and CBT articles.  The Psychoanalysis article is the third but there is no trace to the other discussions.   So what we have here is a case of an editor refusing to accept the communities decision and insisting on inserting a table/image of his own creation; and edit warring on the grounds that he is still discussing the issue at DRP.    
::Now I was an uninvolved editor until a few days ago, I saw a dispute on ANI and as this as area in which I have expertise I looked into it.  It took me some hours to track through the history to the DRP discussions and I don't expect an admin patrolling this page to have to do that.  But you might want to check [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Family_therapy this link] which shows that discussion.  ----[[User:Snowded|<font color="#801818" face="Papyrus">'''Snowded'''</font>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Snowded#top|<font color="#708090" face="Baskerville">TALK</font>]]</sup></small> 19:04, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the DR link. Everybody who edit wars thinks they are right; it isn't an excuse. I am happy to look at the content issue in more detail, but the is always a better solution than edit-warring. --[[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 05:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
::::Of course they do and there are alternatives.  The matter goes to an RfC for something like DR and its resolved.  '''That had happened.'''  If you check the history you will see my first reaction was to put a PoV tag on the paragraph, while I checked into the facts.  Then I found the DR material so I removed it per that community consensus.  Over several days (check his talk page and my edit summaries) I tried to explain he had no consensus for insertion of the material.  I even warning him that I would raise his behaviour here or at ANI which is what triggered the report.  ----[[User:Snowded|<font color="#801818" face="Papyrus">'''Snowded'''</font>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Snowded#top|<font color="#708090" face="Baskerville">TALK</font>]]</sup></small> 05:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

CartoonDiablo has edit warred with multiple editors over time on the same issue and ignored practically any feedback except for switching from a table to a picture of the same table, which is an extremely lame form of wikilawyering. The numerous discussions on this issue linked in the ANI thread show that he drove away at least half-dozen editors who expressed their objection. Voluminous repetition and tiring out the opposition with umpteen DR threads is how one editor with plenty of time on his hands wins on Wikipedia: [[defeat in detail]]. The collective failure of admins to put a stop to the [[WP:TRUTH]] campaign of one editor is rather worrisome, but their time is limited too. A RfC/U on CartoonDiablo should be started by those involved who tried and failed to resolve the matter, but I suspect they're just sick and tired of this. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=514106472#Article_CBT_and_Psychoanalyse._Again] [[User:Tijfo098|Tijfo098]] ([[User talk:Tijfo098|talk]]) 02:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

:I am surprised that neither John or Ed have responded having checked the references given. ----[[User:Snowded|<font color="#801818" face="Papyrus">'''Snowded'''</font>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Snowded#top|<font color="#708090" face="Baskerville">TALK</font>]]</sup></small> 04:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

:And we have another example of a misleading edit summary [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dodo_bird_verdict&diff=514050069&oldid=514047906 here].  There is a clear consensus at the moment to remove the image/table, but CartoonDiablo insists on retaining it where he can, arguing that because he is discussing it the question is still open.  ----[[User:Snowded|<font color="#801818" face="Papyrus">'''Snowded'''</font>]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Snowded#top|<font color="#708090" face="Baskerville">TALK</font>]]</sup></small> 05:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Dsomeone]] reported by [[User:Eldamorie]] (Result: 24 hours for Dsomeone, Bkonrad warned) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Deism}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Dsomeone}}


Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&oldid=513882152]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513885573&oldid=513884692]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513886758&oldid=513886204]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513890881&oldid=513890648]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513892014&oldid=513891614]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513894829&oldid=513894574]
* 6th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513896114&oldid=513895600]
* 7th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513896956&oldid=513896368]
* 8th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513898321&oldid=513897955]
* 9th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Deism&diff=513898664&oldid=513898471]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dsomeone&diff=prev&oldid=513893420]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

<u>Comments:</u>This user is insisting on adding repeated extended quotations from a self-published book, claiming that the fairly well-cited article is not [[WP:TRUTH|the Truth]] and is refusing to engage in productive discussion - see [[User talk:Bkonrad#Please_stop|Here]]. [[User:Eldamorie|eldamorie]] ([[User_talk:Eldamorie|talk]]) 17:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC) <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
*{{AN3|b|24 hours}}. I have also warned {{user5|Bkonrad}} who was involved in this edit war not to continue edit warring in this matter. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 17:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:31.47.12.40]] reported by [[User:Wüstenfuchs]] (Result: Blocked) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Farouk al-Sharaa}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|31.47.12.40}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

I requested the semi-protection of the Farouk al-Sharaa article and I was advised to report the IP's edit warring by [[User:Drmies]] if any removal of the information occures for the second time, and it did. At first, user (the IP) removed the info which was unreferenced (the references only showed that he originates from the Sunni Muslim family, not himself bening a Sunni Muslim), but later I added the source and the IP's reverts continue anyway. It is the same IP that reverts this infromation for days. Drmies warned him not to make any edit-warring a day ago, but he continued to do so anyway. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 20:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
{{AN3|n}}. There are two IP addresses involved in the slow edit war, the reported one and [[User:31.47.12.228]].--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 20:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
*The one is blocked. I'll have a look at the other one. BTW, I've rolled back a couple more of their unexplained edits. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 20:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
*Yeah, there's more. That IP hasn't edited in a couple of days, but there isn't so much hopping that we can't make an effort to keep track of these two, which I will. I left the other one a 4im warning (after reverting a troublesome edit, in the Balkans of all places), just in case they do return to it. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 21:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I appriciate the effort. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 21:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Senor Cuete]] reported by [[User:Giggette]] (Result: nothing) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Lords of the Night}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Senor Cuete}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lords_of_the_Night&diff=513922981&oldid=513588897, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lords_of_the_Night]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lords_of_the_Night&diff=513922981&oldid=513602011]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lords_of_the_Night&diff=513922981&oldid=513625244]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lords_of_the_Night&diff=513922981&oldid=513713831]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lords_of_the_Night&diff=513922981&oldid=513784527]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Senor_Cuete&diff=513923877&oldid=513784157]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

User in question remove content that was properly sourced or formatted with books and refuses to discuss without removing referenced information. --[[User:Giggette|Giggette]] ([[User talk:Giggette|talk]]) 20:54, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
*Sorry, but this makes no sense. The editor did not revert three times (you linked yourself as well in the diffs above). You should work this out on the talk page. The more courteous you both are the more chance you'll have of success. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 21:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Fabyan17]] reported by [[User:Quigley]] (Result: No violation) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Talk:South China Sea}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Fabyan17}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513097745&oldid=513097451]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513850655&oldid=513097745]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513903432&oldid=513851599]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513925963&oldid=513913992]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513927098&oldid=513926240]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fabyan17&diff=513928161&oldid=513840306]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513913992&oldid=513913834]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

Fabyan17 was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=513247097&oldid=513232065 here before] on a straightforward violation of 3RR on the same article. The request was declined because there was a parallel [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive768#Slow_edit-warring.2C_meaningless_POV_edits.2C_and_refusal_to_use_the_talk_page_by_one_editor_at_South_China_Sea thread] on ANI, which became inactive and archived before any resolution. His nationalist edit-warring continues all over Wikipedia (ex. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sabah&diff=513902021&oldid=513900092][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southeast_Asia&diff=513926542&oldid=513925277][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philippines&diff=513842158&oldid=513717646]), wasting the time and patience of the many editors who have tried to teach him the virtues of discussing controversial edits.
----
Fabyan17 replies:

It's not about edit warring, I am only deleting a direct harassment to me by Benlisquare, instead of writing a relevant 'SECTION NAME', he instead used my user name as the topic/section name w/c is already a personal attack to the user/editor. Let us pls. stop tolerating harassment/irrelevant naming of the sections in the South China Sea talk page. We know very clear that based on wikipedia guidelines, the Article's Talk Page (SECTION names) is reserved for ISSUES RELATED to the article, and NOT names of editors/users. The section name made by Benlisquare (entitled @fabyan17) is already a personal attack to the user and not the issue being debated. The proper venue should be in the user's talk page. There should be no double-standards here.  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Fabyan17|Fabyan17]] ([[User talk:Fabyan17|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Fabyan17|contribs]]) 21:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:The fact that you are not allowed to edit this user's talk page comments was pointed out to you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513851599&oldid=513850655 one] (1) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513913834&oldid=513903432 two] (2) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513926240&oldid=513925963 three] (3) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513927927&oldid=513927098 four] (4) times in edit summaries, which the software displays before and after you undo the edits. In case you missed that, it was mentioned to you for a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_China_Sea&diff=513913992&oldid=513913834 fifth] (5) time on the article talk page. Or, if you weren't looking at that, you got the message hand-delivered to your ''own talk page'' for the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fabyan17&diff=513928161&oldid=513840306 sixth] (6) time. Somehow missed that? You got told a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bazonka&diff=513929725&oldid=513928891 seventh] (7) time on someone else's talk page that what you did was not permissible. We're at an administrator's noticeboard where I just reported you for wrongdoing (8), and you're ''still'' defending your actions. This is a classic case of [[WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT]]. [[User:Shrigley|Shrigley]] ([[User talk:Shrigley|talk]]) 21:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
This seems to mainly be an edit war between [[User:Fabyan17|Fabyan17]] and [[User:Benlisquare|Benlisquare]] about what the body of water is called in the Phillipines.  It seems to me there are more productive routes (e.g. [[WP:DRN]]) for solving this problem than making long winded personal attacks against another editor on the article talk page.  This discussion should be directed elsewhere. —{{SubSup|[[User:Kerfuffler|Kerfuffler]]&nbsp;|[[Special:Contributions/Kerfuffler|prowl]]|[[User talk:Kerfuffler|howl]]}} 22:34, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
:More like an edit war between Fabyan17 and half a dozen editors on multiple articles. The content issue shouldn't matter on this board, but it's worthwhile to note that the body of water is international, borders seven countries, and has had only one English name before last year. 

:Benlisquare's message was not a "long winded personal attack". The tone was addressed towards the origin of the disruptive recent edits, but this personalization could be changed with a simple copyedit. The bulk of the message focused on ''content'', specifically Fabyan17's abuse of disambiguation pages, flouting of the Manual of Style, suppression of non-Filipino nationalist viewpoints, and refusal to discuss his edits.

:The point is, the users who disagree with Fabyan are willing to use the talk page, but Fabyan not only ''won't'' use the talk page but he repeatedly ''removes'' all attempts at dialogue not only from his own talk page but also from the article's talk page. If he won't use talk pages, DRN is not going to help. [[User:Shrigley|Shrigley]] ([[User talk:Shrigley|talk]]) 01:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:{{AN3|nv}}. This is unseemly to say the least. Fabyan's removal of the material from the talk page was appropriate. The material was an attack and inappropriate for an article talk page. Benlisquare copied warnings from Fabyan's talk page and pasted them into the article talk page. Nothing short of outrageous, in my view, regardless of what anyone thinks of Fabyan's conduct otherwise. I have removed the section from the talk page, and I wouldn't like to see ''anyone'' restoring it.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 23:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
::As I pointed out above, the meat of the message related to ''content'' issues, but when dealing with an unrepentant edit-warrior, the message also necessarily covers ''conduct'' issues, like Fabyan17's refusal to use the talk page. A plea to use the talk page is not a personal attack. Many Wikipedia pages encourage and assume that important discussions take place on the relatively open article talk space, rather than on personal user space, including ANEW. For an ANEW judgment to ''discourage'' article talk dialogue... well, that's beyond the pale.

::The true outrage here is that the same administrator who found a frivolous reason to excuse Fabyan17's flat-out 3RR violation four days ago, is doing ''the same exact thing'' of ignoring his 3RR violation again by saying, "But the other guy was bad too!" So here's my bold prediction: we'll be back on this board again in a few days, because Fabyan17's past two experiences here tell him that he can get away with blatant, distributed edit-warring as long as he has some scapegoat editor from which to claim "Harassment!" [[User:Shrigley|Shrigley]] ([[User talk:Shrigley|talk]]) 01:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Quite frankly I am astonished by Bbb23's decision to what was a blatant violation of [[WP:TPO]] and [[WP:3RR]]. [[User:Bazonka|Bazonka]] ([[User talk:Bazonka|talk]]) 06:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
::::I totally agree with Bbb23. What belongs to a user page and to one user's conduct has to remain there; in fact the only frivolous thing was Benlisquare's posting of user-related warnings at a public forum like an article talk page. If you feel that one user's conduct is problematic, feel free to report them at ANI but don't move personal matters to the article talk. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 11:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::I am not entirely condoning Benlisquare, but it should be noted that whilst his post on the talk page was directed towards Fabyan17, it was specifically related to the content of the article. (Also note that a user talk page is still a public forum.) But however well or badly Benlisquare behaved, it does not remove the fact that Fabyan17's actions were still a gross violation of [[WP:TPO]] and [[WP:3RR]]. [[User:Bazonka|Bazonka]] ([[User talk:Bazonka|talk]]) 11:37, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:::::@De728631: I've replied to this "allegation" on Bbb23's talk page. This is not a "personal matter", it is definitely related to the article. Furthermore, now it has been ''twice'' that this user has "gotten away" with disruptive editing, edit warring and 3RR violation, for no reasonable justification at all. I hope everyone feels fulfilled since we're essentially promoting more problematic things occuring in the future. "Look, the sysops are fine with me trashing the place around, I'll do it again!" --[[User:benlisquare|<span style="border:1px solid yellow;padding:1px;color:#FFFF00;background:red;">'''&nbsp;李博杰&nbsp;'''</span>]] &#124; <small>—[[User talk:benlisquare|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Benlisquare|contribs]] [[Special:EmailUser/User:Benlisquare|email]]</small> 17:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Camoka5<!-- Place name of the user you are reporting here -->]] reported by [[User:Amadscientist]] (Result: Indef) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Innocence of Muslims}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Camoka5}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Innocence_of_Muslims&diff=513953454&oldid=513953131]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Innocence_of_Muslims&diff=513954220&oldid=513953734]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Innocence_of_Muslims&diff=513958640&oldid=513958532]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Innocence_of_Muslims&diff=513959779&oldid=513959625]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACamoka5&diff=513953919&oldid=513035838]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AInnocence_of_Muslims&diff=513953471&oldid=513951772]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
The editor seems reluctant to accept consensus to not include his personal drawing for inclusion on the article. He appears to misunderstand consensus and has accused this editor of vandalism by removing the map that goes against the current discussion. He appears to be attempting to claim a majority that does not exist and is not consensus and refuses stop edit warring. Attempts to respectfuly ask them to review policy has been ignored and edit warring to push his visual opinion has not ceased.--[[User:Amadscientist|Amadscientist]] ([[User talk:Amadscientist|talk]]) 03:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:Is "camoka" a common word in some other language or something?  Because this account was created one day after {{user|Camoka4}} had their block extended due to "attempted block evasion". - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 05:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
::Really?--[[User:Amadscientist|Amadscientist]] ([[User talk:Amadscientist|talk]]) 05:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Actually Camoka5 began editing 34 minutes after Camoka4 last edited their unblock request, which was denied.  I've added it to an already open SPI at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Camoka4]].  Camoka4 also has a thing for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schengen_Area&diff=497475490&oldid=497468328 edit-warring over maps]. - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 05:12, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
::::Christ, at least Technoquat is {{diff|Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard|513484968|513484197|clever}}!  *facepalm* —{{SubSup|[[User:Kerfuffler|Kerfuffler]]&nbsp;|[[Special:Contributions/Kerfuffler|prowl]]|[[User talk:Kerfuffler|howl]]}} 05:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
::{{AN3|b}} - Camoka5 was indefinitely blocked by Kudpung for block evasion. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 15:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Unnamed101]] reported by [[User:Torchiest]] (Result: 24 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Diablo III}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Unnamed101}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=513950781&oldid=513903966 diff]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=513969258&oldid=513957958 diff]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=513972318&oldid=513971191 diff]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=513972688&oldid=513972556 diff]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=513973616&oldid=513973330 diff]
* 6th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=513974307&oldid=513974039 diff]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Unnamed101&diff=513973430&oldid=513973183 link]
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Unnamed101&diff=513973733&oldid=513973702 link]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:Diablo III#Reception|Large conversation before edit warring]]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
This draconian attempt at blocking legitimate edits is laughable, the edit was made to specifically reference what "reviews" the author was talking about to leave this out is tantamount to context fraud, the sources cited are reliable as they are first hand account of the authors opinion, even if they as themselves would not server as critical reception they deserve mention and sourcing.

Furthermore the talk itself shows a consensus of users requesting this information be added, and the same few who keep reverting it defending their position against including it, including the user torchiest who started this request.[[User:Unnamed101|Unnamed101]] ([[User talk:Unnamed101|talk]]) 05:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:This is a classic example of misunderstanding the problem and point of contention caused by your insistence on not reading the links to policies and guidelines that other editors continue to provide you. There is no "draconian" blocking of edits. It has been explained over and over that non-professional user reviews are not reliable sources. But rather than try discuss it and reach an understanding of the issue, you just keep adding them back.  —<B>[[User:Torchiest|Torchiest]]</B> <sup>[[User talk:Torchiest|talk]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Torchiest|edits]]</sub> 10:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
::That's crock, the edits and links are vital to the information being presented, without it is the literary equivalent of saying "the ____ is orange" what is orange, how do we know it is orange? the information being cited was not being cited as a review but as an important aspect to complete the information, regardless of whether or not they merit as actual reviews which you insist I am presenting them as.[[User:Unnamed101|Unnamed101]] ([[User talk:Unnamed101|talk]]) 14:32, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
*{{AN3|b|24 hours}}.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 15:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Trekphiler ]] reported by [[User:Andy Dingley]] (Result: No violation) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Ford Model T}} <br /> 	
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Trekphiler}}

[[WP:POINT]] issue.  Trekphiler appears to be edit-warring with himself.

Some time around 2009, the article [[Ford Model T]] had the extraordinary claim added that the Model T ran at Le Mans, by adding the category [[:Category:24 Hours of Le Mans race cars]]  This was queried back then at [[Talk:Ford_Model_T#Racing_history_-_new_section.3F]], but Trekphiler argued (uncited, and on a weak claim) that it should be left this way.

Today he seems to have forgotten that, questioned and removed the categorization, with a rather sarcastic edit summary aimed at other unspecified editors. At [[User_talk:Trekphiler#Model_T_at_Le_Mans]] I reminded him that it was only his comments that had kept it the first time round. After which he then ''restored'' the category he'd only just removed. I deleted it, as it's still uncited and with no credible evidence to support it. Trekphiler than removed it a second time. This just seems to be [[WP:POINT]].

This category is wrong. It's at the bizarre end of believable at best and needs robust sourcing ''and explanation'' if it's to stay. We have none of this.   [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 00:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
:{{AN3|nv}}. The background is interesting, but where is the edit-warring? Trekphiler has made only one revert. The first doesn't count because they self-reverted. Not that it's terribly important given the context, but you also didn't warn the user you thought they were edit-warring.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 00:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

:: I'm happy to agree that it's not EW and certainly not 3RR, but it's clearly POINTy and WQA is no longer available. Someone needs to wield the cluebat and I'm unwilling to, lest I be accused of edit-warring in turn.  This is just not an appropriate cat to add to the article. Where's the sourcing? What happened to WP:V?  I've just removed it again.  After all, it's not edit warring, is it?  [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 00:52, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

:::The second rv was only after being accused of trying to make a point, ''after'' self-rv to be consistent with the view I originally accepted, which Andy Dingley claims I "insisted" on. So he comes here, with a false claim of edit war, because he doesn't like the edit summary? Somebody's being a troll. And I am getting damn sick & tired of being the butt of false accusations.  [[User:Trekphiler|<font face="cursive" color="#9400D3"><small>TREKphiler</small></font>]] [[User talk:Trekphiler|<font face="cursive" color="#008000"><sup><small>any time you're ready, Uhura</small> </sup></font>]] 00:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Come on, Andy, you have a content dispute, you take it to the talk page and go through [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]]. You don't come to this board just because you believe you have nowhere else to go. And being smart-alecky ("After all, it's not edit warring, is it?") isn't helpful. And, Trekphiler, you could pay some attention to the substance of Andy's comments. Frankly, I haven't looked at the content, but if the cat isn't supported in the body, it doesn't belong.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 01:15, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:Sean.hoyland]] reported by [[User:24.177.121.137]] (Result: Both editors blocked) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Israeli settler violence}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Sean.hoyland}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&oldid=513498841]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513843543&oldid=513812699]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513902182&oldid=513900584]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513904692&oldid=513904544]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513905832&oldid=513905217]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=prev&oldid=513913104]  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 19:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: warned in edit summary, see article history

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AIsraeli_settler_violence&diff=513490913&oldid=512131219]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
Article is subject to 1RR rule, but that apparently doesn't apply to reverting edits from IPs. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 18:18, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
:This IP has been edit-warring over an image caption, violating the 1RR several times. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;">nableezy</span>]]''' - 18:31, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</small>
::This isn't about me. If you can find diffs supporting that contention, they go in a different section. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 18:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Oh, so people can edit-war and if they are quick enough to report somebody first they get off? ''When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.'' As far as diffs, your reverts on that article, just from today, are: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513909058&oldid=513907238], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513904877&oldid=513904692], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513902938&oldid=513902182], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513900584&oldid=513843543]. Whereas Sean's reverts are exempt from the 1RR, your are not. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;">nableezy</span>]]''' - 18:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</small>
::::I already pointed out that 1RR doesn't apply when reverting edits from IPs. But Sean is not exempt from 3RR, and the rest of your comment isn't on-topic. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 19:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
And also, of note, Sean's first "revert" was reverting the CommonsDelinkerBot as the image in question had been restored on commons. As much as our relentless IP friend would like to find fault in others' reverts (but not his own of course), I dont think the first one counts as a revert. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</small>
:You appear to be confused on what a revert is. Please stop trying to engage me in an argument that's not appropriate for this page/section. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 19:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
::Giggle. If you want me to post what your reverts reverted I would be happy. But again, as written at the top of this page, ''When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.'' Your actions here are in fact ''on-topic''. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</small>
:::Fine, I'll do it: Your first diff isn't a revert. Your second diff isn't a revert. Your third diff isn't a revert. Only the fourth is. Here's a hint for you: not every edit you dislike is a revert. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 19:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
::::The first diff is you blanking a section, which is always a revert. That revert, an obvious one, undid another editor's action. The third and fourth diff show you removing text added to the caption by another user, which are, once again, reverts. The second diff is you moving the picture to another section, as you did earlier [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=513904544&oldid=513904299 here], which is again a revert. You reverted another editor reverting your disruptive edit, claiming that a well known instance of settlers using such charming phrases as ''gas the Arabs'' as being an example of staged vandalism. Try this with somebody who doesnt know what they are talking about, youll have much better results. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User talk:Nableezy|<span style="color:#C11B17;">nableezy</span>]]''' - 19:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</small>
<- It's an SPA advocating for their cause and disrupting Wikipedia in the process. The guy is on a dynamic IP ([[Special:Contributions/24.177.125.104]], [[Special:Contributions/24.177.122.56]], [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137]]). The discretionary sanctions are meant to keep people like this away from the topic area so that editors don't need to deal with this kind of disruptive nonsense. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Sean.hoyland|<span style="color:#000000;">Sean.hoyland</span>]]''' - '''[[User talk:Sean.hoyland|talk]]'''</small> 19:24, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
:Not an SPA. The discretionary sanctions don't allow you to revert 5 times (and counting) within 24-hours. Please cut out the ad-hominem attacks. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 19:30, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
::Sigh. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Sean.hoyland|<span style="color:#000000;">Sean.hoyland</span>]]''' - '''[[User talk:Sean.hoyland|talk]]'''</small> 19:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Good point. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 19:41, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
*The discretionary sanctions are there to prevent disruption. I am not aware that they are designed to keep IP hoppers out. You're both edit warring, you should both be blocked. IP, don't claim that 1R doesn't apply to you--that's the lowest way out, and of course this is about you also. I don't know if there's anyone right in this unseemly war or not, but I do know that this should have been avoided by Sean, who, it seems to me, was successfully baited and let it happen. I'm awaiting input from another admin (nice to get consensus on something like this), but '''block both''' and keep an eye on the POV warrior without an account is my suggestion. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 21:05, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
:*Look, I kept one foot inside the line. Sean's at, like, seven reverts or something. He's repeatedly removed tags challenging the reliability of sources and the accuracy of citations without discussion. The only thing I can get out of him and that other dude on the talk page are personal attacks. In reverting, he's re-broken the citation markup in his own sources (which I fixed!) repeatedly. It's nonsense to say we're equally culpable. 
::You want to block me for baiting him, go ahead. But someone's got to reign in the demonstrable [[WP:OWN|article ownership]] going on over there.[[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]])  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 22:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:{{AN3|bb|24 hours}}. I agreed with Drmies even before he commented.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 22:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
::It would be useful if Admins logged this at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles#Log of blocks and bans]]. Sean has been in the topic area for awhile so it might be necessary to have the log clear if admins are still using escalating blocks to address misbehavior. Clarity is also important if there is going to be an ARBPIA3. More importantly, the IP should be notated as notified since there will more than likely be a sockpuppet case and/or further discussion from them in the topic area. [[User:Cptnono|Cptnono]] ([[User talk:Cptnono|talk]]) 07:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Thanks, Cptnono, I almost didn't notice your comment. I've logged the block of the IP and formally warned the IP on their talk page. Sean was previously notified of the restriction according to the log.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 18:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

<- I've removed the article from my watchlist. I provided the requested reliable sourcing, stopped the editor's disruptive commons deletion nomination and started the talk page section. Clearly the IP plans to continue with their important work. Editors willing to converse with this kind of person can take it from here. They are entitled to support from admins able to recognize an "editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia" and willing to implement the "We avoid advocacy" part of the 5 pillars. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Sean.hoyland|<span style="color:#000000;">Sean.hoyland</span>]]''' - '''[[User talk:Sean.hoyland|talk]]'''</small> 07:57, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
:sigh. [[Special:Contributions/24.177.121.137|24.177.121.137]] ([[User talk:24.177.121.137|talk]]) 18:07, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Reisio]] reported by [[User:SudoGhost]] (Result: Stale) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|User talk:SudoGhost}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Reisio}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SudoGhost&diff=514083195&oldid=514081769]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SudoGhost&diff=514090166&oldid=514083241]
* 2nd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SudoGhost&diff=514092769&oldid=514090235]
* 3rd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SudoGhost&diff=514093119&oldid=514092833]
* 4th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SudoGhost&diff=514093800&oldid=514093210]
* 5th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SudoGhost&diff=514096368&oldid=514093917]


'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|GNU}} <br />
Previous version reverted to: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU&diff=513648581&oldid=512520539]

* 1st revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU&diff=513754931&oldid=513650680]
* 2nd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU&diff=513795936&oldid=513772781]
* 3rd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU&diff=514079730&oldid=514075480]
* 4th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU&diff=514083766&oldid=514080981]
* 5th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GNU&diff=514092008&oldid=514091662]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Reisio&diff=513772639&oldid=511388847] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Reisio&diff=514093364&oldid=514093116]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:GNU#Primary sources tag]]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
The editor violated [[WP:3RR]] on my talk page, the [[GNU]]'s diffs is for a general edit warring report.  Despite discussion on the [[GNU]] talk page the editor is removing any mention of a maintenance template on the article and despite the fact that there is a previous consensus for the template and the issue the template highlights is still there, reverting the edits of three different editors in order to remove the template just because [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:GNU&diff=prev&oldid=513973845 he doesn't see the point] of the template.  Despite requests to stop [[WP:TPO|restoring conversations that I have removed from my talk page]], they continue to edit-war to restore the discussions. - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 00:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

:All pretty self explanatory if you look at the histories, but to sum up: the GNU situation is [[talk:GNU#Primary_sources_tag|still under discussion]], and SudoGhost seems to think his talk page is not a place for people to respond to him at (he seems to think my own talk page is the only suitable medium with which to communicate with SudoGhost). ¦ [[User:Reisio|Reisio]] ([[User talk:Reisio|talk]]) 00:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
::And you ignore the discussion to continue to edit war against multiple editors without actually discussing the issue on the talk page, but I do appreciate that you think it's fine to edit war and ignore [[WP:BRD]] and [[WP:STATUSQUO]] as long as someone else is using the discussion on the talk page.  As for my talk page, [[WP:TPO]] is pretty clear on that, and if you continue to restore conversations I remove, that is edit warring. If I respond at another location, that does not mean that ''you repeatedly copy the entire discussion'' to my talk page over and over, especially when I ask you not to multiple times. Not only does that fragment the discussion, but there's no reason to have the same discussion in two locations. - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 00:59, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
*'''Result:''' Stale. The dispute about the primary source tag is now at [[WP:DRN#GNU]]. SudoGhost is obviously correct that an editor can remove threads from their own talk page. Such removals are not counted as reverts (per [[WP:3RRNO]] item 2). In the time it took to have this dispute somebody could probably have fixed the sourcing of the article, making the discussion unnecessary. If tag warring continues after the DRN is over the admins are unlikely to show much patience. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 19:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
::How is this stale?  Them edit-warring on my talk page is stale as well?  I have no interest in discussing anything because I know they're going to copy the entire discussion to my talk page every time I do; the talk page issue is far from stale. - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 21:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Reisio has not posted to your talk since 00:45 on 23 September. Also, we assume that he will correct his behavior now that the DRN is running. The DRN should be given a chance to work. If you see more evidence of edit warring you could resubmit. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 22:34, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
::::Raisio has not posted to my talk because I haven't responded to him anywhere since then.  The DRN has nothing to do with that behavior on my talk page, and there is no reason to assume that this behavior will cease.  3RR is a bright-line rule, let alone 5 reverts and the issue of edit warring on my talk page is not "stale".  The [[GNU]] page is a separate issue where the editor was edit warring, the issue of edit warring on my talk page has not gone away; the editor has continuously edit warred on my talk page despite ''multiple'' requests to stop, to the point that I have no interest in any discussion this editor is in any way involved in because I do not wish to be harassed in this manner.  If this manner of edit warring and harassment is acceptable just because some other editor opened a DRN discussion on a completely separate issue, then what is the point of [[3RR]]?  - [[User:SudoGhost|Sudo]][[User_talk:SudoGhost#top|Ghost]] 22:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:AurgelmirCro]] reported by [[User:Taivo]] (Result: 24h, final warning) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Croatian language}} '''(Subject to 1RR:  [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Croatian_language])'''<br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|AurgelmirCro}}

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514128624&oldid=514128447]

* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514129114&oldid=514128624]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514136873&oldid=514129973]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514137853&oldid=514137267]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAurgelmirCro&diff=514137520&oldid=265594578]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Croatian_language#Arbitrary_reverts_by_user_kwamikagami]

[[User:AurgelmirCro]] is pushing a nationalist agenda on the page without resort to consensus-building or scientific literature on the subject.  --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 09:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

*{{AN3|b|24 hours}} as enforcement of [[WP:ARBMAC]]. The article is subject to 1 revert per day. I've also warned AurgelmirCro with regards to a possible topic ban if he continues edit warring when the block has expired. On that note, Taivo should not have [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514139341&oldid=514137853 reverted] for a second time either. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 09:35, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:83.131.246.196]] reported by [[User:Taivo]] (Result: page protected, AurgelmirCro's block extended to 1 month ) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Croatian language}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|83.131.246.196}} '''which is a block evasion of [[User:AurgelmirCro]] (blocked right above this)'''

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514128624&oldid=514128447]

* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514140413&oldid=514139341]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Croatian_language&diff=514141185&oldid=514140608]
'''Croatian language is subject to [[WP:1RR]]'''

24 hour block for [[User:AurgelmirCro]] for edit warring: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAurgelmirCro&diff=514139418&oldid=514138300]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

This anon IP showed up immediately following [[User:AurgelmirCro]]'s block, made [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACroatian_language&diff=514140274&oldid=514138582 this] edit warring threat on the Talk Page, and proceeded to continue the edit war.  --[[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|talk]]) 10:02, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

*I've semi-protected the page and extended the blocking period for {{user5|AurgelmirCro}} to one month for obvious block evasion. [[User:De728631|De728631]] ([[User talk:De728631|talk]]) 10:21, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Bali ultimate]] reported by [[User:AnkhMorpork]] (Result: article placed under restrictions) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Zoological conspiracy theories (Arab-Israeli conflict)}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Bali ultimate}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

The article is under [[WP:ARBPIA]] restrictions and 1rr applies.

Bali ultimate has removed the content added in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zoological_conspiracy_theories_%28Arab-Israeli_conflict%29&diff=513821824&oldid=513820589 these] recent edits.

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zoological_conspiracy_theories_%28Arab-Israeli_conflict%29&diff=513867868&oldid=513821824 13:13, 21 September 2012‎] 
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zoological_conspiracy_theories_%28Arab-Israeli_conflict%29&diff=514025562&oldid=514020288 15:15, 22 September 2012]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zoological_conspiracy_theories_%28Arab-Israeli_conflict%29&diff=514152572&oldid=514137768 11:58, 23 September 2012]


<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

<u>Comments:</u>Bali ultimate has reverted three different editors in quick succession in violation of 1rr restrictions delineated on the talk page <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

'''Comment''' I note that no attempt to discuss this on the talk page has been attempted - and frankly, AnkhMorpork's citing of  WP:ARBPIA restrictions here can only be seen as monumental [[chutzpah]]. The supposed 'conspiracy theory' is sourced to an article [http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Local-News/2011/Oct-27/152331-invasive-blowfish-pose-danger-to-consumers-and-fishermen.ashx#axzz27Ick3ur3] which mentions in passing a 'myth' amongst Lebanese fishermen regarding a well-documented invasive species: nowhere does the article describe this 'myth' as a 'conspiracy theory', and nowhere does it claim (per our article lede) that the fish were released "by Israel to attack civilians or to conduct espionage". Then again the article also seems to be suggesting that the idea that puffer fish are poisonous is a myth. Not only ridiculous POV-pushing, but ignorant as well. If anyone deserves sanctions over this it is the editors who are filling this ridiculous article with even more ludicrous bollocks. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 13:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
: The material that a group of dedicated partisans is tag-teaming to insert into the article, in order to make Muslims/Arabs look as stupid as possible, is not supported by the alleged sources. This is the problem.[[User:Bali ultimate|Bali ultimate]] ([[User talk:Bali ultimate|talk]]) 13:49, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
::Yup. As per usual. I'd venture to suggest that anyone adding further 'conspiracies' to that heap of shit of an article is in automatic violation of WP:ARBPIA restrictions by definition. It is nothing but WP:OR, propaganda, and outright fantasy. [[User:AndyTheGrump|AndyTheGrump]] ([[User talk:AndyTheGrump|talk]]) 13:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
In lieu of any actions here, the article is placed under a set of restrictions, per [[WP:ARBPIA#Standard discretionary sanctions]]. [[User:Timotheus Canens|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:Timotheus Canens|talk]]) 18:42, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Reymysteriorocks]] reported by [[User:Djjazzyb]] (Result: Semi) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Hell in a Cell (2012)}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Reymysteriorocks}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hell_in_a_Cell_(2012)&oldid=514149757 The article before edit war.]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hell_in_a_Cell_(2012)&oldid=514186373]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Reymysteriorocks&action=edit&redlink=1]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Reymysteriorocks&action=edit&redlink=1]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
*'''Result:''' Article semiprotected one week. Reymysteriorocks seems to be working in good faith but is rapidly adding unsourced material with no discussion. (Some links that are provided don't verify the given information). The wrestling event is scheduled for Oct. 28 and there will still be time to add sourced details as soon as they are known. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 02:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:WilliamJE]] reported by [[User:Activism1234]] (Result: 24h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|2010 IAF Sikorsky CH-53 crash}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|WilliamJE}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514223321&oldid=514222207] - a revert of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514221630&oldid=514221257 this].
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514231894&oldid=514231799] - removal of 5 external links.
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514234045&oldid=514233692] - removal of an entire section and messes up the formatting of the page (changes the subsection formatting, now it's not visible in TOC and there's an odd "b" in front of it).  Edit summary also doesn't fit the edit. Edit summary claims that this is a removal of a blog, while edit also removes a media outlet.  As such, I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514234437&oldid=514234045 reverted] it, considering the above, and hoping that if there was still an issue, it'd be taken on the talk page.
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514234797&oldid=514234437] - in an edit summary of capital letters, removes the entire section again, messes up the page formatting, and removes a media outlet reference as well.  Didn't use the preview button to look at it first time, and not now either.

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Last section on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WilliamJE#3RR his] talk page is a warning from another editor regarding 3RR, so he certainly knows what it is.

WilliamJE is well familiar with Wikipedia policy, and is not afraid to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash accuse] others of not knowing Wikipedia policies on talk pages.  It's unfortunate he's so committed to getting this article speedily deleted and removing content that can prevent that, but now it's gone and violated 3RR (or at the very least, edit warring) and the page formatting. --<small style="border: 1px dashed;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Activism1234|<b><font color="teal">Activism</font></b>]][[User talk:Activism1234|<font color="darkred">1234</font>]]'''</small> 23:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

This editor should make himself aware of another [[WP:BOOMERANG]]. He accuses me of edit warring and gives 4 proofs. 

2nd proof- The removal of 4 EL that were being used already as IC. That's removing repetition not edit warring.

3rd and 4th proofs- The source  for something taking place in Feb 2012 was from August 2011. A source being used was from a blog, which WP:RS covers. Instead of fixing his edits and coming up with a better source, he put it back up again. Note I said here I'm stepping away and that came before any warnings or this discussion.

1st edit- I put the speedy deletion tag back up. This administrator told me on his talk page[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The_Bushranger#2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash] that a CSD can be taken down by someone other than the creator. So I admitted my error.

On the other hand this editor bringing this complaint against me accused me of lying. He's repeatedly cited an AFD discussion but at the same time insists they don't know anything [[WP:DRV]] which is mentioned right at the top of the page.

Bottom line this editor has shown repeated bad faith. He called me a liar and didn't apologize. He didn't go to deletion review even though he can still do that now. Consensus can be changed, but the article has only been changed cosmetically in addition to being padded, and nothing has occurred between the AFD and now to change the consensus. An article that the helicopters were put back into service. Routine.[[User:WilliamJE|...William]] 00:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
:I never called you a liar, you wrote a very confusing statement and I called that a lie, and after you made it clearer, I asked you to forgive me for the confusion [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514235340&oldid=514235137 here].  I don't see how that's bad-faith.  On the other hand, on the talk page you have assumed that I don't know any Wikipedia policies, you have assumed that I definitely knew that I should've gone to DRV for an article I didn't create (which wasn't part of the closing admin's comments either, and isn't mentioned in any comments there... Yes, I now see it's written in small text at the top of the page, small text that most people probably don't read... Looking at some other AfDs, that appears on every AfD, but also says to comment on the talk page... Article in question was deleted once and was put back up again a second time, without DRV), and after asking to apologize for a comment I made in response to a confusing edit, you gave me hardly any time and simply went and said that I was refusing to do so.  I'd say that's bad-faith, and certainly doesn't assume good faith.  Note I have never asked for such an apology in regards to your claims that I "clearly" don't know Wikipedia policies or that I certainly knew to go to DRV for an article I didn't create. 

:Two of your edits (3 and 4) messed up the formatting of a page and were not consistent with your edit summary.  Because of that, not becuase of [[WP:RS]], I felt it easiest to simply insert it again, and if there were any issues, you could explain such on the talk page.  Be aware that what you wrote too, saying it was a blog, is a content dispute as well - while the URL has the word "blog," it does function as a website for the IDF Spokesperson as well, so I can definitely see a question whether it's legitimate or not - something that should be for the talk page, rather than simply revert again.  It wasn't clear what your intention was with the edit, as your edit summary ran counter to your edit, and messed up the page formatting (which was repeated the 4th time as well, after I specifically pointed out that error).  You could just as easily have clarified what you meant, or perhaps made the edit run along the lines of your edit summary if that's what you intended and not delete the media outlet... Instead, you did a simple revert, without taking into account what I wrote, and all in capital letters. --<small style="border: 1px dashed;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Activism1234|<b><font color="teal">Activism</font></b>]][[User talk:Activism1234|<font color="darkred">1234</font>]]'''</small> 00:39, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::You said something I wrote was a lie and can't apologize, you make bogus edit warring and 3rr violation claims. See Proof #2 of yours for the former and all four of your proofs for the latter. You accuse me of messing up the page. That's dead wrong too. I restored it to what it was before you made incorrect edits. You haven't gone to DRV and just further proof of your [[WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT]] 

::There's nothing for me to apologize for you for. The talk page or article shows plentiful proof of your not knowing WP:RS, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, WP:GHITS, WP:AIRCRASH and the guidelines for military accidents. Not to mention DRV, Boomerang, and maybe something else I'm forgetting.

::I am saying nothing more before an administrator arrives. Note it is a few minutes after 9 p.m. my time. I will be out of here around 10 p.m., as is customary for me, till tomorrow.[[User:WilliamJE|...William]] 01:03, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
:::??? Did you miss what I wrote above, namely [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514235340&oldid=514235137 this diff], where after you clarified a confusing comment by striking out the word "2010" and making it "2011," I said to forgive me for the initial confusion??  

:::This is a good-faith edit-warring request, if it doesn't apply to you then an admin will reject it.  But see, claiming that I "make bogus edit warring and 3rr violation claims" is bad-faith as well.  Assume good faith - because in reality, your assumptions about me aren't correct.  If I thought they were bogus, I wouldn't waste my time...

:::As for saying that you didn't mess up the page, as far as I can tell, that's not true.  Here is a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=prev&oldid=514233692 diff] right before edit #3 above.  Notice the section "investigation" in the toc, and notice the lack of a "b" next to it.  Here is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514234045&oldid=514233692 your] edit. Notice the lack of the section "investigation" in the toc, and the odd inclusion of the letter "b" next to it.  So it seems to me, and I'm sure an admin can check this over, that you didn't restore the page to how it previously was, as the previous diff included a section in the toc and did not have the letter "b" next to it.  If that's the case, then I think that gives a lot more credence to what I said above regarding a misleading comment of his which I said was not true. --<small style="border: 1px dashed;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Activism1234|<b><font color="teal">Activism</font></b>]][[User talk:Activism1234|<font color="darkred">1234</font>]]'''</small> 02:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

'''Summary''':
*I've made a good-faith edit-warring request, which I believe shows that WilliamJE has violated 3RR, and at the very least, has edit-warred.  His last diff is a simple blanket revert, the same as edit #3, without bothering to read what I wrote, and with an edit summary all in capitals that pays no attention to my previous edit.  If he did, he wouldn't have messed up the page formatting again (section "investigation" not in TOC, random "b" next to it) as he did in edit #3, and shouldn't have removed media outlets as well if his only edit summary was against "blogs," which I pointed out.
*WilliamJE has [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514232731&oldid=514232556 written] on the talk page that I "clearly" do not understand Wikipedia policies, without assuming good faith and attempting to understand what I've written regarding content-dispute.  Notice in that last diff that they play around with my signature, although that may be accidental (good-faith assumed).
*WilliamJE [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514234606&oldid=514234001 accuses] me of somehow knowing what DRV was before today, and accuses me of not knowing to go there, even though I'm not the article creator.
*WilliamJE has accused me of calling him a liar, and has accused me of not taking that back.  In reality, I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514230879&oldid=514230419 wrote] that a claim he made was a lie, not he himself.  Namely, his statement wrote "All inline citations and articles added to the article with one exception(That one being Sept 2010) are from 2010." As you can see, it doesn't make much sense, and contradicts itself, hence my confusion with it and different interpretation.  Once he corrected the statement to say "being Sept 2011," I accepted that and complied, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&diff=514235340&oldid=514235137 asked] to forgive me.  Even when I pointed out this diff above, WilliamJE continued saying I never retracted this. 

Whatever decisions the admins make, I am sure that they will understand that this request has certainly been made in good-faith, and I would not waste my time otherwise. --<small style="border: 1px dashed;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Activism1234|<b><font color="teal">Activism</font></b>]][[User talk:Activism1234|<font color="darkred">1234</font>]]'''</small> 02:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

*'''Note''' - The speedy deletion nomination that was submitted twice by WilliamJE has been [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2010_IAF_Sikorsky_CH-53_crash&curid=36616466&diff=514262279&oldid=514234797 declined].  The admin said that the article has significantly changed, which I also mentioned to WilliamJE on the talk page, with him responding that it's not true and that I "clearly" don't know Wikipedia policy...  Yet, the request has been declined. --<small style="border: 1px dashed;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Activism1234|<b><font color="teal">Activism</font></b>]][[User talk:Activism1234|<font color="darkred">1234</font>]]'''</small> 04:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::{{AN3|b}} – 24 hours for 3RR violation. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 04:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Tanneryvillage]] reported by [[User:MTLskyline]] (Result: 31h ) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Mount Royal, Quebec}}

'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Tanneryvillage}}

'''Time reported:''' 04:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

''Diffs are listed from oldest to newest, dates are in UTC''

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=513788859&oldid=509470000]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514236869 23:57, 23 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted 1 edit by [[Special:Contributions/UnQuébécois|UnQuébécois]] ([[User talk:UnQuébécois|talk]]) identified as [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] to last revision by 76.10.142.183. ([[WP:TW|TW]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514237039 23:58, 23 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514241965 00:40, 24 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted to revision 514237039 by Tanneryvillage: Pointless change from "town" to "city". The article should reflect the linguistic reality, and common usage of English Canadian speakers in Montreal, as well as the unique case of 'Town of' being part o...")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514254635 02:34, 24 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted to revision 514243027 by MTLskyline: Linguistic troublemaker. Larousse[ville - nom féminin; 1. [moyenne] town; [plus grande] city. les gens de la ville - city-dwellers, townspeople]. ([[WP:TW|TW]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514255276 02:40, 24 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted 1 edit by [[Special:Contributions/UnQuébécois|UnQuébécois]] ([[User talk:UnQuébécois|talk]]) identified as [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] to last revision by Tanneryvillage. ([[WP:TW|TW]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514258587 03:13, 24 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted 1 edit by [[Special:Contributions/UnQuébécois|UnQuébécois]] ([[User talk:UnQuébécois|talk]]) identified as [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] to last revision by Tanneryvillage. ([[WP:TW|TW]])")</small>
# [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount%20Royal%2C%20Quebec&diff=prev&oldid=514263665 04:13, 24 September 2012]  <small>(edit summary: "Reverted to revision 514258587 by Tanneryvillage: unquebecois is displaying rabid Quebec nationalistic anti-English tendencies without really understanding the subtleties of either the English or French languages. His changes seem to be politically mot...")</small>

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tanneryvillage]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:Mount_Royal,_Quebec#Requested_move]]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
Tanneryvillage is engaged in an edit war with [[User:UnQuébécois]]. Both of them have violated the 3RR. I believe this requires attention. Neither is purposefully malicious from what I can tell, but they are bickering and reverting each other's edits.--[[User:MTLskyline|MTLskyline]] ([[User talk:MTLskyline|talk]]) 04:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|blocked| 31 hours}} —[[User:Bagumba|Bagumba]] ([[User talk:Bagumba|talk]]) 06:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:UnQuébécois]] reported by [[User:MTLskyline]] (Result: 31h ) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Mount Royal, Quebec}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|UnQuébécois}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=513788859&oldid=509470000]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=513967810&oldid=513967088]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514233311&oldid=514232149]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514238253&oldid=514237039]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514239481&oldid=514238253]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514249272&oldid=514243027]
* 6th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514255113&oldid=514254635]
* 7th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514256587&oldid=514255276]
* 8th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514259051&oldid=514258587]
* 9th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514259419&oldid=514259051]
* 10th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mount_Royal,_Quebec&diff=514264690&oldid=514263665]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UnQu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois&diff=514260027&oldid=513356437]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:Mount_Royal,_Quebec#Requested_move]]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

UnQuébécois is engaged in an edit war with [[User:Tanneryvillage]]. Both of them have violated the 3RR. I believe this requires attention. Neither is purposefully malicious from what I can tell, but they are bickering and reverting each other's edits.--[[User:MTLskyline|MTLskyline]] ([[User talk:MTLskyline|talk]]) 04:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|blocked|31 hours}} —[[User:Bagumba|Bagumba]] ([[User talk:Bagumba|talk]]) 06:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
== [[User:Wikiwatcher1]] reported by [[User:Mystichumwipe]] (Result: 48h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Denis Avey}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Wikiwatcher1}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denis_Avey&diff=next&oldid=421949318]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denis_Avey&diff=513738469&oldid=478218501]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513209603]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513209603]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513319966]
* 6th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513738469]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513700174] 

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513329446]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513484895]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513484895]

[[Talk:Denis Avey/Archives/2011#Sunday Times article]]

[[Talk:Denis Avey#Ownership]]


<u>Comments:</u> Wikiwatcher1 has been deleting all material from the lead that mentions the problems with the authenticity of this biography page. He also is reverting all material that refers in any ''detail'' to the controversial aspects of the 'swap' story of the WW2 veteran and ex-POW, [[Denis Avey]]. His reasons for removing material do not appear to me to be valid, viz, he regards the [[New Statesman]], [[The Daily Mail]] and [[The Sunday Times]] as not suitable sources as they somehow to his mind are [[WP:OR| original research]]. E.g. he argues that material detailing the controversy using citations from a source already cited is [[WP:OR| original research]] yet he refuses to explain this partiality for removing only some material in the article which uses the same source ([[The Daily Mail]]). Etc. (see following  diffs on the talk page[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513318966] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513405727] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513406548] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513567502] ) --[[User:Mystichumwipe|Mystichumwipe]] ([[User talk:Mystichumwipe|talk]]) 05:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
He has argued for acceptance of  his reverting based merely on what he personally "''believes''", without providing any verfiable source for this ''belief''. And he appears to think the article should rely only on what he personally believes is true or "''fictional''" and not on [[WP:VER|verfiability]]. E.g. He argued finally with this: ''*I believe key facts were verified by the person he exchanged clothes with and by that man's wife. The fact that some sceptics (in the U.K. only apparently) don't believe what he did or why, and point out some factual inconsistencies in his account, does not make it fictional''[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denis_Avey&diff=prev&oldid=513567502]. --[[User:Mystichumwipe|Mystichumwipe]] ([[User talk:Mystichumwipe|talk]]) 05:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

<s>*'''Result:''' No action, since a reasonable discussion on the article talk page is now in progress. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 16:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)</s>

*'''New result:''' Blocked 48 hours. After the above closure Wikiwatcher1 continued reverting to his preferred material again, after being invited to wait for consensus on the talk page. It seems he will not allow any mention in the *article lead* of the fact that Avey's claim of breaking into Auschwitz is controversial. Although a reasonable discussion is taking place on the talk page, it does not seem he has any interest in seeking consensus there. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 18:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Rishu.jaggotta]] reported by [[User:MrOllie]] (Result: 48 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Local store marketing}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Rishu.jaggotta}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_store_marketing&diff=514019112&oldid=514018575]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_store_marketing&diff=prev&oldid=514027729 15:30, 22 September 2012]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_store_marketing&diff=prev&oldid=514054350 18:50, 22 September 2012]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_store_marketing&diff=514139264&oldid=514110658 09:26, 23 September 2012]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_store_marketing&diff=prev&oldid=514147296 11:03, 23 September 2012]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Local_store_marketing&diff=prev&oldid=514204947 19:21, 23 September 2012]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARishu.jaggotta&diff=514157090&oldid=513877799]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
*{{AN3|b}} – 48 hours. The editor is now up to seven reverts in one day. There is also an IP adding the same stuff. I wonder if this is part of a spam campaign. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 02:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::Worse, it appears to be part of a school assignment involving widespread plagiarism/copyvio on part of most or all of the students. There does not appear to be a project page for the class, but see recent edits to [[Spin (public relations)]], [[‎Brand ambassador]], [[Brand equity]], [[Multichannel marketing]], [[Catalog marketing]], [[Socially responsible marketing]] and numerous similar pages. [[User:Hairhorn|Hairhorn]] ([[User talk:Hairhorn|talk]]) 17:52, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:24.177.121.137]] reported by [[User:RolandR]] (Result:72 hours) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Israeli settler violence}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|24.177.121.137}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=514147175&oldid=514145749]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=514242692&oldid=514147175]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_settler_violence&diff=514269083&oldid=514268439]

Article is under 1RR. User has just returned from a 24-hour block for edit-warring over the same issue on the same article.

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Repeaterdly; eg Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:24.177.121.137&diff=514269593&oldid=514250124]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff]Repeated unsuccessful attempts

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
*72 hours for a second offence. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] [[User talk:Heimstern|(talk)]] 07:57, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:Unnamed101]] reported by [[User:Torchiest]] (Result: Declined ) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Diablo III}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Unnamed101}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

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

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=514288250&oldid=514029055 diff]
* 2nd revert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=514333948&oldid=514314922 diff]
* 3rd revert [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diablo_III&diff=514340998&oldid=514334345 diff]
<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User was just reported a couple days ago [[#User:Unnamed101 reported by User:Torchiest (Result: 24 hours)|on this page]], and immediately started reverting again when block expired.

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period.

I have only performed 3 reverts, and have therefore not broken any rules, furthermore it was not immediately after my block expired.[[User:Unnamed101|Unnamed101]] ([[User talk:Unnamed101|talk]]) 16:15, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
:Breaking [[WP:3RR]] is only a bright line rule for determining edit warring.  You can still be considered to edit war even if you do not go over 3RR. —<B>[[User:Torchiest|Torchiest]]</B> <sup>[[User talk:Torchiest|talk]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Torchiest|edits]]</sub> 16:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::Maybe you should take a look at what bright line rule is, regardless I put this up for conflict resolution to be sorted by a neutral party, before being reported for edit warring.[[User:Unnamed101|Unnamed101]] ([[User talk:Unnamed101|talk]]) 16:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Since the editor has stopped reverting and seems willing to discuss at [[WP:DRN]] and accept the results of the discussion, I'll consider this settled. —<B>[[User:Torchiest|Torchiest]]</B> <sup>[[User talk:Torchiest|talk]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3ex;">[[Special:Contributions/Torchiest|edits]]</sub> 16:46, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
*{{AN3|d}} Reverts have ceased and request initiated at DRN by the editor in question.—[[User:Bagumba|Bagumba]] ([[User talk:Bagumba|talk]]) 03:33, 25 September 2012 (UTC) 
<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
== [[User:Sopher99]] reported by [[User:Wüstenfuchs]] (Result: Expert opinion or reliable sources being sought ) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Battle of Aleppo (2012)}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Sopher99}}

* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&diff=514307184&oldid=514305788]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&diff=514310090&oldid=514309914]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&diff=514310737&oldid=514310451]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&diff=514311776&oldid=514311631]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&diff=514325285&oldid=514325121]

I already tried to tell him not to make edit-warring and I left a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sopher99&diff=514310930&oldid=514309097 message] on his talk page trying to resolve the situation there. He refused to respond. Same thing happened five days ago ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sopher99&diff=513536663&oldid=513398747]), I left him a message to resolve the situation and again he didn't respond. Every time I left him a message he continues to revert edits and leave explanations in the edit summary. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 13:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

I would like to contest this. I had only reverted it three times. Please see the history of the page. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&action=history [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 14:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Further more I did not receive an edit warning on my talk page. What i did receive was "I would like to stop edit warring" Acknowledged - but I only reverted 3 times, and the reason being was because Wustenfuchs edits were a breach of the WP:RS policy. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 14:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:Sopher, your [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Aleppo_(2012)&diff=514325285&oldid=514325121 fifth] revert... the [[Voice of Russia]] is not neutral to you, [[the Guardian]] is not neutral to you... --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 14:37, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::The guardian is neutral, its just that you broke the agreement on the talk page not to make POV pushing statements. Specifically anaylsying a source and quoting single witnesses in an attempt to discredit the rebels. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 14:41, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:::What agreement? I was citing the Guardian. And please, not accuse me for an attempt to discredit the rebels. I'm nobody's agent here. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 14:43, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I quote the Edit warring page saying "Reverting to enforce certain overriding policies is not considered edit warring. " [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 14:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:I left a message on your talk page, then you saw this report and soon after you made another revert. You think I'm a psychologist to know what edits you're gonna revert and which you won't. I'm simply editing Wikipedia. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 14:53, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
:: I did not receive an edit warning on my talk page. What i did receive was "I would like to stop edit warring" Acknowledged - but I did not engage in edit warring, I engaged in preserving WP:RS. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 14:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:::You enaged in edit warring. You made 5 reverts in less then 24 hours. And it is not your first time you refuse to respond my messages on talk pages and insted you go for reverting explaining me the situation in edit summary. And waht is RS to you? You revert everything you dislike, the Voice of Russia, the Guardian... --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 14:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::::As I said you did not give me any official edit warning, nor did you make any attempts to resolve the "dispute on the talk page. VOR is not RS, and to uphold the WP:RS policy, I removed it. I also reverted a POV statement which you attempted to back up using the guardian. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 15:01, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

:::::VOR acctualy meets the WP:RS policy. And I didn't tried to backup anything I was citing the Guardian about the situation of the battle and yet you reverted this because you don't like it. Also I think that my message "to try stop the edit warring" was clear enough why am I sending it. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 15:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
::::::VOR does not meet WP:RS as it classifies one side as "terrorists" , and talk about how the Syrian army "liberates" areas. It is state own, and state controlled, and the mouthpiece of an actual party in the conflict. You did not give me any official edit warning either, nor did you make any attempt to resolve the issue. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 15:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll repeat What I said before because the style of the format makes it look like we are bickering. 
The only problem I am seeing is that you are using a tic--tac report to try to ban me. I have yet to edit war - I reverted three times the attempts to add a source which breaks the WP:RS policy, and 1 revert against an edit which break the WP:NPOV. Wustenfuchs has not properly warned me of anything, nor has any attempt been made on the talk page to clarify things (Despite of a long history of using that article's talk page to resolve conflicts). Quite frankly Wustenfuchs has a histroy of trying to get people banned, to gain an editing advantage. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 15:09, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

::::::I didn't made an attempt to resolve the issue? It's the message I sent to you to which you refused to respond. About the Guardian, you acctualy reverted a satement from a rebel commenting the rebels and you said it's POV and it's discrediting the rebels... It's clear enough you removed the text as you don't like it. And about the VoR, it's your personall oppinin that the source is not reliable. You haven't provided any statement which could prove that VoR is unreliable neither any source said that. And VoR named nobody a "terrorist". --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 15:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

May I suggest you ask for help from [[WP:RSN]]? ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', <small>17:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC).</small><br /> 

:I have done so. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 17:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
::Just ten minutes ago. [[User:Sopher99|Sopher99]] ([[User talk:Sopher99|talk]]) 17:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
:::Thank you for reminding me. --<font face="Old English Text MT">[[User talk:Wüstenfuchs|<font size="3" color="Black">Wüstenfuchs</font>]]</font> 18:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->

== [[User:Nickidewbear]] reported by [[User:Activism1234]] (Result: 72h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Talmud}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|Nickidewbear}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->

The editor has been inserting edits whose edit summary suggests the edits are based on personal opinions ("Undoing Anti-Christian and Pro-Talmudist" etc) and the edits weren't referenced.  The editor was reverted 4 separate times by two different editors (Evan, me, then Evan twice) and warned repeatedly about edit-warring, and recommended repeatedly to go to the talk page, yet has persisted in edit-warring, and has reverted 5 times.
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514442032&oldid=513842588]
* Evan reverts: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514442171&oldid=514442032]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514443461&oldid=514442171]
* I revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514443783&oldid=514443461]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514444108&oldid=514443783]
*Evan reverts: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514444254&oldid=514444108]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=514444452&oldid=514444254]
* Evan reverts: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=prev&oldid=514447107]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&curid=30345&diff=514447294&oldid=514447107]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ANickidewbear&diff=514444236&oldid=514443536] - this is among edit summaries warning.  Also notice Evan warned prior to this about personal attacks - I don't know whether Nicki got upset and followed Evan to this article or what, but it clearly shows some issues going on here.

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Niki's refused, I've gone to his/her talk page.

'''Post-submission''' - after I submitted this, Niki went onto the article [[Candice Cohen-Ahnine]], an article I created and got on DYK, and added a category that isn't mentioned at all in the article. It's possible Niki was [[WP:HOUNDING]] me... --<small style="border: 1px dashed;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">'''[[User:Activism1234|<b><font color="teal">Activism</font></b>]][[User talk:Activism1234|<font color="darkred">1234</font>]]'''</small> 06:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

<u>Comments:</u> <br />

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
* '''Comment''' - User also forged a source with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=prev&oldid=514442382 this] edit. I have made a third revert to undo this and will not be reverting again anytime soon. [[User:Evanh2008|Evanh2008]] <sup>([[User talk:Evanh2008|talk]]&#124;[[Special:Contributions/Evanh2008|contribs]])</sup> 06:18, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
:: And a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&curid=30345&diff=514447294&oldid=514447107 fifth revert], reinstating the falsified material. [[User:Evanh2008|Evanh2008]] <sup>([[User talk:Evanh2008|talk]]&#124;[[Special:Contributions/Evanh2008|contribs]])</sup> 06:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
:: <small>"Bump", as it were. [[User:Evanh2008|Evanh2008]] <sup>([[User talk:Evanh2008|talk]]&#124;[[Special:Contributions/Evanh2008|contribs]])</sup> 08:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)</small>
:{{AN3|b}} – 72 hours. This is already a plain 3RR, and the editor seems to be adding unsourced personal reflections to the article. Is the editor paying any attention at all to what he's doing? As noted by Evanh2008, here he [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talmud&diff=prev&oldid=514442382 changes the wording of a direct quote] from adl.org to falsely claim it said something different. [[User:EdJohnston|EdJohnston]] ([[User talk:EdJohnston|talk]]) 13:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:94.11.147.97]] reported by [[User:Smsarmad]] (Result:protected) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Optical Express}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|94.11.147.97}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: Multiple previous versions and successive reverts by same editor makes it difficult to find previous versions of individual reverts listed below.

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514505554&oldid=514505535]
* 2nd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514505646&oldid=514505624]
* 3rd revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514505799&oldid=514505669]
* 4th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514505977&oldid=514505959]
* 5th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514506920&oldid=514506277]
* 6th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514507655&oldid=514507608]
* 7th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514507723&oldid=514507679]
* 8th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514507784&oldid=514507735]
* 9th revert: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Optical_Express&diff=514508115&oldid=514507804]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:94.11.147.97&oldid=514505970]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [[Talk:Optical Express#PM to Golfbravoecho]]

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
The other user ([[Special:Contributions/Golfbravoecho|User:Golfbravoecho]]) involved in this edit war continues to revert even after being [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Golfbravoecho&oldid=514016297 warned]. Reviewing admin might like to look into reverts done by {{User|Hardlygone}} who also displayed edit warring behavior on this article today. --[[User:Smsarmad|<span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span><span style="background:white;color:DodgerBlue">'''M'''</span><span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span>]]  <sup>[[User talk:Smsarmad|Talk]]</sup> 17:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

'''Update:''' The page is now fully protected by [[User:Elockid]] after a request at [[WP:RFP]]. --[[User:Smsarmad|<span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span><span style="background:white;color:DodgerBlue">'''M'''</span><span style="background:white;color:LightSeaGreen">'''S'''</span>]]  <sup>[[User talk:Smsarmad|Talk]]</sup> 03:54, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

== [[User:184.58.11.202]] reported by [[User:Jprg1966]] (Result: 72h) ==

'''Page:''' {{pagelinks|Begin Again (Taylor Swift song)}} <br />
'''User being reported:''' {{userlinks|184.58.11.202}}

<!-- In the section below, link to a version from before all the reverting took place, and which proves the diffs are reverts by showing material the same or similar to what is being reverted to. -->

Previous version reverted to: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Begin_Again_(Taylor_Swift_song)&oldid=514530054]

<!-- In the section below, link to diffs of the user's reverts. Add more lines if needed. Dates are optional. Remember, you do need *4* reverts to violate WP:3RR, although edit warring has no such strict rule. -->
* 1st revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Begin_Again_(Taylor_Swift_song)&diff=514532070&oldid=514531574]
* 2nd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Begin_Again_(Taylor_Swift_song)&diff=514532278&oldid=514532219]
* 3rd revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Begin_Again_(Taylor_Swift_song)&diff=514532625&oldid=514532354]
* 4th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Begin_Again_(Taylor_Swift_song)&diff=514533572&oldid=514532712]
* 5th revert: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Begin_Again_(Taylor_Swift_song)&diff=514534039&oldid=514533711]

<!-- For more complex cases, it may be necessary to provide a previous version for each revert, or the actual words that are being changed. Adjust your report as necessary -->

<!-- Warn the user if you have not already done so. -->
Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:184.58.11.202&oldid=514532466]

<!-- You've tried to resolve this edit war on the article talk page, haven't you? So put a link to the discussion here. If all you've done is reverted-without-talk, you may find yourself facing a block too -->
Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: N/A, reporting other users

<u>Comments:</u> <br />
Co-warrior with {{User|Afireinside27}}, who ''did'' stop reverting when warned of being at 3RR.
 	
*{{AN3|bb|72 hours}} I have blocked both editors and protected the page for five days to allow for discussion. I count four reverts for Afireinside27 and so blocked him as well but would be open to an unblock at any time so long as he assures he won't edit war again. [[User:Ks0stm|<span style="color:#009900;">'''Ks0stm'''</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:Ks0stm|T]]•[[Special:Contributions/Ks0stm|C]]•[[User:Ks0stm/Guestbook|G]]•[[User:Ks0stm/Email|E]])</sup> 20:05, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

<!-- OPTIONAL: Add any other comments and sign your name using ~~~~ -->
{{done}} Blocked by [[User:Ks0stm]]