Three revert rule violation onTemplate:ScientologySeries (edit | [[Talk:Template:ScientologySeries|talk]] |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Truthisgreater (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 04:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments: This is probably not the only article he's violated 3RR on; he's also been editingR2-45 andChiropractic very insistently. --Antaeus Feldspar04:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
8h as a first offenceWilliam M. Connolley07:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onEarly Christianity (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Giovanni33 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 15:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments: On-going revert warring in conjunction withUser:Professor33.
Comments fromAnnH♫: I added the diffs with versions he reverted to, to make it easier to see that they were indeed reverts. Giovanni is a chronic edit warrior, who was given a huge amount of indulgence when he arrived, and was not reported for his first five or six violations (including one where he reverted eleven times in less than nineteen hours). When he met with opposition, he was supported by the sudden appearance ofBelindaGong (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·nuke contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log), who reverted constantly to his version, violated 3RR, massively, and followed him around to vote for what he wanted. They pretended not to know each other, until a usercheck showed they were editing from the same IP, after which he said she was his wife. He was then joined byFreethinker99 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·nuke contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log), who appeared while Giovanni33 was blocked for puppetry, said he had read the discussion and agreed with Giovanni — and then reverted to his version. When Giovanni was asked if he was connected with any of the new users who were supporting him, he denied it, forgetting that he was logged on as Freethinker99.[1] He then tried to get rid of the evidence[2] but we had already seen it. He is supported byKecik (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·nuke contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log) who has 40 reverts to Giovanni (across a wide range of articles) out of a total of 45 article edits, plus talk page support and votes. AlsoMikaM (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·nuke contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log), who seems also to be here just for the purpose of giving extra reverts to Giovanni. There have been other cases, too. The latest to arrive isProfessor33 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log), who joined recently, reverts to Giovanni, has a similar linguistic style, and edits Mondays to Fridays, at times when Giovanni, according to his time zone, would be at work and would have a different IP. I am happy to e-mail the linguistic evidence to any administrator who requests it, but do not wish to make it public, as it would alert Giovanni.AnnH♫16:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
.svg)
(result: no action)Three revert rule violation onRussian architecture (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).AndriyK (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 18:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Has managed to reinsert the tag into a settled dispute a total of40 times over the past few months. Previously banned by arbcom for offenses such as these. Knows well of 3rr. Suggest minimum of a week.--Kuban Cossack18:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onEdmonton Oilers (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Aksarben (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
AlsoUser:68.147.225.8 looks like him not logged in. Recommend block there too.
Time report made: 19:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onList_of_Jewish_American_journalists (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Nokilli (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 20:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
Three revert rule violation onWhitney Houston (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).159.49.254.2 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 23:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments: User insists on reinserting a pro-Houston POV into the article, and has ignored requests on his/her talk page to discuss the issue atTalk:Whitney Houston. Recently (s)he has also been making uncited and POV contributions (and reinserting them without explanation whenever they are removed) to the articleMariah Carey.Extraordinary Machine23:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, 8h first offence
Three revert rule violation onHistory_of_Korea (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Appleby (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 04:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
2006-06-30 06:00:59 Appleby (Talk | contribs | block) (oops, self-rv, for 3RR)William M. Connolley07:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Kotepho16:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Technically you appear to be correct. I've left a note on the TB page to try to see if this can be fixed. However, I don't think this merits a shutdown of the bot, which is otherwise very usefulWilliam M. Connolley19:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onRon Dellums (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Justforasecond (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
More bad-faith edits from JFAS. Note the very careful attempt to game the system (16:14 versus 16:17), presumably to avoid breaking the letter of the law while breaking the spirit of the law. Note from his block log he's been previously blocked for exactly the same thing on exactly the same article. I'd block, but I'm involved. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆16:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onDemographic history of Kosovo (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Ferick (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log): ((TSO1D (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log))
Time report made: 19:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments: This user has continuously removed the Serbian topics template from the article, in my view not because it is not relevant there but because of ideological reasons.TSO1D19:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Well yes he has, but so (obviously) have you. 12h eachWilliam M. Connolley21:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onMichael Savage (commentator) (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).67.160.229.147 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 23:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Comments: The anonymous user continues to revert to his version which includes obvious Original Research and POV. After being warned of 3RR violation on his talk page, he disrupts by reverting exactly 3 times in 24 hours every day. At least 3 people have offered to discuss and/or help with making his edits NPOV but he won't even discuss or leave an edit summary.--WilliamThweatt23:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
8hWilliam M. Connolley10:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onLough_Neagh (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).62.77.181.11 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 02:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Continual politically-motivated reversions made by IP address (allegedy from IP address allocated to Irish government), in defiance of editorial consensus and wikipedia article about geographical termBritish Isles.
No obvious warning; 3hWilliam M. Connolley10:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onTingle RPG (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Hyrule (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 08:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: User's reverts are to re-insert a link to their personal fansite, which has a story which isunverifiable and has nocitations orsources. Several users have had to revert the 3RR violator's edits, and the user has ignored the discussion to try to resolve the problem in a civil manner. This user has a history of self-advertising and replacing more appropriate, official and credible citations with their own fan site pages for the purpose of increasing their site traffic to bring in more revenue from their advertising. The user also sometimes reverts under an IP address to try to bypass the 3RR.
2006-07-01 06:27:23 Madchester blocked "Hyrule (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (violation of 3RR)William M. Connolley10:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onControversy_over_race_of_Ancient_Egyptians (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).130.94.134.166 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
(All times UTC)
07:09, 1 July 2006]
Anonymous user keeps reverting back in images that are irrelevant to particular sections. I believe I'm at two reverts, but I did make two other edits that were meant to be completing my intended revert (i.e. the second one) that didn't exactly have the effect I meant. One ended up being after another user edited (which would technically count as 2 reverts instead of one, I think, but I didn't know an edit had occured since then), while the other edit that was supposed to be part of my revert was intended to redress what I thought was another oversight, but it turned out that the Anon reverted again (which, had I known, I would not have reverted). Excuse me for these. I have commented on his user talk and two comments have now been exchanged after a long time, but he simply accuses me of POV for the removal of the images instead of actually addressing my concerns. —ዮም(Yom) |contribs •Talk •E09:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Seems fair enough. can have 8h for persistenceWilliam M. Connolley11:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
He has reinserted the images less than 24 hours since his last revert. I have again removed the inappropriate ones (those in areas not involving art) and left alone all images, regardless of appearance, in appropriate sections, putting me at my 3rd revert since around 1:00 UTC July 1st. The Anon is at his 7th or 8th now. Can someone please put a longer ban on him (i.e. one long enough so that he won't come back and break 3RR with his first revert) and/or semi-protect the page so that he will discuss the issue (he hasn't done so except for accusing me of POV earlier, but still hasn't addressed my response). —ዮም(Yom) |contribs •Talk •E20:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onHamas (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Sultanali (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 10:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:And there are many more reverts by this user. There is also the presence of anotherUser:Kevin Breitenstein who has revert warred with the above-mentioned user. Please see thehistory of the article to confirm. Thanks. --Nearly Headless Nick11:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Oops, forgot to say: 24hWilliam M. Connolley12:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onKhalistan (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).AnwarA (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log) andQiuip (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Reverts byUser:AnwarA—
Reverts byUser:Qiuip—
Time report made: 11:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Both of the users have been editwarring on the same topic and have more than 5 reverts each. --Nearly Headless Nick11:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
12h eachWilliam M. Connolley12:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onAmerican Civil War (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Rjensen (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 17:32, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:User frequently wars on this and other pages. After a discussion about POV, one of the editors involved posted NPOV tags on section and article, which drew me to discussion on a page I normally watch and edit. Discussion in talk page didn't deter user from violation and drew personal attack. User reverted NPOV tags 4 times in 24 hours. Asking for some warning/punitive action.BusterD17:32, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
24hWilliam M. Connolley21:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onIraq_War (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Zer0faults (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 19:25, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Apparently this user with several other users are edit warring over this article.
User Nescio is attempting to remove a fact from the Iraq War article, because he does not agree with it. He feels Bush had no right to say it and so feels its ok to remove it. I will layout the situation by dif
I contend that I was stopping the removal of sourced facts, and the manipulation of Nescio, which seemed to be derived from a mistake of what it was reffering to. --zero faults|sockpuppets|19:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Um, well, "I am correct" has never been a defence in 3RR, and it isn't now: 24h I'm afraidWilliam M. Connolley21:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onSternberg_peer_review_controversy (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).DLH (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 20:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
24 hoursJarandawat's sup21:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onBob_Cornuke (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).SYITS (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Comment: waswarned; he was blocked for 3RR violation on the same article in April.
Blocked for 24 hoursJarandawat's sup01:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onKorea_Republic_national_football_team (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).
This user can't even debate things, must just go and keep everything like he only wants. Looking at his talk page, I can see it is often the case he can't deal with things in a calm manner.
Three revert rule violation onList of religions (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).71.34.108.155 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 03:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: User was warned on his talk page, and still made a fourth revert.
Three revert rule violation onList_of_Jewish_American_journalists (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Nokilli (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 03:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
24 hoursJarandawat's sup03:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onOperation Summer Rains (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).El C (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
This a revert of this edit[51] (see casualty figure) by a different editor.El C insist her number (7) is correct and not the other editor (8) - she restored her number
Time report made: 04:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: The problem seems to be a sense of "ownership" user indicated "she made 1/2 of the edit on this article" and she keeps referying to some text as "my"Zeq04:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Somehow you seem to have neglected the trivial fact that youre banned from the article. A quick look indicates that invalidates rv 7; rv 3 obviously doesn't count as self-rv'd; haven't looked through the restWilliam M. Connolley08:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Revert 7 was done before i was banned. The ban was to justify the revert so this does not invalidates it. (i.e. the ban was done by El C when she was having a dispute with me) This is an admin abuse not a justification for revert.So there are 6 reverts (as I indicated 3 indeed does not count, although continued pattern of reverts after the self revert shows it was inteiotional) - even without #7 there are 5 reverts and even if one more is removedthere are still (at least) 4 reverts (possibly 5, 6) -clear violation. 08:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
FromWP:3RR :"consecutive edits by the same editor are considered to be one; thus if an editor makes three separate successive edits, each of which reverts a different section, but with no intervening edits by other editors, this is counted as one revert." - Zeq was advised by this last week when he made a false complaint against me that was dismissed. This complaint is therefore in bad faith. It's also bad faith to count edits that were self-reverted.Homey17:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Homey, good point that I missed so I have merged 4 and 5 together since you are correct are part of the same edit block. If more edits seem to you part of the same block please point it out. I indicated the self revert (as a revert that was self reverted) but since the reverts continued it should be mentioned (but not counted). There are still 5 reverts that should be counted as part of the same 24 hours windowZeq17:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
This a revert of this edit[53] (see casualty figure) by a different editor. El C insist her number (7) is correct and not the other editor (8) —Administrative revert (rollback). I placed an administrative hidden comment not to change casualty figures without a source, because it was becoming too unreliable, and the user changed the figures without a source immediately after. I rollback & then explained to the anon user this on his/her talk page, they then provided the source, which I subsequently added (aside: the anon ended up being wrong in the end by one casualty, which someone else corrected in the following edit).El_C03:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
And thegood book says: "Blocks are a preventative rather than punitive measure used to prevent damage to Wikipedia by dealing with vandalism and enforcing bans and other Wikipedia policies." -FrancisTyers·09:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Rather than block this or that editor for 3RR, it would be better to protect the article for a couple of days, and let the engaged editors come to an agreement on how to resolve the disputebefore unprotecting.≈ jossi ≈t •@15:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onTemplate:History of Greece (edit | [[Talk:Template:History of Greece|talk]] |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Greier (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 16:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
Three revert rule violation onDutch Gold (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Owwmykneecap (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 17:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Classic example ofWikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Warned at[55].Demiurge17:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Matyldalondyn as well as his (probable) IP addressUser:87.227.28.6 have violated the 3RR rule on theLukas Podolski page.
Edits forMatyldalondyn
Edits for87.227.28.6
Please do something about this as well as the sock puppetry being employed by this user to input trivia into an article that has been reverted by 3 or 4 users as dubious and unsourced.Time Report Made 22:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)Batman200522:09, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
After toying with sprotect I've blocked both for 12hWilliam M. Connolley22:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onMajin Buu (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Wiki-star (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 03:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Wiki-star is at it again. We've tried discussing things with him, we've taken a vote on the edits he has proposed, and he refuses to accept the results. He has declared that he is going to keep re-adding things because talking was "a collosal" failure. Meaning that it didn't go his way. He is a problem user, and will NOT be reforming any time soon.Daishokaioshin03:29, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
It could be because the other person or party were too stubborn, it could be that they refused or cut you off. Sound familiar to anyone?KojiDude04:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Diffs byUser:Kevin Breitenstein since its an edit conflict on this report:
These are actual diffs I was going to provide for this report. The user violating 3RR has severalblocks already, apparently.Kevin_b_er04:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I blocked Wiki-star for one week as a repeat offender, KojiDude also broke 3rr on the page but I gave only a 3 hour block as first offence. Please stop edit warning. ThanksJarandawat's sup04:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onHomophobia (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Exploding_Boy (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 04:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:User:Exploding Boy apparently believes he owns the article. the talk page is full of people questioning his POV edits. he's been relying on the fact that none try to stand up to him. i tried to insert one word: "pejoratively" to describe the use of the wordhomophobia to apply to opponents of pro-gay political activism. just as opposition to the state of Israel does not make one an anti-semite, opposition to ACT-UP or similar does not make one a homophobe.r b-j04:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, 12hWilliam M. Connolley07:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onHistory of Microsoft Windows (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Ryulong (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log) and71.117.250.160 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 07:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: At first the IP editor, claiming to work at a MS campus, tried to correct mis-information, was reverted, then just removed all speculation entirely because this isn't crystal ball stuff and it isn't sourced to anything reliable. Both are long past 3RR.
Three revert rule violation onUser_talk:Cberlet (edit | [[Talk:User_talk:Cberlet|talk]] |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Lord Loxley (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 14:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Lord Loxley is well aware of 3RR, and has been warned before. See:[65].
Please don't edit war on peoples talk pages. See the rules. 3hWilliam M. Connolley15:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onIraq_Conflict (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).193.254.155.48 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 15:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:User has switched IP's toUser:62.225.37.69 after being notified of 3rr report.[72] [[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Iraq_Conflict&diff=61878722&oldid=61871978User keeps attempting to add statements in violation of WP:OR. When asked for source he provides ones that do not support the Vietnam claim, only the second half. --zero faults|sockpuppets|15:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
8h; but leave the content-type stuff out of itWilliam M. Connolley18:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onAndy Stephenson (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Crockspot (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 19:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation and possible sockpuppetry onHomophobia (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Rbj (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
At issue here is that Rbj's preferred version has not been created by consensus. Even adding a single word (in this case "pejorative") ruins the neutrality of the article.Exploding Boy20:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, itdoes. Or more precisely, it changes it to "pejoratively." it is clearly enough a restoration of Rbj's preferred version. Additionally, the sudden appearance of a new account whose one and only edit is a restoration of another user's preferred version of an article is usually a reliable indication of sockpuppetry.Exploding Boy22:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onSouliotes (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Deucalionite (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 21:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
Can have 48 h for record, and[73]William M. Connolley21:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onOccidental College (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Mad_Macs (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 06:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Simple reverts to a wholesale removal of material, four in 1 hour 21 minutes. Appears to be a single-purpose account created to delete this section.Timothy Usher06:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onIndian nationalism (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Freedom_skies (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 06:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
Three revert rule violation onUnited States Navy SEALs (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Looper5920 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 07:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Even reverted POV-statement tag and did not reply at talk.Añoranza07:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onMedia coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Nokilli (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 08:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:See the article's talk page. In addition to edit warring, this user engages in OR and racist conspiracy theories. Despite being warned, this is his 3rd 3RR violation in less than a week. ←Humus sapiensну?08:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onEvolution (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).84.146.244.78 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 10:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Revert war onEvolution, insertion of tons of random[citation needed] templates in nonsensical places. Given vandalism warnings, and persisted. --Ultimus10:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Funny how citing wikipedia policy is branded as nonsensical!— Precedingunsigned comment added by84.146.244.78 (talk •contribs)
Three revert rule violation onGlobal Warming (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Ed_Addis (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 14:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Usual global warming conflict. A newish user also violated the 3rr rule, but I have warned him an I don't think it will be repeated. Unfortunately Ed continued edit warring before the other user could have a chance to revert themselves. I've explained the situation on the users talk page but they appear to pay no head and show no signs of stopping.Jefffire14:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onHighgate Vampire (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).User:81.78.80.181 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log),User:217.134.253.79 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)User:217.134.250.166 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log) (apparently the same person, who has been vandalizing the article for several days using many different IP addresses).
(undoing previous edit byJYolkowski)
(undoing previous edits byUser:Simpsonworthing andUser:85.187.44.131)
(undoing previous edit byUser:85.187.44.131)
(undoing previous edit byUser:85.187.44.131.
Time report made: 14:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Revert war onHighgate Vampire. The IP is deleting information from a scholarly folkloristic source and instead inserting information from a self-proclaimed vampire hunter trying to prove that vampires exist. --Anonymous4414:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onRoger Needham (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).TsingTao (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 15:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Chronic vandalism from this user with identical edits under multiple anonymous IPs that we could not report for 3RR. After the second time we semiprotected the article, the user finally got a login and started vandalizing the article again.--Rosicrucian15:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onUnited States Navy SEALs (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Añoranza (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 15:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:This users reverts and changes are also against the concensus on the talk page. The new POV tags are to circumvent the discussion they started in hopes of having operation names removed. When it went against them, this became the new tactic. Its blatant disruption to add a POV tag at the end of every operation name mentioned. --zero faults|sockpuppets|15:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Probably you should have reported Looper5920 too for technical 3RR. But in this case I think the POV-st amounts to disruption. For which A gets 24hWilliam M. Connolley17:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onPersecution of Jehovah's Witnesses (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).192.117.103.90 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 17:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
8hWilliam M. Connolley17:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onKalymnos (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views) and other Greek island articles.Mywayyy (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log) alias88.218.49.114 (talk ·contribs):
Time report made: 17:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: Previous repeat offender, doing obstinate mass reverts over a single issue (Turkish placenames in Greek geographical articles) across multiple pages. Ran up to 96 hours worth of blocks for repeated block evasion last week. Identity with IP 88.218.*.* proven previously and self-confirmed (see edit summary[82]). Now again 5 reverts in less than 30 hours onKalymnos and four within the same time onSamothrace, as well as a few more elsewhere, continuing edit war right where he left it off when he was blocked. Refuses to seek more constructive dispute resolution methods, has repeatedly announced he will "revert forever" if he doesn't get his way. Has done little else but revert-warring over this issue during the last several weeks.Fut.Perf.☼17:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
I suppose it had better go up to a week. Will block the IP for less; but can be extended if re-usedWilliam M. Connolley17:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onSt Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).ParalelUni (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 17:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments
Appears to be newbie biting/edit warring. Has tried discussing to anon ip on talk page but doesn't believe anon ips are allowed to contribute or discuss without an account.--Andeh17:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Warned PU and L. Why didn't you?William M. Connolley18:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onUniversity of California Riverside (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Teknosoul02 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 18:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:Teknosoul02 has repeatedly made accusatory remarks in TALK, and has violated a recent arbitrator direction that all parties Assume Good Faith. In this instance, he has attempted to abuse the revert feature in order to remove a sentence he does not like, even though he has not provided adequate justification. I and another editor have tried to explain to him why his reasons are invalid, but he continue to ignore them and REVERT. Thanks.
Please provide diffs not versions. ThanksWilliam M. Connolley18:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, 3h as a first offenceWilliam M. Connolley19:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onAsma bint Marwan (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Karl_Meier (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 18:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
The user made the last revert despite my warning after the user's 3rd revert[88]. Furthermore, the user removed my warning from talk page[89]. This user also has a history of edit warring[90].
Perhaps, but edit 3 was more than 24 hours after edit 1, so it is not a 3RR violation --Avi18:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
3RR violation onInternational Academic Friends of Israel (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views) byBhouston (talk ·contribs)
Reported bySlimVirgin(talk)19:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comment
User was told he had violated 3RR and was offered the opportunity to revert himself,[91][92] but declined. To clarify the reverts:
Comment
Comment Re: point #3, please seehttp://www.dwt.com/practc/teo_group/publications/Foreign_Charities.htm in that registration with the IRS under 503(c)3 does notipso facto imply the organization is American. --Avi21:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
3RR violation onGeorge Washington (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views) byGbdill (talk ·contribs)Repeated delettion of 2 paragraphs of sourced material
At least 3 since being warned[108] --JimWae20:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
An impressive tally. 24hWilliam M. Connolley21:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onImage:Kuzma.jpg.Luka Jačov (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 22:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
12 hours eachJarandawat's sup00:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onImage:Kuzma.jpg.TodorBozhinov (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 22:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments:
12 hours eachJarandawat's sup00:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Three revert rule violation onÎle-de-France (région) (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).Hardouin (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 23:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments - minor offense this time, but user in question is extremely antisocial, refuses to dialogue or listen to fact or reason, instigates edit wars and is a repeat offender.
Three revert rule violation onBritish Isles (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views).TharkunColl (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log):
Time report made: 23:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Comments: - User dismisses a days editing to the page as "nationalist" POV, and blanks/reverts back to his most recent version. This is not the first time.
Re Tharkuncoll's edits: his edit history on a number of topics shows that he has anissue with Irish people editing articles and with any mention of Ireland. He even takes offence when it is mentioned that Ireland's biggest lake, Lough Neagh, is . . . um . . . in Ireland!!! lol Apparently that can't be said. Irish topics can only be mentioned in so far as they are relevant to theBritish Isles so Lough Neagh's size is only important by British Isles standards!!! And any mention on the British Isles page that many Irish people do not use that term (and some are offended by it) is blanked with anti-Irish abuse in the edit summaries. Quite frankly, the termHibernophobe comes to mind. His edit warring and blanking of the article above is just part of his standard behaviour.FearÉIREANN
\(caint)02:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
![[109]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fw%2findex.php%3ftitle%3dImage%253AKuzma.jpg%26amp%3bdiff%3d62012875%26amp%3boldid%3d61993624){kind=link}
![[110]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fw%2findex.php%3ftitle%3dImage%253AKuzma.jpg%26amp%3bdiff%3d62016097%26amp%3boldid%3d62014725){kind=link}
![[111]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fw%2findex.php%3ftitle%3dImage%253AKuzma.jpg%26amp%3bdiff%3d62038747%26amp%3boldid%3d62016318){kind=link}
![[112]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fw%2findex.php%3ftitle%3dImage%253AKuzma.jpg%26amp%3bdiff%3d62056484%26amp%3boldid%3d62055102){kind=link}
![[113]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fw%2findex.php%3ftitle%3dImage%253AKuzma.jpg%26amp%3bdiff%3d62069429%26amp%3boldid%3d62062081){kind=link}
![[114]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=https%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fw%2findex.php%3ftitle%3dImage%253AKuzma.jpg%26amp%3bdiff%3d62078726%26amp%3boldid%3d62073813){kind=link}