Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard

Shortcuts

Update this page

This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule.

See this guide for instructions on creating diffs for this report.
If you see that a user may be about to violate the three-revert rule, consider warning them by placing {{subst:uw-3rr}} on their user talk page.

You must notify any user you have reported.

You may use {{subst:An3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.

You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

Additional notes

When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.
The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from.
Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection.
Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed.

Definition of edit warring

Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring.

Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)

An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions.

Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Click here to create a new report

Noticeboard archives
Administrators' (archives, search)
349	350	351	352	353	354	355	356	357	358
359	360	361	362	363	364	365	366	367	368
Incidents (archives, search)
1161	1162	1163	1164	1165	1166	1167	1168	1169	1170
1171	1172	1173	1174	1175	1176	1177	1178	1179	1180
Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
473	474	475	476	477	478	479	480	481	482
483	484	485	486	487	488	489	490	491	492
Arbitration enforcement (archives)
329	330	331	332	333	334	335	336	337	338
339	340	341	342	343	344	345	346	347	348
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

User:201.122.44.60 reported by User:Sumanuil (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)

User being reported: 201.122.44.60 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

02:15, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Hijacking articles on Amame (album)."
02:31, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Hijacking articles on Amame (album)."
03:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Hijacking articles on Amame (album)."
03:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Amame (album)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: Already blocked for a period of 2 weeks by Ad Orientem Daniel Case (talk) 06:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:ProKMT reported by User:Guotaian (Result: Both blocked 24h)

Previous version reverted to: [1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [6]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [7]

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

Comments: Did the same for this page[9]

I have consistently explained my edits and the rationale behind them, particularly in addressing inaccuracies and misinformation within the original template created by Pro-KMT. My goal has been to ensure that the template accurately reflects political realities without conflating distinct ideological movements or misrepresenting historical and contemporary political alignments.

Despite my efforts to bring the discussion to the talk page to establish consensus and avoid edit warring, Pro-KMT has refused to engage constructively. Instead of addressing the concerns raised, Pro-KMT have continued to revert edits without meaningful discussion, escalating the conflict rather than working toward a resolution.

Additionally, Pro-KMT has repeatedly been found engaging in violations of WP:POV [10][11][12] and WP:SYNTH [13][14]. This pattern of behavior undermines Wikipedia’s commitment to neutrality and verifiability. Furthermore, Pro-KMT has been accused of sockpuppetry [15][16] in the past, which raises further concerns about editorial conduct.

Given this history, it is clear that my efforts to improve the accuracy of the template and establish a WP:NPOV template have been met with resistance from a user who is more interested in enforcing their own viewpoint than in upholding Wikipedia’s standards. I remain open to constructive discussion, but continued disruptive editing should not be tolerated. Guotaian (talk) 14:13, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both editors blocked 24h for the staggering amount of edit warring across multiple pages. There were also some personal attacks in edit summaries by ProKMT. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:27, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Guotaian reported by User:ProKMT (Result: Both blocked 24h)

Previous version reverted to: [17]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [23]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [24]

Comments: Did the same for this page[25]

Guotaian has been pointed out by other user on the user talk page due to its continuous destructive editing. [26] [27] Even I've never been blocked by Wikipedia[28], but Guotaian has been blocked by constant editing wars and devastating editing.[29]

The report made by Guotaian is very biased Check the history of the Template:Liberalism in China; Guotaian attempted radical edits that were not agreed upon in talk page, and I cancelled his edits and supported 'status quo'. I may have been forced to violate 3RR, but I'm trying to stop Guotaian's vandalism, so I hope the Administrators understand this. ProKMT (talk) 10:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guotaian made a radical and disruptive new edit first, and Guotaian started the edit war first. If my edit to undo Guotaian's vandalism should be blocked for violating the 3RRs, then Guotaian's 3RR violation requires a much longer block than mine. ProKMT (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ProKMT Isn't the page you should set above be Template:Liberalism in China? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 13:25, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both editors blocked 24h for the staggering amount of edit warring across multiple pages. There were also some personal attacks in edit summaries by ProKMT. It is further noted that opening a retaliatory report is bad form; if there's anything relevant to be said about the other editor's editing, it can be brought up as a response in the original report. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:28, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Artinmeysamiraad reported by User:Nikkimaria (Result: Blocked one week)

Previous version reverted to: [30]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [36]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [37]

Blocked – for a period of one week. Part of the reason for the duration is the editor's history. They have never responded to any of the many warnings on their Talk page. Many of their edits have been reverted at other articles, and if it didn't arguably prevent me from acting administratively, I would have reverted many myself for a variety of reasons.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:John Not Real Name reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

User being reported: John Not Real Name (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

14:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276374149 by M.Bitton (talk) See talk page."
13:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276373125 by M.Bitton (talk) Please refrain from edit-warring."
13:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276368627 by M.Bitton (talk) No, it is not. It is adding context to the statement as is done in the surrounding text. For example the bit about 14th Century legal texts. It is showing the practice as explained by proper sources with good citations."
12:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1276268623 by Diannaa (talk) Or you could again leave accurate and cited information alone."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

13:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Islamic views on concubinage."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

13:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC) "/* February 2025 */ new section"

Comments:

They blanked their talk page and resumed their edit war while refusing to address Dianaa's concerns. M.Bitton (talk) 14:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 14:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Barry Wom reported by User:2800:484:738A:43F0:6A6:1713:2923:648C (Result: Reporter blocked)

Previous version reverted to: [38]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Comments: Please someone stop this guy. If you look at his editing history you will see that he causes more damage than he fixes.--2800:484:738A:43F0:6A6:1713:2923:648C (talk) 15:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NOT3RR, reverts were due to block evasion by JeanCastì Barry Wom (talk) 15:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP rangeblocked for obvious block evasion.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:216.126.35.216 reported by User:SchroCat (Result: 2 week block)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

00:46, 18 February 2025
13:11, 18 February 2025
19:55, 18 February 2025
20:40, 18 February 2025
21:03, 18 February 2025
21:27, 18 February 2025 (Note the personal attack too, both on the page and in the edit summary)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [43]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User_talk:DragonofBatley#PROD_notifications and User_talk:DragonofBatley#Harassment

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [44]

Comments:

It's obviously DragonofBatley rejoicing in some logged-out trolling; semi'ing their own talk page against their further input would be advantageous to all. (Except DragonofBatley, which of course is no longer our concern.) Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 22:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I am not DragonofBately. 216.126.35.216 (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then you are to be congratulated on your honesty. In owning up to your trolling rather than socking. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 22:09, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP blocked as a proxy.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Justegypt reported by User:ObserveOwl (Result: Indefinitely pblocked)

Previous version reverted to: [45] [46]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [58] [59]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [60]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [61]

Comments: Justegypt was warned on the 12th for edit warring. On the 15th, they violated 3RR (diffs 1 to 6) and received the other warning on their talk page the same day. I eventually told them to stop edit warring when I started a talk page section. Another back and forth reverting between Justegypt and DjangoLeFandango started on the 16th (diffs 8 and 9; diff 7 reverted an unregistered account) and then both discussed on the talk page, with Justegypt eventually stating that "If you remove it, I will restore it and I am ready to do this daily." Afterwards, I pinged them with a clear intention to take to this noticeboard if the issue persisted. They continued discussion on that talk page section, so Justegypt saw the pings. After DjangoLeFandango removed content added by Justegypt following the discussion, Justegypt restored their own version (diff 10) against consensus that was established on the talk page and RSN, and when partially reverted by me and Halbared, Justegypt re-reverted (diff 11). It is clear this behavior will likely persist if no action is taken. ObserveOwl (talk) 22:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be a bit more clear, Justegypt originally added three entries to the page (two of them above the recognized tallest living person) and discussion between Justegypt and DjangoLeFandango stemmed from the entry for Mohamed Shehata. A third opinion and subsequent RSN post found that the sources were not sufficient for the entry. DjangoLeFandango also disputed the entry for Muhammad Hussein Heikal, and when inquired on the talk page, Justegypt refused to discuss this other entry, replying with "lol", and subsequently restored that material on diff 11 without explanation. ObserveOwl (talk) 23:11, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not fond of pblocks because so many times the aftermath can be unpleasant, but in this case I've indefinitely pblocked Justegypt from editing the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:KeiTakahashi999 reported by User:Bladeandroid (Result: )

Previous version reverted to: [62]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [71] [72]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [73]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [74]

Comments:

Repeat edit warring. Seems to not care that he is edit warring despite multiple warnings on his talk page. Bladeandroid (talk) 07:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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