Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule. See this guide for instructions on creating diffs for this report. If you see that a user may be about to violate the three-revert rule, consider warning them by placing {{subst:uw-3rr}} on their user talk page. You must notify any user you have reported. You may use {{subst:An3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so. You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS oder Atom format. Additional notes When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first. The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from. Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection. Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed. Definition of edit warring Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring. Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR) An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions. Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Click here to create a new report

User:Mercresis reported by User:R Prazeres (Result: Declined)

Page: Yakutiye Medrese (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:55, 28 February 2023 (UTC) "Mercresis moved page Yakutiye Medrese to Yakutiye Medresesi over redirect: There is no such building as "Yakutiye Medrese" in Turkey (it's grammatically wrong in Turkish). Either give it the original Turkish name "Yakutiye Medresesi" or its English translation "Yakutiye Madrasa"."
2. 21:55, 28 February 2023 (UTC) "Mercresis moved page Yakutiye Medrese to Yakutiye Medresesi over redirect: Yakutiye Medresesi article in the Turkish Wikipedia: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakutiye_Medresesi"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 21:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC) "/* February 2023 */ Reply"
2. 21:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC) "/* February 2023 */ last warning; if you do this again you will be reported to WP:ANI"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User edit-warring over article titles by twice repeating an undiscussed page move after it had already been reverted, and despite multiple warnings on their user talk page. They also did the same thing at Ince Minaret Madrasa, where they repeated a move (this) after it had already been reverted and a notice was given to them ([1]). Their responses on their user talk page seem to indicate they don't understand (or don't want to understand) the problem. R Prazeres (talk) 22:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

"Yakutiye Medrese" is grammatically wrong in Turkish. The correct Turkish form in this case is "Yakutiye Medresesi" and the correct form in English is "Yakutiye Madrasa". It would be more logical to choose one of these two names. The difference between "Medrese" and "Medresesi" (e.g., "Gök Medrese" and "Yakutiye Medresesi") is grammatically similar to the difference between "Cami" and "Camii" (e.g., "Ulu Cami" and "Nuruosmaniye Camii"). But don't worry: many Turks don't know how and when to use "Cami" and "Camii" correctly. Mercresis (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

As for the dispute over İnce Minareli Medrese: "İnce" means "Thin" or "Slender" in Turkish. "İnce Minaret Madrasa" is half-Turkish, half-English. Either rename it as "İnce Minareli Medrese" or as its English translation "Thin Minaret Madrasa" or "Slender Minaret Madrasa". I support the original Turkish name. For example, "Hagia Sophia" means "Holy Wisdom" in Greek ("St. Sophia" is a commonly made wrong translation), but it's never translated to other languages this way. With the same logic, I support the original name also for İnce Minareli Medrese (no need to translate it as "Slender Minaret Madrasa", as Hagia Sophia is never translated as "Holy Wisdom" in other languages). Mercresis (talk) 22:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

"Yakutiye Medresesi" article in the Turkish Wikipedia: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakutiye_Medresesi Mercresis (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

In terms of Turkish grammar: Medrese -> Medresesi = Cami -> Camii Mercresis (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Here's the grammar rule in Turkish: Adjective + Medrese (e.g., Gök Medrese), or Name + Medresesi (e.g., Yakutiye Medresesi). Similarly, Adjective + Cami (e.g., Ulu Cami), or Name + Camii (e.g., Nuruosmaniye Camii). Mercresis (talk) 22:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

For the note: "Gök" means "sky" in modern Turkish, but one of its archaic meanings was "blue" (historically, it meant both "sky" and "blue"). Gök Medrese means "Sky-blue (Celeste-blue) Madrasa", and in this case "Gök" is an "adjective", not a name. Likewise, Göksu River (where Frederick Barbarossa died) is often translated as "Skywater River" based on its meaning in modern Turkish, but the archaic meaning of "Celeste-blue-water River" is more correct. Mercresis (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Why are you trying to provide Turkish lessons here, when that is besides the point that myself and other editors made to you: that you are edit-warring and completely ignoring the process for moving articles with a proper consensus? Consider:

1. You were given clear notices on your talk page ([2], [3]) about the general guidelines for article titles on the English Wikipedia.
2. Every revert of your page moves directly links to the guideline (WP:RMUM) that explicitly tells you to start a WP:RM if your bold move is reverted once.
3. I gave you a direct warning about edit-warring on your talk page. (And you were warned about this behaviour last year too, here.)
4. And I again directed you explicitly here and here to use the WP:RM process to propose a move instead.

After all that, you still continued to engage in a move war (the last diff here). Do understand what you're doing wrong, or not? R Prazeres (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Declined Yet again a discussion that the parties seemed to have avoided having has broken out here. With only three moves today, the threshold has not been crossed although Mercresis stepped right up to the edge. But I see fault on RP's part as well: you have not responded to his question about the preferred Turkish name being grammatically incorrect, and you cite consensus but provide no link for an admin to review it.

I see nothing wrong with submitting this to discussion at RM. The outcome will have consensus, and it is infinitely better than going on like this. Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

@Daniel Case: You may wish to reconsider. Not only is this user prolifically renaming pages on English Wikipedia into the Turkish language and away from common names in English, but they also disruptively moved at least one page twice yesterday: first instance, second instance, after it was restored to an English title through a technical move request: [4]. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

If it's too soon for intervention, that's fine. Next time I'll wait until the situation is more clear-cut. For what it's worth, though, it's hard to judge how much effort is enough effort in trying to convince a determined disruptor to stop. (And I'd say moving an article three times, and another twice, when multiple editors have made clear there's no consensus for those moves, is pretty disruptive.) I haven't answered all of Mercresis' subsequent questions precisely because I don't want to volunteer my whole day trying to convince one editor that they're wrong, when there's already a process in place to sort out article names, and that process doesn't rely strictly on my view.

For now, I'll open a general discussion at least at the Yakutiye article's talk page, and restore the old name again. R Prazeres (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

This is why admins here often leave reports like this untouched. We so like finding out after a decline that there was a lot more to the story we didn't know about that, apparently, we were supposed to, regardless of how arcane the topic area is to most editors. I based my close purely on what was here; I saw no evidence that this had been discussed seriously until above (and, frankly, if you "don't want to volunteer [your] whole day trying to convince one editor that they're wrong", you don't get to be dismayed when they keep move-warring because no one's tried to convince them that they're wrong).

We really didn't have to take this ... please note that the page title is "Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring". There is no obligation for us to take move-warring disputes (for one thing, unlike edit warring, we lack a clear bright-line rule as to when move-warring must be sanctioned). In retrospect I should have just referred this to AN/I; in the future I will do this with any move-warring disputes reported here.

That said, I appreciate that you have decided to leave this be for the moment and use the existing processes you referred to. And I also agree that if Mercresis keeps move-warring after this, it's a different story. Daniel Case (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this reply and for your time. This also clarifies a few things. I initially wasn't sure whether this report belonged here or at WP:ANI, so it's useful to know similar cases would belong there in the future. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 20:29, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

User:LordAndSaviourMargretThatcher reported by User:Number 57 (Result: Warned)

Page: Next Ukrainian presidential election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: LordAndSaviourMargretThatcher (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User has repeatedly tried to add a long, unsourced list of "potential" candidates for this election. In their last attempt, their edit summary was "Fuck you the sources a fucking obvious look at the pages for parties". While they have not broken 3RR, this sort of incivility should be more than enough for a block.

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. First attempt to add the unsourced list
2. First revert (as an IP)
3. Second revert (with the uncouth edit summary)

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [5]

Comments:

Warned That was one out-of-line edit summary on the second revert of that edit in ... four days. Enough for a warning, which I gave; hardly anywhere near enough for a block for a user who has not been blocked and does not show any history (at least recently) of outbursts like this.

This report really did not need to be brought here, and probably shouldn't have been made on any noticeboard to begin with. Daniel Case (talk) 20:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

User:2604:3D09:1476:D330:C447:5E29:8623:6031 reported by User:Morbidthoughts (Result: /64 range blocked 3 months)

Page: Mako Komuro (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2604:3D09:1476:D330:C447:5E29:8623:6031 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:34, 3 March 2023‎ (UTC) the reference article have some not legitimate .such a as he entered the LLM in 2018, but the it was written in 2017 which is wrong. His occupation at the time of the engagement was a paralegal, therefore some contents are not legit in the references
2. 01:51, 3 March 2023‎ (UTC) There is no his name on the list of the recognition page of the commencement for the Class of 2021 at Fordham University. https://www.fordham.edu/commencement/past-ceremonies/commencement-for-the-class-of-2021/
3. 22:55, 2 March 2023 (UTC) ""
4. 22:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC) "Added links"
5. 21:46, 2 March 2023 (UTC) "clearly, the spell of name is wrong,his occupation at the time of the announcement of the engagement was a part time paralegal while attending evening classes at the Hitotsubashi University : Graduate School of International Corporate Strategy"
6. 20:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC) "name spelled wrong, there’s no official announcement about his graduation on May 23rd, 2021 provided from Fordham University, his admitted date was wrong in the reference provided."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:55, 2 March 2023 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Mako Komuro."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 21:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC) "BLP noticeboard"

Comments: BLP discussion Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Reviewing the article history there has been disruptive editing from the same dynamic ip range over the last several days. Reverts of their edits by other editors over the same issue.[6] [7][8] Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I just realised Wikipedia:THEYCANTHEARYOU since they are using the iOS mobile app. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

• /64 range blocked 3 months.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

User:2604:3D09:1476:D330:45F7:3FD6:9E1B:163B reported by User:Aloha27 (Result: /64 range blocked 3 months)

Page: Mako Komuro (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 2604:3D09:1476:D330:45F7:3FD6:9E1B:163B (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Consecutive edits made from 03:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC) to 03:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
   1. 03:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Marriage */"
   2. 03:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Marriage */"
   3. 03:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Marriage */"
   4. 03:45, 3 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Marriage */"
   5. 03:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Marriage */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

5RR for this particular IP. Part of an IP range concentrating on the page.   Aloha27  talk  03:59, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I do not understand what is the 5RR? 2604:3D09:1476:D330:45F7:3FD6:9E1B:163B (talk) 04:11, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

See your talk page. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  04:45, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

• /64 range blocked 3 months (dupe of report just above).--Bbb23 (talk) 13:57, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

User:DFoidl reported by User:Pbritti (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Heck cattle (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: DFoidl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [9]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [10]
2. [11]
3. [12]
4. [13]
5. [14] Edit summary suggests the editor thought they were reverting the same content again; the material I restored in the preceding edit was a different passage I found when looking through the version history and otherwise unrelated to the current content dispute.

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [15] (Note: this editor has been warned previously about edit warring in the same subject area)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [16]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [17]

Comments:

• DFoidl has repeatedly removed content in this subject area over the last few years, often sourced content they personally disagree with. Their deletions are made generally without reference to policy and sometimes with miscomprehension of the sources. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:22, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 18:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

User:BeanieFan11 reported by User:Therapyisgood (Result: )

Page: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: User:BeanieFan11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [18]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [19]
2. [20]
3. [21]

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

Comments:
BeanieFan11 has previously been reported to ANI for bludgeoning at AFD here, which led to a broader discussion about WikiProject NFL and his behavior in general. While 3RR has not been violated by either BeanieFan11 or User:BilledMammal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), I would support a warning for especially BeanieFan11. I would warn normally but I'm WP:INVOLVED with BeanieFan11 as I reported him to ANI earlier in the year, about a month ago. Therapyisgood (talk) 17:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)