Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive508

User:Knightoftheswords281 reported by User:HungryHighway (Result: Warned user(s))

Page: Chud The Builder (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Knightoftheswords281 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:47, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "rewrite, improved accuracy, dubious omissions"
2. 01:55, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "WP:PROSELINE"
3. 03:24, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "Restoring to stable revision by Yeti52 with some modifications"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:21, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Your rollback on ChudTheBuilder */ new section"
2. 05:42, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing."
3. 16:54, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 06:43, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */ Reply"
2. 19:15, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */ Reply"
3. 19:48, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */ Reply"
4. 20:02, 16 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */"
5. 06:02, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */ Reply"
6. 06:42, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */ Reply"
7. 06:43, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */"
8. 06:46, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */"
9. 06:48, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */"
10. 07:34, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */"
11. 07:34, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticisms of this Article */"

Comments:

User consistently making edits that revert from other editors' efforts to build an encyclopedic article, often reverting back to grammatical errors, punctuation, and spelling errors that had been fixed. Often reverting back to changes that were criticized by other editors on the talk page. Consistently attempting to add promotional material to a memecoin in the article, and almost glorifying the subject in a way that some editors may construe as a COI, whether connected to the subject or an avid follower of the subject.

I have only reverted 1 change that blatantly added an unsourced claim. Otherwise I've worked around their disruptive editing, reorganizing and rewriting the things they introduced.

I also politely tried to talk to them on their talk page, but they kept reverting changes.

There may be more edit history and talk page discussion to review than is linked there, but those were the more noticable issues. -- HungryHighway🛣️ 17:06, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

User consistently making edits that revert from other editors' efforts to build an encyclopedic article, often reverting back to grammatical errors, punctuation, and spelling errors that had been fixed

These revisions in large part contained unexplained deletion of content, organizing the article into very short paragraphs (WP:PROSELINE), and a few inaccuracies. These revisions weren't reverted just by me, but TonySt (talk · contribs) (mass removal of content) and ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk · contribs) (PROSELINE vios) as well. Furthermore, although I haven't gotten into it ATM, there's also been an influx of duplicate cites as a result.

Consistently attempting to add promotional material to a memecoin in the article, and almost glorifying the subject in a way that some editors may construe as a COI, whether connected to the subject or an avid follower of the subject.

The "WP:PROMO" violation here are two sentences in two different paragraphs about a meme coin the subject made on a platform (pump.fun) that he fled to after being banned on Kick for his idiocy. Pump gives content creators on site an automatic meme coin, and Chud as such had one. After the shooting, it spiked in price. This has been covered by the sources. It's been covered by sources such as MS Now and Newsweek, so I don't think a brief mention is that harmful. Looking at the talk page, it seems like the reason why there is objection to its inclusion are WP:RGW reasons (I feel uncomfortable with this article advertising the badass gains on a neo-Nazi's rug pull coin while events are still occurring?), and none of the five points of PROMO, such as puffery and the like, are being violated (especially when again, it's barely mentioned). There have been repeated aspersions that I'm a fan of the subject, even though if you had to construe the slant of my contributions in any way, it would be negative (not particularly due to any genuine intent, but more so just from how Chud acts, which predictably culminated in the shooting).

Often reverting back to changes that were criticized by other editors on the talk page.

Again, multiple revisions done by other editors of their contributions. Also, it was initially them who attempted to edit war despite being told repeatedly that they're contributions weren't productive and that they needed to take discussion to the talk page. I've been willing to engage over discussion relating to the use of primary sources in the article, but most of the others don't seem very grounded in Wikipedia's editorial guidelines and again stink of possibly trying to RGWs. Reminder that this was done even though the ONUS wasn't on them; I even attempted (as noted above) to revert back to a stable version while discussion took place. — Knightoftheswords 17:32, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

In the Talk page section "Criticisms of this Article", 3 other editors in addition to myself agreed that the page was too cluttered, poorly organized, and the tone was closer to a Fandom article or sensational news headline. Several of us reworked parts of the article to be more in tune with encyclopedic tone, however Knightoftheswords consistently was reverting the changes, repeatedly restoring spelling errors, grammatical errors, and going back to his former Fandom-style tone.

We also noted that he was heavily pushing out the controversial streamer's memecoin name, prominently talking about it in such a way that it implied the coin was valuable. Wikipedia is a highly visible platform especially when it involves recent events. Naming the memecoin in the article multiple times, describing how the platform Pump works, and even attempting to get a DYK put on the home page that stated: "that after he was alleged to have shot a black man outside a courthouse in Clarksville, Tennessee, Chud The Builder's personal meme coin, $CHUD, shot up in value?" all seems like a targeted effort to promote the coin and increase the amount of people purchasing it, and multiple editors agreed on the talk page.

It seemed like a general consensus on the page was to remove primary sources, and to refrain from going far too detailed until the subject became more notable, which is what we did, yet Knightoftheswords repeatedly insisted on restoring these into the article.

He's arguing WP:Proseline, however when an article is being heavily edited, editors often separate the paragraphs out more than a finished article would in order to organize related sentences and ideas into each other. Instead, he wanted to revert back to giant paragraph blocks with multiple ideas scattered throughout that did not belong together.

We are all supposed to work together, not revert major positive changes. And we are especially not supposed to completely disregard the Talk page discussions when editing, especially such a contentious topic as that page is. -- HungryHighway🛣️ 18:13, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

No replies to this message, please. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

---

Hello Knightoftheswords281, Special:Diff/1354655501 and Special:Diff/1354663821 appear to be incompatible with WP:BLPRESTORE unless there was a consensus for re-adding these words. If there was, please provide a link to it; if there was not, this is a warning. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

The relevant talk discussion is here @ToBeFree. The convicted felon part was not added by me, but a vandal who was reverted while I was editing. The public harassment and fundraising bits weren't mentioned in the relevant discussion, but said discussion was still used as justification to remove them; this is again despite the fact that the revised fundraising bit is factually inaccurate (the fundraiser mentioned already existed at the time of the shooting). The only real bit that was discussed was the meme coin, in which two editors opposed its inclusion on the basis of WP:PROMO concerns (I feel uncomfortable with this article advertising the badass gains on a neo-Nazi's rug pull coin while events are still occurring? and also, why are you so adamant at promoting his memecoin when it adds no value to the article). I still reverted those since again, I think there's ample evidence for RGW and ASPERSIONS (the ludicrous claim that I'm only including it since I'm a "fan" of the subject) in those arguments. — Knightoftheswords 18:38, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Also bear in mind that despite the fact that I think SPSes from the subject are okay for his personal life section, contrary to what's been said above, I've been open to discussion on them and per BLPRESTORE haven't re-added them. — Knightoftheswords 18:40, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, but there doesn't seem to be a consensus for any of the words re-added with that diff – neither "motivated him to begin creating retaliatory online content" nor "over public harassment" nor "Eatherly's coin is named $CHUD" nor "he had lost employment over his use of racial slurs" nor "The value of his $CHUD meme coin also increased ..." (with connection to a shooting). The existence of an ongoing discussion about content can be used as a reason for removal, but not for restoring the content while the discussion is ongoing. And that seems to be what has happened – two editors edit warring over the inclusion of disputed content in a biography of a living person. Which automatically puts you on the wrong side of the edit war if you favor inclusion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:48, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

• Warned ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:48, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-29641-84 reported by User:Plasticwonder (Result: Blocked)

Page: List of Hello Kitty animated series (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-29641-84 (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 22:51, 17 May 2026 (UTC) to 22:58, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 22:51, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty and Friends Supercute Adventures (2020–present) */"
   2. 22:58, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty: Super Style! (2022–2024) */"
2. 22:47, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty Fun (2019–2021) */"
3. Consecutive edits made from 22:37, 17 May 2026 (UTC) to 22:44, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 22:37, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* The World of Hello Kitty (2016–2019) */"
   2. 22:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty & Friends – Let's Learn Together (2017) */"
   3. 22:41, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty Channel (2018) */"
   4. 22:44, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Gundam vs Hello Kitty (2019) */"
4. Consecutive edits made from 22:18, 17 May 2026 (UTC) to 22:34, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 22:18, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty's Furry Tale Theater (1987) */"
   2. 22:21, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty and Friends (1989–2000) */"
   3. 22:23, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty's Paradise (1999) */"
   4. 22:25, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Growing Up With Hello Kitty (2001) */"
   5. 22:28, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty's Animation Theater (2001) */"
   6. 22:29, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty's Stump Village (2005) */"
   7. 22:33, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Hello Kitty: Ringo no Mori (2006–2008) */"
   8. 22:34, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* The Adventures of Hello Kitty & Friends (2008–2009) */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:35, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "Message about your edit on List of Hello Kitty animated series: level 1 (WS)"
2. 22:52, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 22:51, 17 May 2026 (UTC) "/* recent edits */ new section"

Comments:

Accounts associated with this TA have made similar disruptive edits elsewhere, such as ,, and . Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 23:04, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked EvergreenFir (talk) 19:21, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-29348-99 reported by User:Anastrophe (Result: Page protected)

Page: Count Dankula (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-29348-99 (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:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Persistent bugger, I'll give 'em that. ~2026-29402-58 ~2026-29595-12 ~2026-29348-99 cheers, anastrophe, an editor he is. 17:07, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected Underlying IP also blocked for 72 hours. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:23, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-29893-95 reported by User:Soetermans (Result: Page protected)

Page: Starfield (video game) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-29893-95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 07:58, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355167262 by Adakiko (talk) The edits ARE explained, just read the edit summary."
2. Consecutive edits made from 07:33, 20 May 2026 (UTC) to 07:48, 20 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 07:33, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355080172 by Soetermans (talk) Vandalism"
   2. 07:41, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Marketing and release */ Updated the page, free lanes was released a month ago."
   3. 07:48, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Audience reception */ Removed a dead source"
3. 19:46, 19 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1354980405 by Soetermans (talk) The editor that reverted my edit apparently has a long history of warring on edits and sending fake official-sounding warnings in editors talk pages. I DID explain my edit IN DETAIL."
4. 07:28, 19 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Audience reception */ I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 07:56, 19 May 2026 (UTC) "General note: Removal of content, blanking."
2. 20:54, 19 May 2026 (UTC) "Caution: Removal of content, blanking on Starfield (video game)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Anonymous user that disagrees with a relevant source, I think it's vandalism, but AGF'ing, let's go with edit warring first. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:03, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

"/* Audience reception */ I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

Registered users repeatedly dismissing valid edits and ignoring the edit summary only to then send condescending messages in my user page explaining how to use said edit summary. ~2026-29893-95 (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

You reverted three times. It's backed up by reliable sources. That you personally disagree with it doesn't mean you can just remove it as you see fit. And in turn, you claim me reinstating the bit was vandalism. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:11, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

"I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

STOP PLAYING DUMB.

Doesn't matter that the bit in question is sourced, even the "reliable sources" in question admit that the (SINCE DELETED) twitter thread is only SPECULATED to be about the game in question.

It's not a personal disagreement, is an objective statement from the articles used as a source for that section. Again, I fail to see how twitter rants are AT ALL relevant in a Wikipedia article about a game.

"I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

"I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

"I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

"I fail to see the relevance of a long since deleted twitter thread that is only speculated to be about the game in question by third parties after the fact."

Did I write the edit summary enough times to have it read at least once by an actual human? Or I'm gonna receive some more condescending comments about how it is unjustified? ~2026-29893-95 (talk) 08:16, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Personal attacks, an uncivil tone and bludgeoning will get you nowhere. After your initial revision, you reverted three times. You personally disagree with the bit. That's fine. It's backed up by reliable sources. Hence its inclusion. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:31, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

But apparently condescending dismissal and ignoring edit summaries of other editors are valid strategies? Should I just start claiming that your edits are unjustified? After all you left most of your summaries empty, and VERY conveniently called another account for that third revert. ~2026-29893-95 (talk) 08:36, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

You're welcome to, but we're here because of your edit warring. I haven't ignored your edit summary, I disagree with it and consider it vandalism. I haven't called another account for making a third revert. Making aspersions, also not helping. (I think they're referring to you, Adakiko). soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 08:47, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I was performing wp:Recent changes patrol and noticed your edit warring. Adakiko (talk) 08:51, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

You saw an edit war and joined the edit warring, trying to enforce WP:BRD as if it were policy or WP:PREFER as if you had protected the page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:32, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Soetermans's first two reverts (over a month ago but that's when the dispute about this specific content seems to have begun) were arguably covered by WP:3RRNO #7 and enforced WP:BLPRESTORE. The rest of the temporary accounts' reverts do not seem to have been made in purely good faith and rather suddenly applied an unwelcome rule to the rest of the content to make a point about the rule. As long as you two have actually taken the time to review the content and take responsibility for it, that should be fine. It's your content now. If you didn't properly check it before restoring, please do so now and remove anything you wouldn't want displayed in a newspaper with the heading "Wikipedia editors Soetermans and Adakiko thought this content would be suitable for an encyclopedia". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:43, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-30290-87 reported by User:Tgeorgescu (Result: Page protected)

Page: National Center on Sexual Exploitation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-30290-87 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:32, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355264474 by Tgeorgescu (talk)"
2. 21:23, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355263317 by Tgeorgescu (talk)"
3. 21:21, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355223047 by Tgeorgescu (talk)"
4. 15:29, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "I edited for clarity and to make sure the page was accurate with the organization's current focus. The old page was really outdated and focusing on things no longer relevant to the organization"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:00, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "General note: Introducing fringe theories on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."
2. 17:00, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "General note: Adding original research on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."
3. 21:23, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Caution: Introducing fringe theories on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."
4. 21:23, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Caution: Adding original research on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."
5. 21:25, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Introducing fringe theories on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."
6. 21:25, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Adding original research on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."
7. 21:27, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* May 2026 */ WP:FTN notice"
8. 21:29, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on National Center on Sexual Exploitation."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:40, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "fails WP:V"
2. 16:43, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ fails verification"
3. 16:46, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ The article could say that..."
4. 16:53, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ I have WP:CITED WP:MEDRS"
5. 17:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ Google search AI"
6. 17:21, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ +1"
7. 17:50, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ pseudoscience"
8. 20:26, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* DSM-5-TR */ compromise measure"
9. 20:29, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert */ commented out"

Comments:

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:01, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

User:SALlM BlN YOUSUF reported by User:Jolielover (Result: Partial block from article)

Page: Cockroach Janta Party (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: SALlM BlN YOUSUF (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 11:31, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
2. 11:20, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
3. 11:15, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
4. 11:12, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
5. 08:38, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
6. 08:30, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
7. 03:06, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"
8. 20:37, 20 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:39, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* ANI Discussion */ new section"
2. 11:25, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "ONLY Warning: Edit warring (UV 0.1.6)"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 06:19, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Lack of official flag / logo */ Reply"

Comments:

There's also an ANI discussion I opened to hopefully resolve this peacefully with input from other editors, but this edit warring has gotten out of hand. jolielover♥talk 11:35, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Also, contentious topics of infoboxes & South Asia jolielover♥talk 11:42, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I have blocked this user for 48 hours from the article in question to stop the ongoing disruption. I'm hoping that's all that's needed but if any other admins wish to lengthen or expand the block that's fine with me. CoconutOctopus talk 13:04, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Partially blocked from article for 48 hours per above. I have also left a CTOPS notice on the talk per WP:CT/SA. Daniel Case (talk) 17:56, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Royge 12 reported by User:Martineden83 (Result: Both blocked)

Page: De Gaulle (2026 film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Royge 12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 10:45, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */" In the infobox, only the producers should be listed, not the co-producers, who belong in the technical credits section. Pathé is indeed the film’s sole producer; the others are merely financial backers or co-producers. That has nothing to do with actual production companies, but rather with investment firms or banks. A bank does not become a production company simply because it invested one million in a film, at least not on Wikipedia
2. 18:14 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* top */" Added the official source for the French film classification. Pathé is indeed the sole producer; the others are not film production companies and/or simply purchased the rights with a share of the profits (which does not make them producers recognized on Wikipedia's film index
3. 21:57, 21 May 2026 (UTC) (We are now two contributors who share the same opinion, in addition to the factual source, while you contribute nothing but strong-arm tactics. I will report you if you continue.Undid revision 1355442790 by Martineden83 (talk)).

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 03:07, 20 May 2026 (UTC) per unifrance page co-production companies re-added + cleaning confusing lead section
2. 13:03, 21 May 2026 (UTC) Undid revision 1355353314 by Royge 12 (talk) again + there's no "bank" credit here + user seems to be confused and not following sources that he added before
3. 21:53, 21 May 2026 (UTC) User engaging on WP:DISRUPTIVE / WP:LLMDISRUPT + refusing to follow Template:Infobox film and WP:MOSFILM
4. 22:07, 21 May 2026 (UTC) Undid revision 1355443264 by Royge 12 (talk) WP:UNCIVIL + user engaging in editing war

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 12:59, 21 May 2026 (UTC) Reply
2. 21:52, 21 May 2026 (UTC) Reply
3. 22:06, 21 May 2026 (UTC) Reply
4. 06:19, 21 May 2026 (UTC) →May 21: new section

Comments: This user has a large history of edit warring + WP:UNCIVIL on my talk page Martineden83 (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I do not currently have the time to provide a detailed response showing how dishonest Martineden83’s approach is, but to summarize: he has provided no sources whatsoever, he pushed his edits through even though two contributors, myself included, disagree with him, and he is putting forward information that is factually contradicted. For example, through these forceful edits, he lists several investment fund companies as producers even though they are neither producers nor co-producers. He has also refused to debate the issue on its merits and has instead spent the entire time hiding behind Wikipedia rules. And when I explicitly showed him that he was wrong, rather than admitting the mistake, he chose to make this report in a dishonest attempt to bypass normal Wikipedia discussion processes and impose his own view despite factual evidence proving otherwise, including information from the official French film database Film France, which belongs to the CNC. And I have never had an approved report for an edit war and have never been blocked for it, contrary to what the user claims, I'll let you check for yourself, I have to be away for several hours. Royge 12 (talk) 22:43, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

(and he refused to discuss the matter or reach any form of consensus, instead repeatedly forcing his edits through each time (as he himself acknowledged in one of his messages); he was also the most recent person to make yet another revert on the page in question) Royge 12 (talk) 22:46, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello Martineden83, you should know better than to continue reverting with a summary providing no other arguments than "the other user is edit warring" and "the other user is uncivil". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 24 hours ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

User:BangaliMuslim reported by User:Rht bd (Result: Blocked for now)

Page: Shafiqur Rahman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: BangaliMuslim (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:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:44, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

User:SALlM BlN YOUSUF reported by User:Jolielover (Result: User indeffed from article namespace)

Page: Abhijeet Dipke (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: SALlM BlN YOUSUF (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 09:25, 22 May 2026 (UTC) "/* See also */"
2. 09:24, 22 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Career */"
3. 05:22, 22 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Career */"
4. 19:07, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Career */"
5. 06:54, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* See also */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:39, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "/* ANI Discussion */ new section"
2. 11:25, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "ONLY Warning: Edit warring (UV 0.1.6)"
3. 11:35, 21 May 2026 (UTC) "Notifying about edit warring noticeboard discussion."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Already partially blocked for edit warring on Cockroach Janta Party, and has been warned numerous times. Keeps inserting a hoax flag which was created by them (if you see the flag circulating online, it's due to citogenesis; the CJP have not used the flag prior to Salim's introduction of it) jolielover♥talk 10:04, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Already blocked User indeffed from article namespace by Star Mississippi Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Wareno reported by User:GumballNine1Nine (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:27, 23 May 2026 "Sources cited do not at all support changes and infact the word "sovereignty" is absent from any one of them. Restored content that does not break Wikipedia guidelines removed arbitrarily until the appropriate excerpts have been cited in the talk page in good-faith."
2. 13:07, 23 May 2026 "Recognition in the Brazil and USA articles refer to the entity they became independent from, which isn't the case here. For that there's "Conference of Zamora". Nowhere does Wiki policy state that the infobox needs to be like those articles, nor that those articles can't specify "Portuguese recognition" or "British recognition""
3. 20:40, 22 May 2026 "The victory at São Mamede does not correspond to sovereignty because officially Afonso Henriques was still subordinate to Alfonso VII, and recognition without specifying by whom isn't helpful. Restored content removed unduly."
4. 15:34, 22 May 2026

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 16:09, 22 May 2026
2. 22:18, 22 May 2026
3. 14:30, 23 May 2026
4. 16:27, 23 May 2026 "/* Revert */ User persistently breaks WP:OWN, edits and removes others users contributions in an arbitrary fashion and tries to dissuade them from editing by issuing warnings. Persisting on this behaviour will result in a report for WP:HARASS and WP:VANDALISM"

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 16:50, 23 May 2026

Comments:
User:GumballNine1Nine has broken WP:OWN, by treating the article Portugal as his own, and he admits it (Quote: "Also, regarding what you said in your edit summary, yes, you're right about WP:OWN (in actuality, the reason why I appear to act as such is because I'm trying to get Portugal FA status, hence the importance I'm putting over this matter" 1). He has persistently disregarded other users contributions and insists that they refer to "the sources cited in the article 2" yet the sources in question do not support his edits, unless he wishes to provide excerpts that corroborate them as requested, which he has so far refused to do. Elsewhere on the same article, the user has removed other users content because it lacks sources 3, and after sources being provided as requested 4 5 he proceeded to persistently remove sources or replace sourced content with unsourced one 6 7 8. He wrote that "just because other articles follow a specific pattern that doesn't mean that every single feature must be followed" 9 then he removed content because "United States doesn't say "British recognition", Brazil doesn't say "Portuguese recognition" 10. He has persistently refused to allow other users edits even when his own were in the minority. He then tries to intimidade other users from editing by issuing them warnings on the talk page, claiming that their edits are "disruptive" 11 12 13 14. Even this report is meant to intimidate.

The user has persistently diplayed a pattern of editing in arbitrary fashion, pushing out other users contributions and intimidation, therefore I request that the user be blocked from editing instead, for breaking WP:OWN, as well as WP:HARASS. Wareno (talk) 17:58, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

As evidence of their credibility, the user has chosen to respond by reverting edits to this topic. I'll let the evidence speak for itself. GumballNine1Nine (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

Because I had the page open and was typing the response. Feel free to add or re-add the edits that you wish, because it doesn't make your attitudes any less arbitrary and this report any less of an attempt to try and intimidate other users out of editing. Wareno (talk) 18:08, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

You can surely resolve edit conflicts differently than by overwriting/undoing helpful changes already made during 40 minutes of typing and then asking others to fix the result. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:26, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

Wareno, wherever I look in this conflict, your behavior has been concerning. You're not helping the encyclopedia by interfering with the attempts to build a Featured Article after successfully getting it to Good Article status, at least not in the way you did. It doesn't matter if you are right about the sourcing of "Sovereignty"/"Papal recognition"; if you have to revert four times to present your arguments, you're doing something wrong. You have clearly edit warred and the article would benefit from you being required to use the article's talk page instead of reverting. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:41, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

User:LLYG Mista reported by User:MrActiniuM (Result: User already indeffed as sock)

Page: Pennsylvania (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: LLYG Mista (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 03:11, 24 May 2026 (UTC) to 03:13, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 03:11, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355822438 by MrActiniuM (talk)"
   2. 03:13, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Race and ethnicity */ Removing uncited content"
2. 03:09, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355821584 by LuniZunie (talk) This is still inaccurate to have on the article"
3. 03:00, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355821201 by LuniZunie (talk): See talk page"
4. Consecutive edits made from 02:50, 24 May 2026 (UTC) to 02:52, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 02:50, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1355820305 by Sailing427alt (talk)"
   2. 02:52, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Race and ethnicity */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 03:14, 24 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Persistent edit warring, doesnt use WP:CONSENSUS despite being instructed to. MrActiniuMtalk 03:17, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Can confirm his edit warring. I just caught his latest pending edit and undid it. HarvardJock🏫 (talk) 03:20, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Dispute resolution was taken to my talk page, user reverted after posting. See User talk:LuniZunie#About your edit on Pennsylvania. – LuniZunie_(talk) 03:21, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

User appears to be socking via a temporary account. See: . CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:19, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Based on the TAs, and the reply here, this is a disruptive sockpuppeteer, see It Depends. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 08:37, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Already blocked indefinitely by ToBeFree Daniel Case (talk) 19:28, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Adakiko edit warring (Result: Both warned)

I myself may also be guilty, however this user reverted my edits which cited an unreliable source that did not relate to the statement on the page. The statement is also contradicted directly in the same article 2 sentences further (and for the rest of the article).

The article says that South Africa quality of life has improved, but then goes to say 2 sentences later (with 2 sources) 'Despite a growing gross domestic product, indices for poverty, unemployment, income inequality, life expectancy and land ownership, have declined' - these are widely recognised as QoL factors.

I reverted 3 times as the source of the first statement is wrong, and the second statement is more reliably sourced and reflects what is actually occurring in SA. This user just blindly undid my edits without considering my statements.

Article is: Inequality in post-apartheid South Africa ~2026-31335-36 (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi @~2026-31335-36. The formatting of a report here is important. Please click the "Click here to create a new report" button and fill out the necessary information so that your report is properly formatted. (You will need to provide links to diffs.) SuperPianoMan9167 (talk) 00:17, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Adakiko, restoring disputed content removed in good faith with verifiability concerns with an edit summary complaining about original research is ... creative. Can you stop and adhere to WP:ONUS/WP:BURDEN? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:55, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

~2026-31335-36, you'll need to significantly calm down, looking at your latest contributions. Special:Diff/1356144056 is full of incorrect assumptions and pointless attacks. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:00, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

• Warned both, see above. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:01, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Beatrack reported by User:~2026-30068-30 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Status of women's testimony in Islam (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Beatrack (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Status_of_women%27s_testimony_in_Islam&oldid=1356295813

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Status_of_women%27s_testimony_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1356306421
2. [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Status_of_women%27s_testimony_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1356306663
3. [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Status_of_women%27s_testimony_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1356315956
4. [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Status_of_women%27s_testimony_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1356318940

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beatrack&diff=prev&oldid=1356320484

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Status_of_women%27s_testimony_in_Islam&diff=prev&oldid=1356317846

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beatrack&diff=prev&oldid=1356320771

Comments:
User is repeatedly reverting cited content from Princeton University Press. I've already posted the full quote from Nicolai Sinai for verification on the talk.

• Hello ~2026-30068-30, the onus is on you to obtain a consensus because you would like to include the material. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:09, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:09, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Hhl95 reported by User:Danners430 (Result: Partially blocked 1 month)

Page: Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Hhl95 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

3. & (two reverts at once)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: (softer warning), (3RR)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

User has been repeatedly reverting back to their preferred version despite reasonably clear consensus on the talk page against this. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 21:36, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 1 month ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:12, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

User:JDtoBee reported by User:Aesurias (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: 2026 California billionaire tax initiative (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: JDtoBee (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 22:48, 27 May 2026 (UTC) to 22:49, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 22:48, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356463823 by Aesurias (talk)"
   2. 22:49, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356463180 by Aesurias (talk)"
2. Consecutive edits made from 23:52, 26 May 2026 (UTC) to 20:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 23:52, 26 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356298244 by Aesurias (talk)"
   2. 06:45, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356302988 by JDtoBee (talk)"
   3. 20:49, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356298481 by Aesurias (talk)"
   4. 20:49, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356298244 by Aesurias (talk)"
   5. 20:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356298131 by Aesurias (talk)"
3. 18:32, 26 May 2026 (UTC) "Revised as discussed in talk page, providing multiple high quality sources to substantiate that residency status is disputed and uncertain as a matter of law."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on 2026 California billionaire tax initiative."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 03:26, 26 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Disputed Factual Claims About Mobility Presented in a Biased Manner as Though Undisputed */ Reply"
2. 03:46, 26 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Disputed Factual Claims About Mobility Presented in a Biased Manner as Though Undisputed */ Reply"
3. 23:14, 26 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ new section"
4. 00:00, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
5. 00:07, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
6. 00:11, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
7. 00:12, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
8. 00:14, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
9. 00:18, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
10. 22:41, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"
11. 22:49, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "/* JDtoBee */ Reply"

Comments:

This editor has been continually reverting to a version of the article that multiple other editors have opposed, without explanation. Attempt to resolve dispute on talk page has been met with AI wall of text from them. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 22:52, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:28, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Hippo43 reported by User:~2026-31589-49 (Result: Warned user(s) Reporter blocked indefinitely)

Page: Alex Cole-Hamilton (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Hippo43 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

User is adopting a completely inflexible attitude towards the subject matter's nationality, and is simply refusing to engage with, or otherwise countenance compromise with, multiple other editors who are advocating for alternative wording that better reflects the nuance of the situation. When he was warned for edit warring, his response was 'go away'. When it was correctly noted that he had violated 3RR, his response was that this was a 'patronising approach' and to continue reverting # . It thus seems perfectly clear that he will not stop edit warring.~2026-31589-49 (talk) 08:24, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Hippo43, of your latest reverts, only the very last revert was actually exempt from the edit warring policy as it purely removed disputed content, which is compatible with WP:3RRNO #7 and WP:BLPRESTORE. Anything else, including your repeated re-addition of the word "English", does not qualify for this exemption, and if it continued, you'd be blocked. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

• Warned ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

User:ToBeFree Thanks, and noted.

The comment from IP guy above is dishonest. I have engaged in the discussions on the talk page, which he had not, until today, and others have not. Happy to keep discussing. // Hippo43 (talk) 21:43, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, a few users seem to have interpreted "consensus" as something they achieved through edit warring. I have removed the disputed content for now. Thanks for discussing this on the talk page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:46, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Excuse me? You have no justification for accusing me of dishonesty, especially since it has been confirmed that you were edit-warring and my complaint was thus valid. Please justify yourself, or strike out that allegation in accordance with WP:AGF. ~2026-31589-49 (talk) 22:18, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Have you interacted with Hippo43 or Talk:Alex Cole-Hamilton before Special:Diff/1356362149, the message sent in the same minute as this report was created? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:19, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Anon editor, my edits have no bearing on your lack of honesty. You wrote above that I was "simply refusing to engage with, or otherwise countenance compromise with, multiple other editors". Yet I had made 3 comments on the article talk page on this issue, 2 within the last few days and one a couple of months back. Other editors have edited around this dispute but not engaged. Your comment was dishonest. Was it meant to mislead admins and others reading here? Will you withdraw your dishonest comment? // Hippo43 (talk) 00:15, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Hippo43, you're missing a part of the picture at the moment. You might be surprised. I'm currently waiting for ~2026-31589-49 to admit it. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:13, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Multiple personalities? I would not be surprised. There has been a lot of it recently. // Hippo43 (talk) 01:17, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Into the silence, I'll disclose that the following edits probably came from the same person:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carlton_House_Terrace&diff=prev&oldid=1352725772
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carlton_House_Terrace&diff=prev&oldid=1352725822
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hippo43&diff=prev&oldid=1352726230
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alex_Cole-Hamilton&diff=prev&oldid=1356362149
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hippo43&diff=prev&oldid=1356362164
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=1356362209
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&diff=prev&oldid=1356460687

And because the lack of a visible connection between these is disruptive bordering harassment, I'll block the temporary accounts involved in a way that allows the user to create a registered account (and use that from now on). Who knows how many other similar contributions there have been.

~2026-31589-49/~2026-27237-80, further editing without being logged into an account will be block evasion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:26, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh god, this user's harassment of Hippo43 has a history going back to 2024. Enough. You are now indefinitely blocked from editing. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:36, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Arsemagic reported by User:Koncorde (Result: No action needed)

Page: Gabriel Martinelli (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:57, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "I told you the rules of the fa cup only players in the matchday squad receive medals, you were asked to provide a requested link to say that martinelli had received an fa cup winners medal ? these websites may not know the fa cup finals rules and regs can you show a link where he got special dis"
2. 20:38, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "absolutely none of them are respected sources henry did not get a medal in 2005 and said it but that site lists him with one"
3. 19:27, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "he was out injured the club did not request a medal, can you prove that they did?"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:49, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Gabriel Martinelli."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: There have been multiple edit summaries explaining, in addition to adding uncontroversial sources.

Comments:

User is WP:UNCIVIL and (verging on WP:NOTHERE) and has a Battleground mindset. Has had multiple confrontations already. Koncorde (talk) 21:04, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

I have pointed out quiet clearly that the player involved did not receive an FA Cup winners medal because he was injured, FA Cup rules state only players in the final matchday squad receive a medal. Of course the person who reported me stated the club can request medals for players not in final matchday squads. I asked them to provide a direct link that Martinelli received special dispensation from the FA to receive a medal but none was provided. Arsemagic (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

This is incorrect. As informed, and can be found on FA Cup rules. as well as from the Rules of the FA Challenge Cup Competition, part 281.

SECTION G: MISCELLANEOUS

Trophy and Medals

277. The Trophy is the property of The Association.

278. The Association shall loan the Trophy to the Club that wins the Competition on such terms and conditions as The Association shall determine. That Club will be responsible for returning the Trophy to The Association in good order and condition on or before the first day in March in the following year.

279. The Association reserves the right to request the return of the Trophy at any time by giving seven days’ notice to the Club to which it has been loaned.

280. Where the Trophy is lost, destroyed or damaged in any way while under the care or custody of a Club, in addition to any other penalty which the Professional Game Board may impose, that Club shall refund to The Association the amount of its current insured value or the costs of thorough repair.

281. The Association shall present 40 medals to playing staff and officials of both Clubs competing in the Final. Koncorde (talk) 22:02, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello Koncorde, thanks for coming here and stopping to violate WP:BURDEN/WP:ONUS and WP:BLPRESTORE. When a consensus for including the material has been found on the article's talk page, it can be included again. This noticeboard is unsuitable for holding the content discussion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:29, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

• No action needed ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:30, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

That's nonsensical. The BLP contains a statement of fact, the fact has been sourced. The statement is "If it is to be restored without significant change, consensus must be obtained first." but it was restored with multiple additional sources (which have been subsequently removed, with further patently false assertions - provided here as evidence to the fact). Koncorde (talk) 22:49, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Koncorde, which significant change is between Special:Diff/1356607518 and Special:Diff/1356614385? Why is the last edit to the article's talk page older than 3 years? Arsemagic has been here for a month, you've been here for almost 20 years. It's time for you to lead by example:

Once it is clear there is a dispute, avoid relying solely on edit summaries and discuss the matter on the associated talk page, which is where a reviewing administrator will look for evidence of trying to settle the dispute. [...] Avoid reverting during discussion.
— Wikipedia:Edit warring § How to avoid an edit war

There is no way this report gets actioned with any sanction more severe for the reported user than for you, so please just accept the "no action" close and slightly adjust the course. Starting a discussion here instead of continuing to revert was a good decision, taking the discussion to the article's talk page and inviting the reported user to it using {{please see}} on their talk page would be a productive next step. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:38, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

User:JordanWrites123 reported by User:Acroterion (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Patriot Front (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: JordanWrites123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 01:44, 29 May 2026 (UTC) "1st par. + infobox: white supremacist -> white nationalist. Several recent reliable secondary sources describe the organization as nationalist rather than supremacist. Because the characterization is disputed and not consistently supported across current sources, ‘nationalist’ is a more neutral and verifiable descriptor. [Program on extremism (GWU): “Patriot Front is a white nationalist organization...”, SPLC: “Patriot Front is a white nationalist hate group...” ISD Explainers: “can be classifie"
2. 00:21, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356470470 by Acroterion (talk) - ADL is not a reliable source as they lean left and are pro Israel. Other than possible former ties, not enough evidence regarding Patriot Front advocating for white supremacy."
3. Consecutive edits made from 23:35, 27 May 2026 (UTC) to 23:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
   1. 23:35, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356450667 by Czello (talk) - Sources taken from sites like the ADL can be biased. Patriot Front officially frames itself as protecting American heritage rooted in ancestral identity rather than advocating for a 'superior' race."
   2. 23:40, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Patriot front infobox: White Nationalism -> White nationalism. 'See also': List of neo-Nazi organizations -> List of neo-fascist organizations"
4. 20:45, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "1st par.: white supremacist -> white nationalist. Patriot Front infobox: white supremacist -> white nationalist. Evidence portrays the group as a white nationalist rather than white supremacist. Can be compared to Identitarian movement in Europe."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 23:45, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Patriot Front."
2. 23:46, 27 May 2026 (UTC) "CT notice"
3. 01:29, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "/* May 2026 */ note"
4. 01:42, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "/* May 2026 */ r"
5. 02:16, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "/* May 2026 */ r"
6. 02:18, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "/* May 2026 */ add"
7. 02:22, 28 May 2026 (UTC) "/* May 2026 */ add"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:22, 28 May 2026 (UTC) on User talk:JordanWrites123 "/* May 2026 */ add"

Comments:

Sustained edit-warring. Despite requests to discuss on the article talkpage, the editor has not done so. References are not unanimous concerning "nationalist" versus "supremacist," but JordanWrites123 has made a point of dismissing those that don't agree with their preferred characterization without discussion. Early edit summaries indicate reliance on self-characterization by the organization, rather than independent sources, and later referencing is only via edit summary. Reverts start from apparent TA edit. Acroterion (talk) 02:05, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Add onto this that the user is edit warring across multiple pages; in most cases it appears to be whitewashing far-right parties by sofetning the language away from what the sources actually say. — Czello ^(music) 07:45, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:10, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

User:ArchiveOtter reported by User:Aesurias (Result: Page protected)

Page: 2026 Santa Clara County District Attorney election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:10, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357123900 by Aesurias (talk) Responded in the Talk. These people are listed as "key supporters" in a reputable, verified source."
2. 21:52, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357123073 by Aesurias (talk) The same KQED article is being used as a reference for Rosen's endorsements but somehow for Chung it doesn't follow the guidelines? Please provide your explanation in the Talk."
3. 21:46, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357119919 by Aesurias (talk) Endorsements from credible sources are being selectively removed for Chung, suggesting political bias by editors. Adding them back in to keep the page neutral."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:15, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on 2026 Santa Clara County District Attorney election."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 21:52, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Biased cherry-picking and removal of sourced endorsements for Daniel Chung */ Reply"
2. 22:14, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "/* Biased cherry-picking and removal of sourced endorsements for Daniel Chung */ Reply"

Comments:

Combining 3 accounts (2 registered, 1 unregistered) into one report here. Combined 10+ reverts and consistent edit warring on this article because all of them (1 person?...) refuse to read the WP:ENDORSE guideline. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 22:17, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks. aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 22:50, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Ardiansrfh reported by User:Wira rhea (Result: Nominator blocked, page protected)

Page: Perseden Denpasar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ardiansrfh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

• Nominating editor blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:57, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
• (also, Page protected by PhilKnight). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:51, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-32191-32 reported by User:MrOllie (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Page: Standard Generalized Markup Language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-32191-32 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:24, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "I'm merely citing the specification. Do not vandalize valid objectively correct information that absolutely belongs in this article."
2. 21:59, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "If the section is the problem, I'll just make a new section below "history". A "Criticisms" section has already been suggested years ago by someone else in the talk page."
3. 21:43, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "since the discussion seems to be over, I will not call SGML obsolete but I will note that xml and html can't be parsed fully and reliably with a pure sgml parser. They are not compatible enough."
4. 17:18, 30 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356902703 by MrOllie (talk) sgml does not suppot xml namespaces. it's not a subset anymore."
5. 14:48, 30 May 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1356890251 by Tedickey (talk) Tedickey did not reply on his talk page."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:02, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 21:46, 30 May 2026 (UTC) "/* HTML and XML are not SGML-parseable */ Reply"

Comments:

Edit warring to keep WP:OR in the article, with a side of personal attacks: , MrOllie (talk) 22:30, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

At least someone will hopefully read it now. I hate being helpless against power abuse but no one except my bullies care about me. ~2026-32191-32 (talk) 22:39, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN and WP:ONUS are not power abuse; ignoring them usually results in opposition. The content can be restored if a consensus for doing so is found on the article's talk page, and your current approach is unhelpful in reaching that goal. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:03, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

wpburden: I think I provided sufficient verifiable citation from the HTML specificition.

Wponus: I wanted to find a consensus on the talk page but it was impossible because they simply insisted on what contradicts the specification and didn't feel obligated to provide new arguments for their point of view and didn't provide any feedback or contribution on what they think would help a criticism section. They didn't seem to want the constructive discussion I was hoping for ~2026-32191-32 (talk) 23:24, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

The verifiability itself has been challenged, so that alone already requires a discussion before reinstatement. But even if the content is fully verifiable and not synthesis or otherwise problematic, you'd still be required to obtain a consensus for adding the verifiable material, perhaps through a third opinion or an RfC, perhaps asking on a WikiProject's talk page for more opinions. Other editors are not required to argue in a circle presenting the same arguments against yours again and again. If there had been purely zero discussion on the article's talk page after attempts by you to start a discussion, the situation would be different, but MrOllie invested more time than they were required to into Talk:Standard Generalized Markup Language § HTML and XML are not SGML-parseable and now the load of finding someone to agree with your point is on your shoulders, not theirs, and it is on your shoulders alone and to 100%. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:30, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

I have also removed a statement on the page which you have restored. This: "It does, however, define an alternative XHTML serialization, which conforms to XML and therefore to SGML as well." Edit summary was: "Contradicts HTML5 spec: "Also, since neither of the two authoring formats defined in this specification are applications of SGML" https://html.spec.whatwg.org/" It means xhtml5 is not sgml. I think I don't need consensus to remove verifiably wrong information. Am I wrong about this? ~2026-32191-32 (talk) 23:35, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

MrOllie, objections to removing this? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:39, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I object. It needs consensus on the talk page just like the rest of these proposals - there are citations (already cited in the article) that pretty clearly support that. There are other sources that may say something different (though the wording the TA quotes here is ambiguous), but that should be explained without sides being taken. MrOllie (talk) 00:05, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I insist that the whatwg html5 living specification is the only source of truth, not some hearsay or the w3 commitee which got replaced by whatwg because of it's historical inability to reconcile its fantasy specifications with the real world and actual implementation and needs of developers. ~2026-32191-32 (talk) 00:14, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

But to answer your question, you're right that removing incorrect (or more precisely, unverifiable) information is generally always fine. The restoration is an unintentional side effect of the revert to a stable revision ... unless there are objections to the removal of that part, in which case the stable revision prevails as I won't judge who of you is right or wrong about the content. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:41, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Ollie said "HTML 1, 2, and 3 were only sort of SGML, and 5 is in a similar position." on the talk page. But html5 is not "sort of sgml", it just isn't. Browsers never parsed html as sgml. Not 1 2 3 or 4. I think there is a widespead misconception that I wish to clear up. I also quoted the section where it says that from the spec in the article. He's the prime example of why the criticism section I wrote is needed. To me it looked more like he disagreed about how html and xml relate and are compatible with sgml rather than the inclusion of some text saying that into the article. ~2026-32191-32 (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Please don't cherry pick parts of my comments out of context. Thanks. MrOllie (talk) 00:07, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I don't think I quoted you out of context in a manner that is disrespectful or changes your statement. If you want to add something to it please do so. ~2026-32191-32 (talk) 00:18, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Sooo the stable revision prevails. As this noticeboard is unsuitable for finding a consensus about the content, I'll mark this as closed at this point. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:28, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:02, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

~2026-32587-25 {Result: Page protected)

• ~2026-32587-25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Cultural genocide (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This user edit warred despite both a lower level warning by me and a harsher warning by @HarvardJock. This is my first report so I'm not sure what to do. Please ping for anything. Dafootballguy | Want to talk? 01:58, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Click on the "Click here to create a new report" button above. That gives you the proper template formatting to publish a report. You can delete your current post afterwards. Thanks for reporting! HarvardJock🏫 (talk) 02:06, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

It's okay. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:26, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Dafootballguy and HarvardJock, please both take a moment to join the discussion on the article's talk page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:26, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

@ToBeFree Thanks for the heads up! I didn't see his ping because of his lower case misspelling of my username. HarvardJock🏫 (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:26, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Bxvn reported by User:FDW777 (Result: Page already protected)

Page: City of Derry Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bxvn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. (made using TA, switched to account after page was protected and clearly the same editor)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

• Page protected by Yue. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:12, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Dezignr reported by User:AirshipJungleman29 (Result: Already partially blocked)

Page: Tom Hardy (designer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:12, 1 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. 22:32, 1 June 2026 (UTC) "Reverted irrelevant and incorrect post as issues cited have been resolved"
3. 20:32, 1 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. 10:39, 1 June 2026 (UTC) "Reverted form as suggested issues are resolved. ALL DATA IS FACTUAL AND NON-PROMOTIONAL WITH VERIFIABLE SOURCES."
5. 22:48, 31 May 2026 (UTC) "Template removed as issues have been fixed: (1) Citations added for verification as requested by Editors (2) Text deleted where unverifiable (3) Text deleted that gave the impression of self-promotion (4) All content remaining has verifiable citations"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:20, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Tom Hardy (designer)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Just noting I've indefinitely p-blocked them pursuant to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#COI_editor_continues_to_edit_his_own_article. I'm unfamiliar with the norms of this board and leave it to those who are to take any additional steps needed. Star Mississippi 00:42, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

  All good, although the block reason "ANI;DE" might be incompatible with WP:EXPLAINBLOCK's Block reasons should avoid the use of jargon as much as possible so that blocked users may better understand them. As far as the noticeboard is concerned, I just add a {{AN3}} template below and "Already partially blocked" to the heading. These are not automatically interpreted by a bot, so anything is valid. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks @ToBeFree

  Will definitely make a note to be better about that going forward and noted for future reports here. Star Mississippi 12:19, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Already blocked from editing this article ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-32701-35 reported by User:Bananakingler (Result: Nominator already blocked)

Cape Three Forks: Cape Three Forks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-32701-35 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

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

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

Comments:
Bananakingler's reverts

5. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-32701-35 (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Nominator had violated a 1RR restriction from the recent Maghreb case and is already blocked because of this. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
• Already blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:50, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Danners430 reported by User:Galilma (Result: Nominator blocked indefinitely)

Page: Darwin International Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Danners430 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Darwin_International_Airport&diff=prev&oldid=1357247288
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Darwin_International_Airport&diff=prev&oldid=1357470710
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Darwin_International_Airport&action=history#:~:text=cur-,prev,-21%3A14%2C%202
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Darwin_International_Airport&diff=prev&oldid=1356757518

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Darwin_International_Airport#Updated_Qantas_routes_reverted_again

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Danners430&oldid=1357480875

Comments:

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am filing this report as a neutral outside observer to this ongoing dispute. Multiple independent editors have attempted to update the "Airlines and destinations" table to accurately reflect active, high-volume mainline Qantas domestic routes out of Darwin (specifically Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide, and Perth). While there was a technical dispute regarding the initial formatting and sourcing (using the airline's website link), User:Danners430 has engaged in a continuous pattern of "revert-first" gatekeeping. Instead of cooperating to help improve the citations, using a tag, or allowing stable secondary data (like the BITRE passenger statistics already listed further down the page) to fill the gap, they have repeatedly wiped out completely accurate real-world data against the clear consensus of every other editor on the Talk page. This rigid editing style is making the article factually incorrect, causing a disruptive revert cycle, and actively creating a hostile environment that discourages new editors from trying to contribute to Wikipedia. I am requesting administrative intervention to stop the edit war and ensure a collaborative consensus can be reached. Galilma (talk) 22:23, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

"Note to reviewing administrator: The user appears to be repeating this exact same rigid 'revert-first' pattern regarding routes on other Australian airport articles, such as Hobart Airport and Canberra Airport." Galilma (talk) 22:36, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Neutral outside observer? In your first report, you said you added the information with sourcing. Which is it? --Onorem (talk) 23:05, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

That phrase was referencing the sourcing attempts made by the other editors on the talk page. Galilma (talk) 23:11, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Right. "I have added these routes along with reliable sources in my edits." That's a super common way to explain what 'other' people were doing. --Onorem (talk) 23:16, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello Onorem, I'll have a look at the other reports above first, but if you'd like to answer this in the meantime: "Revert-first"? You mean as described in WP:BRD? Not a mandatory process but nothing unusual either. You edit, they "revert first", you discuss. If that's your concern, you'll just need to get accustomed to that practice when editing Wikipedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Not my concern. Galilma is the "neutral outside observer" who made this report. --Onorem (talk) 23:26, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Oh, right, sorry. Your usernames do look very similar (O, G, similar length, currently both red, appearing directly below each other in a report). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:31, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Of course some might wonder due to the use of "gatekeeping" by the OP whether they are also parties to the dispute ~2026-32373-32 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who used "gatekeeper" here or ~2026-32866-56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (who used "gatekeeping", while also claiming to be "an outside observer" here). FDW777 (talk) 23:34, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:42, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

• Nominating editor blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-32691-58 and User:~2026-32678-88 reported by User:Czello (Result: Page protected)

Page: All Elite Wrestling (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-32691-58 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and ~2026-32678-88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (same user)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:41, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Haven't changed the content or intent of this paragraph, simply questioning and challenging the use of word legitimate."
2. 17:06, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Removing the idea of legitimacy, which cheapens what the wrestlers do in the ring."
3. 04:48, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Why is a paragraph saying "wrestling is not legitimate" needed here?"
4. on new TA

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:24, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on All Elite Wrestling."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 18:27, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Can we respect the industry and the work they do and not have to say what is presented is "not legitimate" */ Reply"

Comments:

• Page protected because multiple temporary accounts were involved. However, Czello, you too will have to find some kind of consensus for your preferred wording (or remove the disputed paragraph entirely to succumb to WP:BURDEN/WP:ONUS for now). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:53, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

[[User:]] reported by User:~2026-32871-34 (Result: Declined as malformed)

Page:  
User being reported:

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [diff]
2. [diff]
3. [diff]
4. [diff]

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

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

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

Comments:
Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. Ordinarily we try to see past some user mistakes in formatting and often we can see what you were trying to direct our attention to, after which we take appropriate action if warranted. But here no one can tell what you want. Daniel Case (talk) 04:53, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Dajasj reported by User:~2026-32716-43 (Result: Nominator blocked indefinitely)

Page: Esmah Lahlah (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [1357395291]
2. [1357516915]
3. [1357542852]
4. [1357543280]

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

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

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

Comments:

WP:BOOMERANG for OP. Aside from the malformed report and failing to notify Dajasj, OP has violated 3RR in order to commit non-neutral BLP violations. — Czello ^(music) 08:57, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Sorry, I hadn't thought about the 3RR, that's totally my fault and if it is necessary, feel free to block me. I will refrain from reverting in any case. I was just trying to remove obvious biased information and work towards something more neutral. Dajasj (talk) 09:07, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

  From what I can see, you haven't violated 3RR. You're at 3 reverts, and given that this is a BLP situation I would hope admins don't see that as actionable.

  On the other hand, OP is now up to 4 reverts plus their original edit as they reverted me, and so is well over the line. They are continuing to edit war, including by not assuming good faith of other editors. — Czello ^(music) 09:11, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

  Ah you're right, thanks! Dajasj (talk) 09:41, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

  Hello Dajasj, while in general you should of course keep 3RR in mind and note that edit warring can also already be done without making more than three reverts, don't worry too much about this specific case as WP:BLPRESTORE exists and you have enforced it. It's not 100% clear if WP:3RRNO's number 7 made it perfectly fine to revert this specific content so many times or if waiting for an administrator would have been more advisable, but I personally certainly won't close this with a block for those enforcing the policy. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:19, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Nominating editor blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:15, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-32716-43 reported by User:Czello (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Esmah Lahlah (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-32716-43 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 09:22, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357553782 by Czello (talk) Unduly hiding of facts, promises made about the position of the person in question confirmed by attached sources. Repeated edits made in bad faith, attacking democracy and reliability of Wikipedia by censoring verifiable facts."
2. 09:07, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357552269 by Czello (talk) Facts are neutral. Political biased censorship in order to hide the truth is not neutral and dangerous in times where democracy is under threat."
3. 08:32, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357542852 by Dajasj (talk)"
4. 06:35, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Added facts that were unduly removed based on political biased censorship."
5. 01:27, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision, facts are neutral by default. Previous edit showing political bias and censorship 1357395291 by Dajasj (talk)"
6. 11:06, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Added up to date information about her re-election and political lies."
7. revert after report filed

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 09:13, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Repeated BLP violations — Czello ^(music) 09:23, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you; could you revert their final edit? It's a clear BLP violation. — Czello ^(music) 10:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you. :) But I think I already did that directly after protecting the page unless I have overlooked something! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

  Apologies, I clearly missed that! — Czello ^(music) 10:34, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:S31290 reported by User:Otisu (Result: Already blocked)

Page: Red Dead Redemption (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: S31290 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:03, 3 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. 11:50, 3 June 2026 (UTC) ""
3. 11:04, 3 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. 09:39, 3 June 2026 (UTC) ""
5. 09:32, 3 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Already blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Flann Sinna reported by User:LaffyTaffer (Result: Partially blocked indefinitely)

Page: Francis Bacon (artist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 12:24, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "It is agreed that Bacon was born in Dublin, Ireland. Therefore, he is Irish, not British, and no further concensus is required. Are Oscar Wilde and James Joyce Irish-born British? Of course not, and neither is Bacon. Stop creating a false reality and DO NOT undo my edits."
2. 00:06, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "changes necessary to state what Bacon was, Irish, not British"
3. 21:59, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357455366 by A Frantic Turtle (talk)"
4. 19:29, 2 June 2026 (UTC) ""
5. 23:54, 1 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:20, 2 June 2026 (UTC) "change to edit war notice on review of user's contribs"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 00:54, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "/* edit war */ new section"

Comments: User appears to finally be discussing on the talk page as of writing this comment, however it wasn't until after this report as well as violating 3RR yet again. ᴸᵃᶠᶠʸTaffer💬(they/she) In solidarity 18:50, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Flann Sinna appears to be a SPA, with 9 reverts to the article this year and no other edits. Their belated contributions to the talk page haven’t been helpful in my opinion: they wish to change the nationality of the subject not because sources say anything different but to make a point about British behaviour in colonial Ireland. I happen to agree with them on that point, but not on going against the handy assessment of sources given in the (now quite old) RFC. Given more time (I’m busy irl), rerunning the RFC is something I’d like to do, but the disruption of the edit war would need to be stopped first. • a frantic turtle 🐢 solidarity 20:01, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:05, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:005 SRO reported by User:Aaaas216& (Result: Both blocked 24 hours)

Page: List of serving generals of the Bangladesh Army (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 005 SRO (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:27, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "There is no violation. We could share so much more information but we did not. Arms and location are basics."
2. Consecutive edits made from 17:19, 3 June 2026 (UTC) to 17:20, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 17:19, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357614952 by Aaaas216& (talk)"
   2. 17:20, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Do not destroy the format. Who is from which arms is very important"
3. Consecutive edits made from 17:04, 3 June 2026 (UTC) to 17:06, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 17:04, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357611083 by Aaaas216& (talk)"
   2. 17:05, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357610275 by Aaaas216& (talk)"
   3. 17:06, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357606602 by Aaaas216& (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:26, 3 June 2026 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

POV Pushing, putting everything in the article even the ones that Violates WP:NOTEVERYTHING and furthermore, WP:OR started WP:SOAP and disruptive reverts. The user also showed same disruptive behaviour in other following articles such as and . Tried to talk with them but they are showing no intrest in resolving it and fighting over it irrelevantly. Aaaas216& (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello Aaaas216&, 005 SRO does very much appear to be responding to your messages with a genuine interest in finding a solution – perhaps with a strong preference for their own point of view, but they do discuss. User talk page discussions won't lead to a consensus about this, however. The article's talk page would be a good place to start a new discussion (the latest is 7 months old) and the other user can be invited to that discussion (using {{Please see}}, for example). If that all doesn't help, see WP:DISCFAIL for a helpful essay, but I have a feeling it won't be needed. You may need a third opinion sooner or later, though, or an RfC. Or, if that all is too much work and trouble, I'm afraid you both or one of you may need to disengage from the topic. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 24 hours ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Semsûrî reported by User:FeisaStar (Result: No violation)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yak%C4%B1nca&oldid=1328215268

Diffs of the user's reverts:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Semsûrî#h-Talk_page_comments-20260117174700

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Semsûrî#h-Talk_page_comments-20260117174700

(Broken AN3 notification template removed; link syntax fixed above) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:10, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Comments:

The username is:Semsûrî the user's page link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sems%C3%BBr%C3%AE User have also deleted talks and other stuff from these pages:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ye%C5%9Filyurt,_Malatya&diff=prev&oldid=1333394986 Another talk page: https://en-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/w/index.php?title=Talk:Malatya_Province&diff=prev&oldid=1350928081&_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=tr&_x_tr_hl=tr&_x_tr_pto=tc FeisaStar (talk) 16:03, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello FeisaStar, you've copied a Google Translate link for an English Wikipedia talk page from English to Turkish to the report above. Are you relying on machine translation to edit the English Wikipedia? Because that is almost guaranteed to lead to problems sooner or later, and apparently rather sooner than later. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:13, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

No sometimes the browser auto translates especially in wikipedia FeisaStar (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Ah, that option can probably be turned off either for an entire language (if you don't want English to be translated at all) or for a website (if you don't want Wikipedia pages to be translated). Ideally, you won't need that kind of translation for English and can disable it for the entire language. Specific unclear words or sentences can probably still simply be highlighted and translated (select text, right click, "Translate to Turkish" might be an option?), or copied to a translation tool. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:23, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you FeisaStar (talk) 06:46, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• No violation: There was no edit war here. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:28, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

User:VolmarrViking reported by User:Srpska1992 (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Windows 3.1 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: VolmarrViking (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_3.1&oldid=1357438431

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_3.1&oldid=1357552667
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_3.1&oldid=1357438076
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_3.1&oldid=1357434869
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Windows_3.1&oldid=1357427916

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:VolmarrViking&oldid=1357438469

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Windows_3.1&oldid=1357449796

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:VolmarrViking&oldid=1357605900

Comments:

• (involved) While this is edit-warring it is also a violation of the MoS:LEDE. The user has been notified to read MOS, but seems like they have not done so. They also do not use edit summaries. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:46, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Vacant0, "STATUSQUO" is an essay section. WP:PREFER is for administrators when protecting pages. You're edit warring while telling others not to. Your latest edit summaries provided no other reason for reverting than the existence of an edit war. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

No, I’m not edit warring. What are you talking about? Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Vacant0, one more of Special:Diff/1357438431 and Special:Diff/1357609962 and I'd have trouble to close this without a block on your account. If you want to stop an edit war administratively, you can do so by protecting the page and optionally restoring a pre-edit-war revision. What you can't do is reverting for the sole reason of others reverting and linking to essays for justification. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Sorry for the trouble! 🙁 Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

I've been more harsh about this than necessary, sorry from my side. And no worries. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:01, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: It's alright, it happens even to the best of us. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:34, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:16, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Darinmax reported by User:Deepred6502 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Mafia state (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Darinmax (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 02:10, 2 June 2026

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Mafia state 12:21, 21 December 2025
2. Mafia state 15:25, 27 May 2026
3. Mafia state 16:47, 1 June 2026

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: User talk:Darinmax diff

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Mafia state#United States edit war

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: User talk:Darinmax diff

Comments:

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-33329-82 reported by User:Plasticwonder (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: La Toya Jackson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-33329-82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 04:27, 5 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. 04:20, 5 June 2026 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 04:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC) to 04:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 04:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   2. 04:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. 04:09, 5 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 04:22, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This user is edit warring in poorly sourced content. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 04:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Not only in this article. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:16, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:16, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

User:RS Ritwik reported by User:Blue-Sonnet (Result: Already blocked)

Page: Satyabhama (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:52, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ This image is the right depiction how mother goddess Satyabhama use to wear outfit in ancient time as written scriptures that's why this is the best fit. So stop reverting it"
2. 14:30, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */"
3. 12:39, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ This image is legally right stop changing it"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:48, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Satyabhama."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 14:47, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Offensive Image */ Reply"

Comments:

Note that this editor has also said that they are a "mod" and called another editor brain dead when they reverted the change of image In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 15:07, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• Already blocked by Doug Weller. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:48, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-33417-68 reported by User:Plasticwonder (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Donovan Patton (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-33417-68 (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 06:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC) to 06:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 06:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357872706 by Plasticwonder (talk)"
   2. 06:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Video */"
2. 05:02, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357872013 by Plasticwonder (talk)"
3. 04:44, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357870810 by Plasticwonder (talk)"
4. 04:38, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357870158 by Plasticwonder (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Disruptive adding of a youtube video, aimed to troll. Linked with another TA account (now pblocked.) Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 14:22, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:45, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Plasticwonder, if you rely on WP:3RRNO #7 for enforcing WP:BLPRESTORE, please say so in your edit summaries at least when you start crossing the line to what would else be a 3RR violation. Because this was clearly not the type of "obvious vandalism" exempt through #4. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:47, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 23:28, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

User:BillionDollarJanitor reported by User:MrOllie (Result: Partially blocked 1 month from editing articles)

Page: Repressed memory (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:56, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357929764 by MrOllie (talk) Concern trolling is not a substitute for legitimate disagreement"
2. 14:50, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357925737 by MrOllie (talk) Vandalism"
3. 14:15, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1357921541 by MrOllie (talk) Reverted for vandalism"
4. 12:31, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* top */Added further developments"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:27, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 14:26, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Stop adding Jesse Friedman to this article */"

Comments:

• This is a continuation of prior edit warring on this article from this user from a few weeks ago. Diffs: , . I also note the false accusations of vandalism in the above edit summaries. MrOllie (talk) 15:02, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
• MrOllie is not acting in good faith and refuses to read any source, even ones they cite. BillionDollarJanitor (talk) 16:23, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
• Hello MrOllie, if the three-revert rule brought you here instead of reverting further, please treat it as a two- or one-revert rule next time you encounter a similar situation.
  Partially blocked – for a period of 1 month from editing articles because this wasn't the first article where edit warring was BillionDollarJanitor's primary response to others' concerns. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:36, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Sumitjh239 reported by User:Ravensfire (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Poonam Pandey (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Sumitjh239 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:08, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Reverting unexplained removal by Rejoy2003; sourced content restored per WP:BURDEN — all claims backed by reliable refs (Times of India, Indian Express). No consensus for removal on talk page. See WP:PRESERVE."
2. Consecutive edits made from 14:39, 5 June 2026 (UTC) to 14:43, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 14:39, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Removing BLP content per WP:BLPREMOVE: (1) tabloid-sourced claims with dead original URLs — content unverifiable; (2) citation is a pornographic website (onlyindian.net), not a reliable source per WP:RS, archived version also unavailable; (3) content fails WP:NPOV/WP:V — cited source is a general opinion piece not specific to subject. Note: editor User:Ravensfire has been retaining this unsourced/poorly sourced BLP content despite these issues."
   2. 14:43, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Expanding Early Life section with verifiable sources: (1) birth place Mumbai per Indian Express & India Today already cited in article; (2) modelling since age 16 per StarsUnfolded; (3) Kingfisher Calendar 2011 per OddNaari and Zee News; (4) WebTV Asia Awards per official WebTVAsia website and India.com; (5) subject's own interview statement on 2011 World Cup announcement per Open Magazine. No original research. All sources are third-party published."
3. 14:28, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Restoring factual, well-sourced content per WP:V and WP:BLP. Previous revert by Ravensfire removed cited information without citing specific policy violations. All claims are backed by reliable sources (Times of India, Indian Express, archive URLs provided). BLP articles must include verifiable, neutral content — removal without valid rationale is not compliant with WP:PRESERVE. Please discuss on Talk page before reverting again."
4. Consecutive edits made from 09:27, 5 June 2026 (UTC) to 09:46, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 09:27, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Removing BLP content per WP:BLPREMOVE — citations are tabloid sources, original URLs dead, content unverifiable Removing BLP violation — citation is a pornographic website (onlyindian.net), not a reliable source per WP:RS; archived version also unavailable Removing/flagging per WP:NPOV and WP:V — cited source does not directly support claim; general opinion piece not specific to subject"
   2. 09:46, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Expanding Early Life section with verifiable sources: (1) birth place Mumbai per Indian Express & India Today already cited in article; (2) modelling since age 16 per StarsUnfolded; (3) Kingfisher Calendar 2011 per OddNaari and Zee News; (4) WebTV Asia Awards per official WebTVAsia website and India.com; (5) subject's own interview statement on 2011 World Cup announcement per Open Magazine. No original research. All sources are third-party published."
5. 05:52, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Web series */ Added Black Widow web series (Rocket Reels) to filmography — verifiable recent project"
6. 03:11, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Removing BLP violation — citation is a pornographic website (onlyindian.net), not a reliable source per WP:RS; archived version also unavailable"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 14:34, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Poonam Pandey."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 14:18, 5 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Removal of BLP content cited to pornographic website (ref 11) */ Reply"

Comments:

• Possible tag-teaming with Cosmicsam (talk · contribs) here as well. Ravensfire (talk) 15:20, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

  Hi Ravensfire, thanks! They're not just tag teaming, they're the same person. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

  Where's my Pikachu shocked face! Ravensfire (talk) 23:31, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

  ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:42, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-33561-87 reported by User:GSK (Result: Indef block)

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

User being reported: ~2026-33561-87 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 04:40, 6 June 2026 (UTC) "Removed AI intro. Will be reporting wiki to disability rights for discriminatory operations. Get inclusive."
2. 04:31, 6 June 2026 (UTC) "Added adaptations section and facts about adaptations"
3. 04:03, 6 June 2026 (UTC) "Added relevant adaptations section and included an animal right backrooms game that is based around this movie."
4. 03:40, 6 June 2026 (UTC) "Added adaptations section."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 03:45, 6 June 2026 (UTC) "General note: Using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion on Backrooms (film)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

TA is also attacking other editors who have reverted their edits on their talk. GSK 04:49, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely Ban-hammered by Izno. 🌻 A^♭m ^(Ring!) _(Notes) 06:03, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

User:TheHipHopRapping reported by User:Zirthes (Result: Both partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Am I the Drama? (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: TheHipHopRapping (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments: This user has repeatedly tried to add unnecessary information to the lead of the article in question, such as records achieved by the artist rather than the album, while consistently reverting my attempts to make the lead meet the guidelines of MOS:LEAD. They are continuing to do this even after I have initiated a discussion on the talk page of the article where other editors have agreed in my favour that the information should not be included in the lead. They have also insulted me and another editor involved through the talk page discussion about this.
–Zirthes (talk) 15:43, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked – for a period of 2 weeks from editing this specific article only. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:18, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-23876-09 reported by User:Insanityclown1 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Nathan Vasquez (lawyer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-23876-09 (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:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Slow edit warring on this page. Seems to violate npov and includes synth or original research. Insanityclown1 (talk) 15:52, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:21, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-33637-04 reported by User:Least Action (Result: No action needed)

Page: 1916 Black Friday storm (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-33637-04 (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 00:48, 7 June 2026 (UTC) to 00:56, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 00:48, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Aftermath */"
   2. 00:53, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   3. 00:53, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   4. 00:56, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. 00:45, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""
3. Consecutive edits made from 00:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC) to 00:42, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 00:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   2. 00:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358165068 by ~2026-33637-04 (talk)"
   3. 00:36, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358164686 by Least Action (talk)"
   4. 00:42, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. Consecutive edits made from 00:27, 7 June 2026 (UTC) to 00:31, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 00:27, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1345858523 by Entranced98 (talk)"
   2. 00:28, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1336631005 by Hurricamia75 (talk)"
   3. 00:29, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1331370107 by JJMC89 bot III (talk)"
   4. 00:29, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1324044636 by Favonian (talk)"
   5. 00:31, 7 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:30, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "General note: Editing tests on 1916 Black Friday storm."
2. 00:41, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "/* 1916 Black Friday storm */ new section"
3. 00:44, 7 June 2026 (UTC) "/* 1916 Black Friday storm */ Reply"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. Consecutive edits made from 00:30, 7 June 2026 (UTC) to 00:44, 7 June 2026 (UTC) on User talk:~2026-33637-04

Comments:

This user seems to be constantly reverting the article to a prior version without discussion. -- Least Action (talk) 01:00, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Least Action, are you describing your own behavior or have there been discussion attempts from your side? Or perhaps at least an edit summary containing an explanation for the reverts you made? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:17, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

I think I was a bit off by that time, as my reverts was only because they removed an image and stuff. I had left a message on their talk page, but got no reply. -- Least Action (talk) 05:31, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Hm well. It is strange but I'd close this without action for now. As soon as any specific reason for reverting ~2026-33637-04's edits has been provided to them and ignored, I'm open to simply semi-protecting the page. But at the moment, their edits are the latest, it doesn't seem to be vandalism and there's no active edit war. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:42, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

• No action needed ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:42, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Revirvlkodlaku (Result: Declined as malformed and really should be at AN/I)

Not sure if this is the best place to bring this up, but I'm the one being accused of edit warring here(!) and I've no intention of being cowed by weaponised accusations of such.

The initial dispute was inconsequential and related to

• My intial placement of a synonym for the band name in bold and its reversion
• The unexplained reversion of anchor links I'd added in a separate edit

I explained my reason for bolding the text in this edit summary and this edit summary.

If this reasoning was flawed, Revirvlkodlaku could- and should- have made the reason clear when they reverted it, but instead said "Why the bolding?"

Since I'd already explained my reasoning and they hadn't, the impression given was that Revirvlkodlaku had simply clicked "undo":- (a) without having bothered to read the summary nor (b) explained what I'd supposedly done wrong or why they were justifified in reverting it and (c) unnecessarily and lazily undoing another (unrelated) edit of mine as collateral damage in the bulk "undo".

That's why I felt justified in adding them back (*) and leaving this message, which I don't think was unreasonably rude.

Only *after* this did Revirvlkodlaku bother to explain- somewhat combatively and unhelpfully- their reasoning, i.e. that synonyms should, stricly speaking, only be bolded in the lede/header. ("Show me the policy that says alternate names should be bolded (except in the lede). In the meantime, stop edit warring and drop the combative attitude."])

They're correct in respect of the policy, and if they'd bothered to make that clear in the first place and escalate the issue we might not be having this discussion. But they didn't.

Despite this, they've been quick to escalate to accusations of "edit warring" and of alleged incivility.

Apologies if this is longwinded or the wrong place to bring this up, but if someone wants to use accusations of edit warring against me, I'm not sure where else it should be discussed.

Ubcule (talk) 17:01, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Declined – malformed report. Please use the "Click here to create a new report" link at the top of this page, which gives a template report, and provide complete diffs. And this really sounds like it would be better at AN/I. Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Reposted at AN/I as recommended, thank you. Ubcule (talk) 18:41, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Pollyannaeffect reported by User:Wellington Bay (Result: Blocked 1 week)

Page: By-elections to the 45th Canadian Parliament (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Pollyannaeffect (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

The warning was removed by the user

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
You'll see the edits are reverting it back to original format, but other editors ignored. Also wasn't reverting since also adding in correcting to undisputed inaccuracies. The other contributor did not discuss the edits and just personal insults on me rather made any honest attempt at consensus by stating this was all "waste of time" or "that's not an argument". Pollyannaeffect (talk) 18:48, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Mhm. Pollyannaeffect, this isn't your first edit war of the month, looking at the revision history of the article about Robert J. Carney. You've been here for over 11 years; it's time to learn dealing with disputes in more productive ways. You have a week for your research. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Aaaas216& reported by User:~2026-31100-25 (Result: Both blocked)

Page: List of serving admirals of the Bangladesh Navy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Aaaas216& (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Comments:

Editor Aaaas216 has repeatedly reintroduced disputed formatting changes to the article despite multiple reversions and attempts at discussion. The edits remove long-established elements including rank insignia, location columns, appointment abbreviations, and standardized formatting that have been present in the stable version of the article.

I have attempted to resolve the issue through normal editing and discussion. However, the editor continues to restore the disputed version without obtaining consensus. I am requesting administrative review for potential edit warring and disruption of the established consensus process.

• Both editors blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

(This includes, linked behaviorally, 005 SRO, who was not evading a block during the edit war). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:07, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Please see also: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aaaas216& & Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/005 SRO. Staraction (talk · contribs) 01:17, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

User:MannaHontanna reported by User:AirshipJungleman29 (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Indians in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:50, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358560954 by ~2026-33324-56 (talk) not consensus gained and acting to fast. removing content that was not generated by AI."
2. 13:33, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358559428 by ~2026-33324-56 (talk) you are removing information that you have not contested. If you want to remove information relating to AI generated content that only remove that information which you are entirely capable of doing."
3. 13:08, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358557052 by ~2026-33324-56 (talk) you are removing non-ai content which is vandalism. please identify the content you suspect is AI and only remove that. Multiple users have called you out for vandalism."
4. 13:03, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358556342 by ~2026-33106-38 (talk) that does not result in the removal of all the content you wanted to remove. contest any content you want to remove and remove that content only."
5. 12:57, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358556004 by ~2026-33106-38 (talk) There is no AI content."
6. 12:50, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358555307 by ~2026-33106-38 (talk) multiple people state what you are doing is vandalism. take it elsewhere."
7. 12:47, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358554736 by ~2026-33106-38 (talk) reverting vandalism"
8. 10:46, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358477046 by Njd-de (talk) restoring vandalism, most of what was removed is not LLM."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:52, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Indians in Japan."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WhyIsAidepikiw may be relevant. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of two weeks due to seven reverts within a couple of hours. The SPI may likely lead to this becoming indefinite. Daniel Case (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-33324-56 reported by User:AirshipJungleman29 (Result: Underlying IP blocked two weeks)

Page: Indians in Japan (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-33324-56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:46, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358559540 by MannaHontanna (talk)everything has been agreed on talk pages"
2. 13:32, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358557177 by MannaHontanna (talk)not vandalism what you doing is vandalism"
3. 13:07, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358556687 by MannaHontanna (talk)stop reverting ai content please"
4. 10:50, 8 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358268286 by AriuCH (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Previously reported at WP:ANI. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:55, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of two weeks The underlying IP, since both TAs that editwarred with HM come from it and HM was blocked for the same length of time. Daniel Case (talk) 19:13, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Daniel Case, as we recently had a case at AIV where someone's IP(s) were blocked and the temporary account just continued with different IP addresses, I'll block ~2026-33324-56 and the temporary accounts associated with them for 2 weeks just to be on the safe side and to enforce your block against "I didn't notice that I was allegedly blocked" responses. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:49, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-34197-63 reported by User:Musashi1600 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Hawaiian Airlines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-34197-63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:21, 10 June 2026 (UTC) "On the Oneworld members page, it lists Hawaiian Airlines and Alaska Airlines under a single Oneworld member, and not as its own member."
2. 00:06, 10 June 2026 (UTC) "Hawaiian Airlines is an affiliate member of Oneworld under Alaska Air Group."
3. 20:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Hawaiian Airlines is an affiliate member of Oneworld under Alaska Air Group."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:38, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Flizzadizza reported by User:Zefr (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Yerba mate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:11, 11 June 2026 (UTC) "keep it pls"
2. 17:45, 11 June 2026 (UTC) ""
3. 06:48, 11 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. 23:41, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "yo stop deleting this bro its true stop being a nerd"
5. 23:35, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358632211 by SimpleObjects-9ei (talk)"
6. 23:34, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358632027 by ClueBot NG (talk)"
7. 23:32, 9 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1358628928 by Staticspector (talk)"
8. 22:25, 9 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:40, 11 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Disruptive editing on Yerba mate."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User has had trivial content and a Daily Mirror source reverted 8 times in 3 days, with adequate warnings by different editors and a previous 24 h block. Zefr (talk) 20:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, there's a point when automatically expiring blocks are no longer an option. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

~2026-33648-34 and ~2026-34262-43 reported by User:CommonsKiwi (Result: Blocked indefinitely; page semi-protected)

Page: Microplastics and human health (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-33648-34 and ~2026-34262-43

Previous version reverted to: Special:PermanentLink/1350540141

Diffs of the user's reverts: Its easier to just look at the page history. All the relevant edits are +19k additions. This has been happening from the 7th of June (4 days so far).

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: ~2026-34262-43: Special:Diff/1358797496. Other user not warned, they are obviously the same person.

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: They are clearly using LLMs for all their additions (including summaries and talk page interactions), and four different editors (including myself) have reverted their edits. There is no talk page debate to be had.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1358871404 Special:Diff/1358871422

Comments:

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:17, 11 June 2026 (UTC)
• Page semi-protected for a period of 1 month. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:17, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

User:WATT TV reported by User:Multiplivision (Result: Blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Paw Patrol: The Dino Movie (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: WATT TV

Previous version reverted to: Special:Diff/1358871604

Diffs of the user's reverts: For the last day or so, the categories Canadian animated action films and Canadian animated adventure films have been the subject of constant readdition by WATT TV, even though there have been grounds for speedy deletion of the two categories, which ended in the consensus being that they be merged into Canadian action films and Canadian adventure films respectively. Despite this, they are constantly being readded to the article, and the user in question has been incredibly hostile while doing so.

The following is the reverts that WATT TV has performed:

• Special:Diff/1357156395 ("At least leave in the new categories also next time you undo my edits.")
• Special:Diff/1357199190 ("And please stop the rollback edits. I beg you.")
• Special:Diff/1357244207 (no edit summary provided)
• Special:Diff/1358094081 (no edit summary provided)
• Special:Diff/1358451558 ("You need to stop this now.")
• Special:Diff/1358712461 ("If I recall correctly, two of the film's production companies (excluding Spin Master) are American production companies, is that correct? And stop erasing it from the two categories!")
• Special:Diff/1358786085 ("WILL YOU PLEASE STOP THAT?!")
• Special:Diff/1358812173 (no edit summary provided)
• Special:Diff/1358871220 (no edit summary provided)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Special:Diff/1358874492

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Despite having been told on their talk page, they still insinuate that the categories be implemented, and has resulted in a continuous back-and-forth towards myself and User:MikeAllen.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Special:Diff/1358875348

Comments:
Multiplivision (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for replying. Multiplivision (talk) 21:47, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Edit war on iPadOS 27 (Result: Reported user blocked indefinitely, reporter blocked 24 hours)

A temporary account (User talk:~2026-34542-26) keeps edit warring the article iPadOS 27. I've seen other sock puppets do the same thing. Slackintosh (talk) 21:57, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

It takes two to tango. 15 reverts are too many. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:43, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

• Both editors blocked. Slackintosh is blocked for 24 hours. The temporary accounts were initially also blocked for 24 hours, but looking at their larger history, I have extended this to indefinite duration. Further edits from the reported user will be block evasion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:04, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

You locked it after he vandalized the page, and you locked me out so I can’t fix it. ~2026-23876-09 (talk) 03:38, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

At Wikipedia we follow the three-revert rule. This means that you must not revert more than three times within 24 hours from the first revert, even if you think that your idea is correct. If you do so, you may be banned or blocked. Instead of edit warring, use the article's talk page to make a discussion. Slackintosh (talk) 03:44, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Edit warring doesn't start strictly when the fourth revert has been made, and it is possible to edit war without breaking the three-revert rule, but yes. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:06, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Zack Peter edits by ~2026-34021-76 (Result: Page semi-protected)

I have now been involved for multiple days in a dispute over the page of Zack Peter, who endorsed false claims of electoral fraud in the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election. While this might be notable for his page, ~2026-34021-76 has now made repeated bold edits to the page with limited sourcing, even when reverted and warned. Responses by the editor have included calling Wikipedia bots "stupid" and accusing me of having a bias toward Peter or being him. (I had never edited this page before this week.) I tried to start a Talk Page conversation to avoid further escalation, but he has explicitly requested administrator intervention and I would moreover like an examination. Thank you so much for your hard work for our community! PickleG13 (talk) 07:26, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi PickleG13, you seem to be on the right side of WP:ONUS, WP:BURDEN and WP:BLPRESTORE there. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:08, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page semi-protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:09, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Reporting User:Haute-Spatio, User:Malgosha reported by User:Kirnod Skuaita (Result: Nominator blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Malaysian United People's Party (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Haute-Spatio (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Malgosha (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_United_People%27s_Party&action=history 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_United_People%27s_Party&oldid=1357966987

[^ 19:39, 5 June 2026 Kirnod Skuaita talk contribs 5,239 bytes −158 correctly adjacent in adherence to according to the consistency of the party's history timeline upon factual assessment. undo Tags: Reverted Visual edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_United_People%27s_Party&action=history#:~:text=07%3A07%2C%209,RW%20Undo%20Reverted

[ 07:07, 9 June 2026 Haute-Spatio talk contribs 5,397 bytes +158 Reverting edit(s) by Kirnod Skuaita (talk) to rev. 1325500359 by Syaz351: Vandalism (RW 16.1) undothank Tags: RW Undo Reverted] (what I am slanderously accused of) }}Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [diff] Nationalism(
   ) *Reverted to (Nationalism)
2. [diff] (Progressive conservatism) *Reverted to (Nationalism)
3. [diff] After edit 'Progressive conservatism': *^(
   ) *Reverted to (Nationalism)
4. [diff] (Post-communism) *Reverted to (Nationalism)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [User talk:Haute-Spatio]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Haute-Spatio#c-Kirnod_Skuaita-20260611124200-MUPP [diff]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Haute-Spatio#c-Kirnod_Skuaita-20260611124200-MUPP [diff]

Comments: These kind of fascists attempt to silence authentic and genuine incentivizers of editing when the alignment of a party's ideals inserted is actually grounded and has a legitimacy for being inputed at the article. These users have a notorious track record of oppressing and targeting attacks upon unsuspecting and unsuspicious formally equipped but untainted educators or interior/internal resources and inquisitors and informers from the same political platform or are genuine members of the party or platform in question itself, therefore these two users should be blocked from interrupting the edits of political articles, let alone in their manipulative or misconduct and irrational or irreconciliable attitude when there are people like me who actually provide relevant pertaining addresses to the political articles by which match with the circumstances of the political platforms in the article as well as its official party constitution and consistency in provisioning the efforts in their assurances and verifiable prospects and proponents.

My sources of reference to settle the dispute: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying

Kirnod Skuaita (talk) 11:47, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

• Comment Looking at the article's history, if there's anything actionable for a slow-motion edit war, it's by the reporting editor, not the two reported editors. Looking further at the reporting editor's conduct, it borders onto personal attacks against the other editors. I suggest that Kirnod Skuaita engage in constructive discussion at the article's talk page if they wish to move toward consensus for making this change. —C.Fred (talk) 11:54, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
• Nominating editor blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Dynamic IP reported by User:Cinderella157 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Ōei Invasion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Dynamic IP User talk:~2026-34015-28, User talk:~2026-34343-16 and User talk:~2026-34408-10

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Revision as of 18:34, 10 June 2026 (initial addition)
2. Revision as of 00:30, 11 June 2026
3. Revision as of 05:29, 11 June 2026
4. Revision as of 06:20, 11 June 2026
5. Revision as of 23:18, 11 June 2026

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: , and

Comments:

Cinderella157 (talk) 03:52, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-34812-71 reported by User:Howardcorn33 (Result: 48 hour block)

Page: David Hockney (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-34812-71 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:06, 13 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Death */ He hated prince charlie"
2. 13:59, 13 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Death */ Incorrect source"
3. 13:49, 13 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Death */ Incorrect sources"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:~2026-34812-71&oldid=1359159092

Comments:

Also insulted person giving warning for edit warring. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 14:10, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked for 48 hours. PhilKnight (talk) 14:16, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-24776-22 reported by User:Multiplivision (Result: Required to create an account)

Page: How the Grinch Stole Christmas (2000 film) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-24776-22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: Revision as of 13 June 2026, 13:04 UTC

Diffs of user's reverts:

1. Revision as of 12 June 2026, 10:36 UTC ("Still no need to add UIP as the international distributor.")
2. Revision as of 12 June 2026, 18:49 UTC ("No really any need to add UIP as the international distributor.")
3. Revision as of 13 June 2026, 09:54 UTC ("Stop adding UIP as the international distributor, there's no need to do so.")
4. Revision as of 13 June 2026, 13:12 UTC (no edit summary provided)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Revision as of 13 June 2026, 13:10 UTC (reverted by reported user)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: Revision as of 13 June 2026, 13:21 UTC

Comments:
Multiplivision (talk) 13:22, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

The user being reported went ahead and harassed another anon user (~2026-34492-37 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)), as shown by this edit: Revision as of 13 June 2026, 14:57 UTC. If this user report leads to them potentially getting blocked, I expect it to be indef due to harassment being against Wikipedia policy. Multiplivision (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

The warning given to the reported user has since been removed, making it clear to me that they are not heeding to the warning whatsoever, leading me to believe they are likely going to continue making poorly sourced or improper changes to articles. Multiplivision (talk) 16:37, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Required to create an account. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:43, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Editorofthesouth reported by User:Plasticwonder (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: The South Is My Country (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Editorofthesouth (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 01:47, 14 June 2026 (UTC) to 01:59, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 01:47, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticism */ added more text"
   2. 01:59, 14 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. 01:32, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticism */"
3. 01:31, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticism */ fixing vandalism of the china comunist party"
4. 01:28, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "fixing the shit people do"
5. 01:25, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticism */ fixing what plasticwonder did"
6. Consecutive edits made from 01:14, 14 June 2026 (UTC) to 01:14, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 01:14, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Criticism */ fake info"
   2. 01:14, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "fale info"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 01:34, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Do not revert again */ new section"
2. 01:48, 14 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Revert yourself */ new section"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Frequent adding of unsourced content, or content that is not neutral. Has been reverted several times by 3 different users (including me), I tried giving this user the benefit of the doubt and discuss the content additions with them, but that didn't seem to work. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 02:33, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

"vandalism of the china comunist party" ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:16, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Yeah that made me laugh too lol. I have to admit some of the personal attacks I get are creative, I cannot lie on that! Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 03:29, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:16, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

User:McSly reported by User:~2026-34936-31 (Result: Page protected)

Page: Institut polytechnique des sciences avancées (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: McSly (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Institut_polytechnique_des_sciences_avanc%C3%A9es&diff=1359187793&oldid=1359140252

Comments:Deleting refs and files

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:54, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Background information: I had removed a more broken report about the same "edit war" without action before and it's back with less broken formatting. If the side affected by any kind of protection believes there is such a need for administrative intervention in this non-edit-war, so be it. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:58, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-29788-75 reported by User:Sławomir Biały (Result: Partially blocked from editing articles for 2 weeks)

Page: Complex number (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-29788-75 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

5. (after ANEW notice)

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

TA refuses to engage in discussion of any sort. Sławomir Biały (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks from editing articles directly. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:09, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Rumumiken reported by User:Buidhe (Result: Partially blocked 2 weeks)

Page: Treaty of Lausanne (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Rumumiken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
Also blockable for OR, disruptive editing, WP:HID (genocide denial), take your pick. (t · c) buIdhe 04:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

User is upset because his propaganda without any relation to the article `Treaty of Lausanne` is removed! Rumumiken (talk) 09:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Whatever. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:20, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:20, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Stevencocoboy and Sportsfan 1234 reported by Bgsu98 (Result: Stevencocoboy blocked 24 hours)

Report 1

Page: 2026 Pan American Fencing Championships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 04:17, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359596941 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk) please stop to revert, canada only win one gold medal"
2. Consecutive edits made from 04:14, 16 June 2026 (UTC) to 04:14, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 04:14, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359596337 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk) stop, your data are wrong"
   2. 04:14, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359596319 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"
3. 03:02, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "I'll focus update the result, your edit have mistakes"
4. 02:55, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359588040 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: Warning was issued here.

Report 2

Page: 2026 Pan American Fencing Championships (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Sportsfan 1234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 04:21, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by Stevencocoboy (talk)"
2. 04:15, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Reverted 2 edits by Stevencocoboy (talk) to last revision by Sportsfan 1234"
3. 04:10, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Restored revision 1359588167 by Sportsfan 1234 (talk): Restore last good revision"
4. 02:56, 16 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359588112 by Stevencocoboy (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: Warning was issued here.

Discussion / Result

Refactored. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:29, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

It's not my mistakes. I've already comment it. That user count the wrong data in medal table so that's the reason I've reverted it. Also I believe that user:Bgsu98 have very stronger feeling for me because I'm argue with him before, but it doesn't matter with him and I don't understand why he always complain me. Thanks. User:Stevencocoboy (talk) 09:03, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

As a neutral party I will point out that I attempted to warn BOTH involved parties here and BOTH simply blanked the warning from their talk pages. Would recommend blocks for both involved parties. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 16:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

I would add that Stevencocoboy's doubling down in the above comment that they were justified in editing warring and saying that Bgsu98 (who reported BOTH involved parties) is somehow out to get them is indicative of a much larger issue here. It should also be noted that Stevencocoboy appears to have a second account which they flip flop back and forth between using (Olympicmen). Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:35, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

This has been a longterm problem. I only saw this nonsense because Steven was also edit-warring at 2009 World Figure Skating Championships. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:13, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

I understand the concern and apologize for the edit warring. Three of the edits in question were made in quick succession, though I recognize that this is not an excuse. I understand the issue that has been raised, and we are now discussing it on my talk page . There will be no more reverts on the article in question until we come to a mutual understanding. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:35, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Sadly, Stevencocoboy's response – contrary to that of Sportsfan 1234 – doesn't give me a reason to believe this would stop without any administrative measures. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:39, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

• Stevencocoboy is thus Blocked – for a period of 24 hours. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:40, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Stadt67 reported by ConeKota (Result: Reporter warned, reported user partially blocked for 2 weeks)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Stadt67 is edit-warring on Oliver Tree and broke 3RR by making 4 reverts in 24 hours.

Here are the diffs: 1. 2. 3. 4.

They are reverting multiple editors to consistently place their own version and seem to be the only editor doing so. After they left me a message on my talk page saying I broke 3RR (which I don't recall doing so) for which I later responded to, I left a message on their talk page about their behavior and breaking policy. They later deleted my message, accusing me of retaliatory behavior, and threatened to report me to ANI instead of discussing a solution to said edit war.

Since they refuse to use the talk page and keep breaking the revert limit, I'd like an admin to intervene in this and hopefully resolve this. ConeKota (talk) 02:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

ConeKota, reverting a revert with an edit summary of "I'm not going to have an edit war with you" () has some degree of irony in it. Please generally don't, especially in biographies. I don't think WP:BLPRESTORE applies in this case but WP:ONUS does. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:17, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

@ToBeFree ConeKota's behaviour ought to be took into account too:

1. Fundamentally wrong. Cause of death should not be listed in the infobox unless the subject is notable for such a death. Since Oliver Tree is more notable for being a musician and internet personality than his death, such an inclusion in the infobox is unwarranted.

2. Copied and pasted the warning I gave them onto my talk page:

3. ConeKota never asked or wanted a solution. I was right in that regard. ConeKota waited days until bringing it here, the only interaction or discussion was a retalitory 3RR warning (see diff) and saying they'd report me.

ConeKota was neither civil or co-operative throughout the process. I'm asking that this be reviewed too. Stadt67 (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

1. Irrelevant to my behavior (?)

2. Copied and pasted the warning I gave them onto my talk page: I completely own up this. I honestly mistook their warning for an automated warning template, which is why I reused said text. I apologize for that nonetheless.

3. ConeKota never asked or wanted a solution. Stadt67 wrongfully warned me, deleted my talk page message after I notified them of their 4th revert, and threatened an ANI report first. I only brought this here because they refused to engage and escalated. ConeKota (talk) 12:03, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

1 is important as that's what the whole dispute is about. To deny the biography manual of style is to do with behaviour.

To address number 3 I do not remember a notification of the 4th revert, and had left their own talk page open for days which I considered to be non co-operative. Stadt67 (talk) 12:24, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 09:18, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:~2026-35395-67 reported by User:Jfire (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Stacey Patton (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-35395-67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:32, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359849816 by Jfire (talk)"
2. 16:13, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359846798 by Pyrrhic victor (talk)"
3. Consecutive edits made from 16:01, 17 June 2026 (UTC) to 16:02, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 16:01, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Sources are reliable."
   2. 16:02, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Source is reliable. This is not politics."
4. 15:24, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359839876 by EightAndNine (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:25, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Another revert. — Czello ^(music) 16:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

And another. Clear violation of WP:BLPRESTORE. — Czello ^(music) 16:54, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Another account has jumped in as well.Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 17:00, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:36, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

User:GanNiNiang8964 reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: Indeffed as sock)

Page: Template:Video game consoles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: GanNiNiang8964 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 07:39, 17 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. 01:38, 17 June 2026 (UTC) ""
3. 01:12, 17 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. 00:50, 17 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 19:38, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Template:Video game consoles."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 19:37, 17 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Ninth generation of video game consoles */ new section"

Comments:

User:GanNiNiang8964 continues to add Nintendo Switch 2 to Template: Video game consoles, even though there is no source confirmed that Nintendo Switch 2 indeed a ninth gen console which is false., This appears to be Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nipponese Dog Calvero Untamed1910 (talk) 19:41, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely as a sock of Nipponese Dog Calvero Daniel Case (talk) 01:58, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-34027-68 reported by User:Semsûrî (Result: Required to create an account)

Page: Foreign relations of the United States (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-34027-68 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:48, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "@hamze-haji Abbou"
2. 13:20, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ hamze-haji"
3. 13:04, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ hamze-haji"
4. 05:10, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */? +"
5. 00:28, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Morroco"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:32, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Foreign relations of the United States."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked (required to create an account to continue editing) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:20, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-35614-91 reported by User:AriuCH (Result: Already blocked)

Page: Human extinction (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-35614-91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 17:43, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360009646 by AriuCH (talk)"
2. 17:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360006896 by TonySt (talk) consensus sought, unlike you"
3. 17:16, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360006105 by Skywatcher68 (talk)"
4. 17:09, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360005213 by Dinercoffee (talk)"
5. 17:04, 18 June 2026 (UTC) ""
6. 15:06, 18 June 2026 (UTC) ""
7. 08:15, 18 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:22, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "General note: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Human extinction."
2. 17:07, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "/* June 2026 */ Reply"

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 17:43, 18 June 2026 (UTC) on Human extinction "Undid revision 1360009646 by AriuCH (talk)"

Comments:

• As displayed by comments on the user's talk page, there is also WP:UNCIVIL behavior in discussion with other editors. Zefr (talk) 18:17, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Also see personal attacks: diff. AriuCH (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Already blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  @ToBeFree Thanks, after this IP was blocked, several others showed up with the same pattern; I reported them to AIV and they were blocked too. Thanks for your help. AriuCH (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

User:LocalF15 reported by User:Cinderella157 (Result: Geddit blocked indefinitely, LocalF15 blocked 24 hours)

Page: Great Turkish War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: LocalF15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. Revision as of 03:45, 18 June 2026
2. Revision as of 15:54, 18 June 2026
3. Revision as of 16:15, 18 June 2026
4. Revision as of 18:25, 18 June 2026

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

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

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

Comments:

Cinderella157 (talk) 22:57, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

To be fair, we were going to discuss on TP but seems like @Geddit (who has been warned multiple times on their TP) is targeting me because of, I assume, changes on French conquest of Algeria and French conquest of Morocco. LocalF15 (talk) 23:47, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked: Geddit indefinitely, and LocalF15 for 24 hours. "Restore stable version" is something an administrator can do when protecting a page (WP:PREFER), not a justification for joining or continuing an edit war. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:29, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-27792-93 reported by User:Mvcg66b3r (Result: Blocked 24h)

Page: WXII-TV (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-27792-93 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:

Slow-motion edit warring, replacing dark PNG logo with SVG logo that's hard to see at the top. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 09:32, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Of course, while we do prefer SVG logos whenever possible because of their scalability, they need to be as good as versions in other formats. Daniel Case (talk) 18:27, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-35888-09 reported by User:AriuCH (Result: Blocked 1 week)

Page: Calgary (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-35888-09 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 21:01, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360192259 by AriuCH (talk) Again, if you want to add new and unreferenced edits, follow WP:BRD."
2. 20:06, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360186832 by Magnolia677 (talk) What are you not understanding? This was recently added. It is being reverted. If you wish to add it, use talk and follow WP:BRD"
3. Consecutive edits made from 19:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC) to 19:47, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 19:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360182512 by CodeTalker (talk) Please follow WP:BRD if you wish to add."
   2. 19:47, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Revert to original"
4. 19:19, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359964805 by Magnolia677 (talk) Please follow WP:BRD"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 20:50, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "General note: Personal attack directed at a specific editor on Calgary."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 20:06, 19 June 2026 (UTC) on Calgary "Undid revision 1360186832 by Magnolia677 (talk) What are you not understanding? This was recently added. It is being reverted. If you wish to add it, use talk and follow WP:BRD"

Comments:

personal attack — violation of WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. AriuCH (talk) 21:09, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:45, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

  @ToBeFree Thank you for your attention and handling. AriuCH (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-33664-65 reported by User:Plasticwonder (Result: Page protected)

Page: Kevin MacDonald (evolutionary psychologist) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-33664-65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:39, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ Again, this constitutes original research. If you want to cite from Cofnas (a race realist btw) or Kriegman, quote it and attribute."
2. Consecutive edits made from 18:33, 19 June 2026 (UTC) to 18:36, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 18:33, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Reception */ Reverted unexplained addition. This content is duplicated from another article. If you have an issue, please take it to the talk page."
   2. 18:34, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Reception */"
   3. 18:36, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Judaism and Jewish culture */ Again, this is cited a primary source and likely contains original research. If you have an issue, please take it to the talk page."
3. 18:22, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Reception */ Most of this is duplicated from the The Culture of Critique article. We should keep this page focused on MacDonald himself, and keep the topic of The Culture of Critique series in its own article."
4. Consecutive edits made from 18:13, 19 June 2026 (UTC) to 18:16, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 18:13, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ Primary sources and original research regarding the Cofnas citation; if we wish to use those as sources, we must quote and attribute.

Added a source clarifying MacDonald’s stance on the Protocol."

1. 1. 18:16, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Judaism and Jewish culture */ Primary source, original research."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:38, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Kevin MacDonald (evolutionary psychologist)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

This user is removing content. When reverting they direct others to the talk page despite not doing so themselves. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 18:52, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm unsure to which degree the use of the term "race realist" by ~2026-33664-65 in the edit summary of Special:Diff/1360176520 is a quote or racist by itself. The term seems to have been used there in a context against someone promoting, if the statement is correct, scientific racism.

It's beyond the edit warring itself and a matter for WP:ANI if I have misinterpreted this edit summary as non-racism. I'll close this report with the protection applied to the page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

User:NorthtotheFuture reported by User:Jfire (Result: Partially blocked indefinitely)

Page: Gregg Renkes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:42, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "Eliminated promotional material"
2. 00:09, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "revert"
3. 23:33, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Previous edit is inaccurate, limited in scope, and based on biased sources."
4. 01:56, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Revert for Accuracy"
5. 18:06, 18 June 2026 (UTC) "Career: Restore"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:12, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Gregg Renkes."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Partially blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:15, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-32106-07 reported by User:Jfire (Result: Page already protected)

Page: Inde Navarrette (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-32106-07 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 03:29, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "not confirmed"
2. 02:35, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "speculation"
3. 02:32, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "not confirmed"
4. 02:28, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "speculation"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 02:33, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Inde Navarrette."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:38, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "/* Bisexual */ new section"

Comments:

• Page protected already ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:44, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Kirkusmaximus85 reported by User:Untamed1910 (Result: Blocked 48 hours)

Page: Virgin Australia Regional Airlines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Kirkusmaximus85 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 22:08, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360504015 by Danners430 (talk) reverted to velocity per icao doc 8585/209 page 141 no listing for Virgin Australia Regional, airlines operates under virgin australia icao"
2. 21:49, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360503294 by Danners430 (talk)source was cited in the edit comments, there was no source provided when the pwrson changed it to rapid."
3. 21:45, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360501317 by Danners430 (talk) per ICAO 8585/209 page 141 virgin Australia regional airlines operates under virgin australia ICAO and IATA, rapid has never been used in its operating history."
4. 21:25, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360480246 by 10mmsocket (talk) ICAO DOC 8585/209 page 141, no listing for Virgin Australia Regional Airlines"
5. 07:09, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1359267822 by MilborneOne (talk) RAPID callsign is not used by VARA"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 23:17, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Virgin Australia Regional Airlines."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 23:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "/* User:Kirkusmaximus85 */ new section"

Comments:

Constant Edit Warring by User:Kirkusmaximus85 Untamed1910 (talk) 23:21, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

report is un justified, other members have been singling out my edits only and have not taken any action against other users edits that are un sourced, this is bullying and harrasment, all users should treat all uses to the same standards, if you are going to revert some ones edits on the basis of un sourced then revert all unsorted edits, instead of picking on one person. Kirkusmaximus85 (talk) 00:13, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

No, this is not bullying or harassment, I counted 5 reverts to Virgin Australia Regional Airlines and you are clearly in violation of WP:3RR which is indeed considered as Edit Warring. Untamed1910 (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked – for a period of 48 hours Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-35751-35 reported by User:Plasticwonder (Result: Already blocked 48 hours)

Page: FC UNA Strassen (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-35751-35 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:49, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360064115 by Plasticwonder (talk)"
2. Consecutive edits made from 00:44, 19 June 2026 (UTC) to 00:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 00:44, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "neither you can beat lower pro fact with 22' league article; i won, be c"
   2. 00:46, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ Typos

(I won, be coward and ask pages protection)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:47, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Message about your edit on FC UNA Strassen: vandalism (1) (WS)"
2. 00:50, 19 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on FC Swift Hesperange."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

edit warring via this TA and other associated TAs. Unlikely to stop. see this gem as well. Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 00:52, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

@Plasticwonder: See also their previous comments as previous TAs on Project Football, the Admin Noticeboard Incidents, Reliable sources, and their old TA talk page discussions.

This is not their first attempt at this, and this is happening on multiple pages multiple times - FC UNA Strassen FC Swift Hesperange, FC Etzella Ettelbruck, UN Käerjéng 97, US Hostert, FC Wiltz 71, FC Victoria Rosport, US Mondorf-les-Bains, FC Alisontia Steinsel, FC Schifflange 95, FC Differdange 03, SC Bettembourg, SC Bettembourg Féminine, Jeunesse Junglinster, and CS Grevenmacher Phil 07:45, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

this comment is interesting as well.Plasticwonder (Cat got your tongue?) 01:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Already blocked  for a period of 48 hours by Ad Orientem. Daniel Case (talk) 18:07, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

@Daniel Case / @Plasticwonder Unfortunately, they have returned as ~2026-35858-44 (talk · contribs) and are making the same edits, this time reverted by @Spike 'em Phil 07:39, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Already re-blocked. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:13, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

They are returning again and again, this time ~2026-36224-75 (talk · contribs). I believe that one was already blocked, but as I mentioned on the Admin noticeboard, their comments from older TAs in Project Football are a bit worrying Phil 06:25, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

And they are now posting personal information on other Wikipedia forums , so not only are they reverting edits with original research based on poor source materials, they are now starting to target me. Phil 06:53, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Juddhasumsher reported by User:AriuCH (Result: Blocked; page protected)

Page: India–Nepal relations (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 16:03, 22 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ Unnecessary information"
2. 15:55, 22 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ Edited out the unnecessary claim not recognized by Nepal"
3. 13:23, 22 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */ Edited the claim which isnot agreed from Nepali side"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:52, 22 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on India–Nepal relations."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 15:57, 22 June 2026 (UTC) on India–Nepal relations "Reverted edits by Juddhasumsher (talk) (HG) (3.4.14)"

Comments:

• Blocked ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:21, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:21, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Mohamd67 reported by User:Blue-Sonnet (Result: Blocked 1 week)

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

User being reported: Mohamd67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 02:01, 22 June 2026 (UTC) "followed the talk page and insert ref"
2. 23:34, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "corrected grammar and terms"
3. 23:03, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360512575 by Blue-Sonnet (talk) rv POV fascism whitewashing"
4. 09:04, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "npov ref"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:59, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "General note: Unconstructive editing on Croat Muslims."
2. 23:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Neo-fascism."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 23:26, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "/* NPOV edits */ new section"
2. 23:57, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "/* NPOV edits */ Add clarification"

Comments:

Edit warring across multiple pages including Neo-fascism, continuing to insert preferred edits without reaching a consensus. Talk page history will show accusations of lying and bad faith. Whilst I might not have been clear on the need to form a prior consensus on the Croat Muslims page, I felt that was made clear on the Neo Fascism page, which has been reverted by many editors & didn't feel the need to constantly repeat it.

• Reverts at Neo Fascism:
• Personal attacks: In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 07:31, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Here Blue-Sonnet proved that he made an unfair accusation against me, and here Blue-Sonnet clearly doesn't want to make any contribution, any useful comment, nothing. Just forcing something onto the Talk page, reversing the addition of a non-controversial and already known country section. I stopped editing and replied on the talk page, sorry I didn't know that. I'm waiting for answers in talk page. He purged an entire section and reliable sourced content about the already known (even in wikipedia) Croatian neo-fascism here. You can see the mass removal of sourced content here. My edit was previously approved in pending review by CycloneYoris here. . In the Croat Muslim article, I provided the source he requested here. --Mohamd67 (talk) 07:57, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

That edit was undone by a completely different editor . I was the second editor to revert you and a third has done it since. In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 08:35, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

So, I fixed PARAKANYAA claim and included sources that clearly discuss Croatian fascism and neo-fascism (since even the previous sources on Croatian fascism and neo-fascism "weren't enough" for him), and I removed irrelevant excerpts. And even then it came to nothing.--Mohamd67 (talk) 08:44, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, because we need to reach a consensus on the article Talk page - everyone needs to agree on what to do next. If you go ahead without checking the corrections are ok, we end up with a giant mess in the editing history and even more reversions & fixes. Please see Wikipedia:Consensus, especially Wikipedia:EDITCON and the following sections. In solidarity, Blue-Sonnet (I'm listening) 09:06, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Not necessarily everyone, consensus does not require unanimity. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:26, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello Mohamd67, you have two choices when the block expires: Start treating this community as one you joined and need to get accustomed to, or leave. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:29, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-35658-57 reported by User:HypnoBlader (Result: Page protected)

Page: Template:War on terror infobox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-35658-57 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 15:19, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */"
2. 14:08, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */"
3. Consecutive edits made from 13:32, 20 June 2026 (UTC) to 13:33, 20 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 13:32, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */"
   2. 13:33, 20 June 2026 (UTC) "/* */"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 18:33, 21 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Template:War on terror infobox."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by HypnoBlader (talk • contribs) 18:36, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

I am now counting seven reverts by the IP in less than 24 hours up until Revision as of 21:54, 21 June 2026 . Cinderella157 (talk) 22:48, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:20, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi ToBeFree, I would draw your attention to this TP edit made by Josephguy15 as at Revision as of 22:57, 21 June 2026 and the language used, particularly in the new section heading compared with the edit summaries by the IP. This looks like a DUCK to me but I am uncertain on how to deal with it apart from drawing it to your attention. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Irruptive Creditor reported by User:JDiala (Result: Both warned)

Page: Carl Schmitt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Irruptive Creditor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 07:32, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
2. 21:18, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
3. 23:06, 22 June 2026 (UTC)
4. 23:23, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 23:43, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Discussion had in Talk:Carl_Schmitt#Uncited_claims_by_JDiala, diffs where I warn him to not edit war are below

1. 02:23, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
2. 04:34, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
3. 23:50, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

In the last one, I point out his violation of 3RR and request a self-revert. He refuses. (This is in addition to the talk page warning in prior section).

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

03:13, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Comments:

User attempting to remove longstanding material from article lead without consensus. Discussion was had in Talk:Carl_Schmitt#Uncited_claims_by_JDiala after an initial series of mutual reverts. As the user insisted on keeping his version, during the course of the discussion as an act of good faith I let him maintain his version without reverting myself. There was a several day hiatus in which the user stopped responding in the course of the discussion (17 June to 21 June), at which I point I took it on myself to revert back to the longstanding version as consensus was not reached. Then again he began reverting, culminating in this 3RR violation on 22 June.

The user claims his actions are justified due to BLP, but of course BLP does not apply to this long-dead Nazi figure Carl Schmitt. The user insists the lack of citations in the lead is a VERIFIABILITY violation despite being explained that WP:LEADCITE indicates redundant citations already present in body do not need to be repeated in the lead. JDiala (talk) 03:44, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello JDiala, statements about Trumpism are arguably affected by WP:BLP because Donald Trump is a living person. I have no idea why Irruptive Creditor chose to use such confusing edit summaries that make them look as if they're completely out of their mind when correctly claiming this is a (potential) BLP problem. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:17, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Warned both (, ). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 06:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Wizeone2 reported by User:Seasider53 (Result: Blocked 24 hours, page extended-confirmed protected)

Page: Thierry Henry (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Wizeone2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Thierry Henry

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

Comments:

Edit-warring. Ignoring the consensus of at least four editors and has proved hard to bring to the discussion table because it "was not their priority". Seasider53 (talk) 14:05, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Seasider53, consensus obtained through editing only exists until it is disputed or reverted. Starting a discussion was apparently not your priority either, and none of your statements on the article's talk page address the content. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:14, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-36330-50 reported by User:SimpleObjects-9ei (Result: Page semi-protected)

Page: Aerial America (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: ~2026-36330-50 (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 16:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC) to 17:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 16:51, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   2. 16:53, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   3. 17:03, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   4. 17:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   5. 17:28, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   6. 17:46, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   7. 17:47, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 16:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC) to 16:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 16:23, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   2. 16:41, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
3. 16:16, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
4. 16:12, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""
5. 15:45, 23 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 16:29, 23 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Aerial America."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Repeatedly removing the word "(state)" in the episode titles "Georgia", "Washington" and "New York", resulting in disambiguation links (these are DABs because, for Georgia, there are two geographic places of the same name, for Washington it may refer to three things now, and for New York, two things now), even if piped was better. Talk:Aerial America shows no proof about what is going on.

Also, in the more recent 5PM edits, the Temporary Account replaced several links to a link to a TV database (and moreover forgot to replace the title parameter in all the refs), I'm not sure if this database (https://www.thetvdb.com/series/aerial-america/allseasons/official) is a reliable source, if the previous link was just dead or if I'm even in the correct place to report this TA for edit warring 6 reverts (I think). Even sent the page to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase and waiting for a response. I don't want to get involved any further into the edit warring so that's pretty much it for the message. – SimpleObjects-9ei 🏖️/☀️/🥵 (🌎 CentralAuth) 18:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page semi-protected. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:27, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Amitrao17 reported by User:Martinevans123 (Result: Partially blocked 1 month)

Page: Air India Flight 171 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Amitrao17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. here
2. here
3. here

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: and elsewhere on that Talk page

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

Comments:

Multiple reverts have been happening for "some time". The editor seems very sure that only he is right, in a number of areas, not just the summary in the infobox. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:00, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 1 month ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-36874-46 = User:~2026-36842-91 = User:~2026-36427-40 = User:~2026-36349-54 = User:~2026-36455-13 reported by User:Иованъ (Result: Page protected)

Page: Glagolitic script (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-36874-46 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: 1360892417

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. ...
2. 1360891524
3. 1361185125
4. 1361186178
5. 1361191941

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: 1360896150

Attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Talk:Glagolitic script#"and Cyrillic"

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: 1361193200

Comments: A single individual is likely behind multiple temporary accounts, as evidenced by identical edit summaries.

Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 08:14, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I only reverted 3 times the registered users. I did not edit warring, I explained how the source fails in WP:OR and WP:V. The source is controversial because it is nationalist partisan and makes revisionist and irredentist ([HAZU case) claims on Bosnian and/or Serbian Cyrillic works, most of them simply labelling as "Croatian", dishonestly ignoring and mistreating its details. It's controversial and should not be in the lede. I checked the source, and there is no page, quote or passage stating that. It's WP:RS and WP:OR problem. --~2026-36874-46 (talk) 08:22, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello there! You seem knowledgeable about Wikipedia policy. May I interest you in discussing the article's content on its talk page? Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 08:27, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

• Page protected ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:43, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-34139-18 reported by User:Grandmaster (Result: Required to create an account)

Page: Azerbaijan State Academic Opera and Ballet Theater (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-34139-18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

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

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

Comments:
This appears to be the same user hopping IPs and edit-warring across multiple articles, most of which are covered by WP:GS/AA. The IP has made no contributions to any talk page discussions either, despite my warning, and multiple warnings by other users. Grandmaster 08:29, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

• Blocked from editing without a registered account. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:47, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Ilikecountriesalot reported by User:AriuCH (Result: Sock blocked)

Page: Reformed Government of the Republic of China (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 14:13, 26 June 2026 (UTC) "Fix artielce"
2. 17:26, 25 June 2026 (UTC) "Of is a more accurate descriptor Undid revision 1361074269 by Materialscientist (talk)"
3. Consecutive edits made from 12:55, 25 June 2026 (UTC) to 13:10, 25 June 2026 (UTC)
   1. 12:55, 25 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   2. 12:56, 25 June 2026 (UTC) ""
   3. 13:10, 25 June 2026 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 17:39, 25 June 2026 (UTC) "Caution: Formatting, date, language, etc (Manual of style) on Reformed Government of the Republic of China."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Ilikecountriesalot blocked as a sock of Curiousperson2.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:16, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

@Ponyo Thank you for handling. AriuCH (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Calhetan77 reported by User:Speederzzz (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

Page: Madalena do Mar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Calhetan77 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 09:41, 26 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1361188284 by Speederzzz (talk)"
2. 03:08, 26 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1361146412 by Blue-Sonnet (talk)"
3. 09:17, 25 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1361049788 by Masterhatch (talk)"
4. 22:03, 24 June 2026 (UTC) "Undid revision 1360981254 by Gnomingstuff (talk)"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 13:02, 25 June 2026 (UTC) "Caution: Unconstructive editing on Madalena do Mar."
2. 07:02, 26 June 2026 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Madalena do Mar."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Edit warring with LLM generated material, Both at ANI and AIN.

ANI link

AIN link Speederzzz (Talk) (Stalk) 11:01, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:41, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Ordinâryüs_Üstâd reported by User:Jeppiz (Result: Blocked 3 days)

Page: Zara Larsson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Ordinâryüs_Üstâd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

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

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

Comments:

The user has been behaving in the same disruptive way across various articles. Nothing in their edit history suggests they are here to contribute. Jeppiz (talk) 09:10, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

I blocked the user. Let me know if further problems arise. Johnuniq (talk) 09:21, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Augmented Seventh reported by User:Wikifried Steak (Result: Will monitor)

Page: Common ostrich (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Augmented Seventh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: it was my talk page, where they admit my edit is not in error.

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

Comments:

• @Wikifried Steak: All you did is changing "Species of flightless bird" to "Species of flightless dinosaur", which the user you reported rightfully reverted. Did you create your account just to make the point that "dinosaurs are birds"? Coincidentally (?), we just had a user topic-banned for precisely the same behavior concerning the same topic (birds being dinosaurs), see . Please stop it, thanks. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:21, 27 June 2026 (UTC)
• Your behaviour is incredibly inappropriate and I am in shock that you would even link the discussions on your talk page here, because they frame you in a terrible light. Augmented Seventh was cordial towards you and you were unable to extend that same courtesy. The diffs provided do not show edit warring (at least not from Augmented!) aesurias (ping me in your reply, or I won't see it) (talk) 08:23, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  They edited their comments to go from hostile to cordial, leaving it to appear I'm angrily replying to a welcome message - . That was dishonest of them. Wikifried Steak (talk) 08:33, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

  Greetings fellow editor,

  I noticed a change in established classification, and reverted back to content available in any current life science textbook. Recent discoveries regarding lineage have not changed the aves classification.

  Sorry for your misunderstanding, Augmented Seventh (talk) 08:49, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

I didn't say dinosaurs are birds anywhere. Triceratops was not a bird. Don't strawman what I said. Wikifried Steak (talk) 08:26, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

I am closing this and will watch Common ostrich. @Wikifried Steak: You have 17 edits and an ability to report other editors. You will have to declare your previous account or behave more like a new user. Johnuniq (talk) 08:36, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

• CU Note I've blocked the reporting party as a sock. Girth Summit _(blether) 18:00, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

User:~2026-36260-07 reported by User:ElKevbo (Result: Page protected)

Page: The New School (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ~2026-36260-07 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

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

Comments:
This editor has recently changed to ~2026-36918-96 but they've continued edit warring without participating in the Talk page discussion or responding on their Talk page. I added their most recent revert to the list above. ElKevbo (talk) 21:05, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Page protected The edits come from a variety of IPs, so protecting the page is a better option. Daniel Case (talk) 04:43, 28 June 2026 (UTC)