Jump to content

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
    Shortcuts
    Update this page

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

    You must notify any user you have reported.

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

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

    Additional notes
    • When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first.
    • The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from.
    • Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection.
    • Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed.
    Definition of edit warring
    Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring.
    Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR)
    An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions.

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

    Click here to create a new report

    User:Themiromusic reported by User:162 etc. (Result: Declined – malformed report)

    [edit]

    Page: Fernando Garibay (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Themiromusic (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. [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:

    @Bbb23: Apologies for the malformed request. A look at the article history will confirm what I'm referring to. 162 etc. (talk) 16:39, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The warring goes back over a month it seems. With no talk page discussion. It looks more like a candidate for full protection or maybe a 1RR restriction. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:15, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Necatorina reported by User:Zefr (Result: partially blocked 24h)

    [edit]

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

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 01:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "I think I have explained myself several times. Stop edit warring."
    2. 00:28, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "It is regarded as a toxin by American govt organisations, not a neutral point of view. Adding American-only sources do not improve the article. Undid revision 1247361764 by Zefr (talk)"
    3. Consecutive edits made from 23:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC) to 23:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
      1. 23:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247284481 by 65.206.92.82 (talk)"
      2. 23:14, 23 September 2024 (UTC) "/* Health and safety */There are many chemicals used in dry cleaning. Just because some dry cleaners got cancer, doesn't mean that tetrachloroethylene caused it. They are also normal people, so they do smoke and drink alcohol. Both are known to cause various types of cancer. Animal researches aren't reliable for humans (remember : chocolate is toxic for dogs but not for humans)."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 01:20, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Introducing fringe theories on Tetrachloroethylene."
    2. 01:23, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Tetrachloroethylene."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 00:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "/* Industry Bias */ Reply"

    Comments:

    User has the adverse opinion that respected scientific government sources are not valid sources, and has warred far beyond the 24-hour 3RR. User is further ignoring mainstream science. User has not attempted to build consensus on the talk page, and instead has taken combative, uncivil positions that opposing editors using reputable sources have a wrong interpretation of the affirmed toxicity of the substance discussed in the article. Zefr (talk) 01:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Government organisations cannot be reliable for scientific matters. It is not "uncivil" to remove biased text with unreliable sources. Necatorina (talk) 02:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Blocked – for a period of 24 hours from editing only the tetrachloroethylene article. The rest of Wikipedia is still availabe for Necatorina to edit. I will add: If you are going to argue against established Wikipedia guidelines such as WP:MEDORG, then you should do so on the guideline talk page, not by edit-warring or making statements on talk pages and edit summaries that fly in the face of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:01, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:JerrySlimefeld reported by User:MrOllie (Result: Blocked two weeks)

    [edit]

    Page: Nicholas Alahverdian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 18:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Talk Page discussion of this edit has already occurred. If you would like to contribute, go to the talk page. Continued Vandalism will result in a ban from editing."
    2. 18:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "If you would like to discuss the potential for putting a picture of the former Vice President in the article, please go to the talk page. Wikipedia is about collaboration so don't be afraid to speak up."
    3. 16:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Please go to the talk page if you would like to discuss the addition of a picture of Mike Pence to this article."
    4. 16:04, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Removed vandalism by user Just Step Sideways. Please post on the talk page why you think a picture of Mike Pence is appropriate for this article (it is not)."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. 18:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Nicholas Alahverdian."

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 18:36, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "/* Image of Alaverdian with Mike Pence */ new section"

    Comments:

    Reverting back to this version. MrOllie (talk) 18:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Lazered 99 reported by User:WikiDan61 (Result: Blocked indefinitely)

    [edit]

    Page: Minato Namikaze (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Lazered 99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: original redirect page (redirect to List of Naruto characters).

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. First edits by edit warrer
    2. revert by I dream of horses
    3. revert to preferred version by Lazered
    4. revert to redirect by me
    5. revert to preferred version by Lazered
    6. second revert by me
    7. third revert to preferred version by Lazered
    8. third revert to redirect by me (see note below)
    9. final revert by Lazered



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [1] (not technically a uw-3RR, but plain text with the same gist.

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [2] (note on user's talk page rather than article talk page, explaining why the edit was inappropriate (mostly for WP:N and MOS:INUNIVERSE problems).

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [3]

    Comments:

    Note: I did technically revert this user's edits 3 times, but the third time was to revert what I perceived as a simple page blanking (here), but the user had restored their content before my revert, resulting in an edit conflict and somewhat confusing page history. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Sketchbuild reported by User:MrOllie (Result: 1 week)

    [edit]

    Page: Water ionizer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 21:31, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "same as before."
    2. 21:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Removed opinion and opinion sources. Removed citation unrelated to subject. Removed statements that are elaborated upon in further sections."
    3. 20:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Rephrased statements to relay the conclusions of relevant research more accurately."
    4. 16:46, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Published research on the effects of consuming alkaline water is not fringe/minority. The effect of consuming alkaline water is related to machines that produce alkaline water."
    5. 16:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision. Unrelated citation to statement. Secondary citation states further inquiry needed."

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning: diff

    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. 21:16, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "/* Pseudoscience */ new section"
    2. Consecutive edits made from 18:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC) to 21:24, 24 September 2024 (UTC) on User talk:MrOllie

    Comments:

    New user, edit warring to remove text pointing out that alkaline water use is pseudoscientific. Has been made aware of contentious topics restrictions on this area and kept edit warring. MrOllie (talk) 21:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:2003:D3:FF39:6400::/56 reported by User:Graham87 (Result: Page semi-protected for 2 days)

    [edit]

    Page: Frankie Valli (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: 2003:D3:FF39:6400::/56 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial))}}

    Previous version reverted to: [4]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [5]
    2. [6]
    3. [7]
    4. [8]



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: n/a because it's an IPV6 range, but they clearly know about 3RR

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [9]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: n/a, because impossible (see above)

    Comments: I'm an admin but am obviously too involved to take administrative action. I probably haven't been a saint here either but after my attempt to start discussion which I noted here, they responded with this edit summary that makes no sense to me. Time zone issues also complicate this revert war. Yes, it's a /56 and not a /64 IPV6 range because of the way the ISP works in this case (link in German). Graham87 (talk) 01:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    In light of this all, I'm inclined to semi-protect the page for 2 days and allow for the status quo to be restored pending further discussion on the talk page. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CottonDuggan reported by User:R0paire-wiki (Result: Indefinitely blocked)

    [edit]

    Page: 1912 United States presidential election in Tennessee (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 03:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "For the last time. Don’t ever undo this edit again with the inaccurate map."
    2. 03:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Stop edit warring please"
    3. 03:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Stop reverting back to the inaccurate map. This is a better map with a better file name."
    4. 03:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "These are the accurate shapes. Don’t ever undo this edit again please."
    5. 03:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "These shapes are accurate."
    6. 02:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Leave the original map alone and stop edit warring"
    7. 02:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "The original map needs to be used. The shapes are accurate."
    8. 02:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Stop edit warring and leave the original map alone. We’ve started using these shapes for these files since 2023."
    9. 02:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "The original map needs to be here. Don’t ever undo this edit again please. You’re the one doing the edit warring."
    10. 02:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "I told you to don’t ever undo this edit again and you won’t listen and won’t stop edit warring."
    11. 02:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Don’t ever undo this edit again. The old maps need to be used."
    12. 02:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Leave the old map alone and stop edit warring"
    13. 02:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Leave the old file alone and stop edit warring. These are the accurate shapes."
    14. 02:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Use the old map file to overwrite instead of making a new image file"
    15. 02:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Use the old map."
    16. 20:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC) "The old map has the accurate shapes"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    Both this user and GatewayPolitics are both edit warring on the article, going beyond the WP:3RR. R0paire-wiki (talk) 03:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I’ve been trying to explain to GatewayPolitics that the old map needs to be used and he uploaded a redundant file of the same map with different shapes of the counties and the shapes on the old map have been used for election maps for counties since December 2022. CottonDuggan (talk) 03:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    if you go to this user's talk section, you can see that I've been trying to explain to them why my map is the better version. If you guys agree with what I told him, could you lock the page from continuing edit Wars because it's going to continue GatewayPolitics (talk) 03:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:GatewayPolitics reported by User:R0paire-wiki (Result: Blocked 24 hours)

    [edit]

    Page: 1912 United States presidential election in Tennessee (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. 03:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "I don't think you understand what checking your talk page means"
    2. 03:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Check your talk page."
    3. 03:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247617987 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    4. 03:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247617774 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    5. 03:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247617608 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    6. 03:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "COUNTY LINES are inaccurate."
    7. 02:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247616790 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    8. 02:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247616634 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    9. 02:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247616204 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    10. 02:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247615890 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    11. 02:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "YOU started warring. stop replacing the accurate map with the inaccurate one."
    12. 02:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247615141 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    13. 02:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247615017 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    14. 02:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247614543 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    15. 02:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247613996 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    16. 02:27, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Undid revision 1247610736 by CottonDuggan (talk)"
    17. 01:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC) "Nope. county lines have changed. https://digital.newberry.org/ahcb/map/map.html#TN"

    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:


    Comments:

    Both this user and CottonDuggan are both edit warring on the article, going beyond the WP:3RR. R0paire-wiki (talk) 03:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    @R0paire-wiki I do apologize that I have been in a heated edit war. I've been trying to explain to the user what I've been doing and they are not making any sense GatewayPolitics (talk) 03:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Crashed greek reported by User:PadFoot2008 (Result: Declined)

    [edit]

    Page: Maratha Resurrection (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Crashed greek (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. [10]
    2. [11]
    3. [12]
    4. [13]

    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [14]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [15]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [16]

    Comments:

    • Not within 24 hours, but certainly an attempt to game the system, as the fourth revert was made just outside the 24-hour period. PadFoot (talk)
    This is backdoor attempt by the User:PadFoot2008 to bypass the WP:AFD process. He has no right to delete an article by redirecting. I have undone his deletion, I have not undone any edit to his text as such. I would not have reverted if it was any article text editing by him. Crashed greek (talk) 12:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That doesn't give you any right to violate 3RR at your own will. The article lacks any notability, or RS confirming the existence of such a period, and is a clear case of a WP:OR by an editor, but I retained it as a redirect to the main article (Maratha Confederacy), as many articles had links to it. PadFoot (talk) 12:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support WP:BOOMERANG it appears User:PadFoot2008 is attempting to backdoor delete. The article should probably go to AfD though, fwiw. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I have not broken 3RR nor do I intend to break 3RR, nor do I have an intention of editwarring. I know reporters don't have any 'immunity', but I know what 3RR is, and do not intend to break it or engage in editwarring, look at the page history, I've not reverted anymore since. On the other hand, Crashed greek has indeed violated 3RR and has been warned for it too. Also, @Kcmastrpc, could you please tell what is backdoor deleting? I have never heard of that term before except in this case. If there is an issue, I've no problem doing to an AfD. PadFoot (talk) 14:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Editors involved in an edit war don't necessarily need to cross the red line of 3RR to be considered subjects of edit warring sanctions. With regards to backdoor, see WP:NOBLANK and WP:PRESERVE. Since this isn't a BLP, it's hard for me to believe it was imperative to edit war on this article over a redirect. I suspect this article wouldn't survive WP:AFD, but just blanking the page over WP:OR sidesteps processes Wikipedia has in place to find consensus for verification issues (see WP:FAIL). Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Sorry @Kcmastrpc, I wasn't aware of those. I have opened an AfD now, I would appreciate your participation. PadFoot (talk) 14:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Declined The article is currently being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maratha Resurrection, and should remain as a standalone article during that discussion. @PadFoot2008: If you make a WP:BLAR that is then contested, discuss it on the article's talk page or another appropriate venue (the proposed target's talk page, for example) rather than edit warring. Creating this comment a few minutes before you created this report, but well after all of the reverts were made by both of you, does not come across as an attempt at discussion. Aoidh (talk) 19:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also to be clear, @PadFoot2008: please note that Wikipedia:Edit warring states that The three-revert rule is a convenient limit for occasions when an edit war is happening fairly quickly; it is not a definition of "edit warring", and it is absolutely possible to engage in edit warring without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so. The only reason you weren't blocked for this is because the article is now being discussed at AfD, so I don't expect that reverts will continue at this point. - Aoidh (talk) 19:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:Xslyq reported by User:Symphony Regalia (Result: )

    [edit]

    Page: Assassin's Creed Shadows (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
    User being reported: Xslyq (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to: [17]

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. Diff 1
    2. Diff 2
    3. Diff 3
    4. Diff 4
    5. Diff 5



    Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Warning by another editor [18]

    Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [19]

    Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [20]

    Comments:

    User registered in 2017, and then made their first edit one week ago to strong-arm poorly sourced nationalist POVs/WP:FRINGE in the Assassin's Creed Shadows article, using a website that denies the Nanking Massacre.

    User was warned by both another editor[21] and myself to stop edit warring and wait for discussion before forcing changes given that said changes were opposed by multiple editors on talk[22] [23][24]. User then misrepresented discussion as closed, started a RfC with selective notification (failing to notify the editor who told him to stop editing warring), and then immediately continued to revert to force their change without waiting for the RfC that concerns the change. Symphony Regalia (talk) 17:35, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    First of all, I did not violate 3RR.I have been actively trying to resolve the dispute.
    The editor referred to by Symphony Regalia was not directly involved in the discussion of the article, but was only involved because of previous disputes with IP users. A compromise consensus had indeed been reached before Symphony Regalia itself revised it without discussion.
    I also strongly disagree with the accusation that was poorly sourced, which can be found here. I'm simply reverting to Symphony Regalia's behavior of removing content at the time of the ongoing RfC.Xslyq (talk) 19:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: User did violate 3RR (Revert diffs 2, 3, 4, 5 take place between 04:02 24 September 2024 and 03:41, 25 September 2024). Symphony Regalia (talk) 19:36, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    During the ongoing RfC, the version of Symphony Regalia should be considered disruptive editing.Therefore, I think did not violate 3RR.Xslyq (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    User:CrashD2025 reported by User:Dont trap anna (Result: Declined)

    [edit]

    Page: Psyche (mythology) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

    User being reported: CrashD2025 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

    Previous version reverted to:

    Diffs of the user's reverts:

    1. [25] Original edit and my reversion directing User:CrashD2025 to read the style guide after confirming that the article was originally written in BCE/CE format. This can be seen here [26] proving that User:CrashD2025's comment "restored universal gregorian designations" is not a restoration of an original format but a new format that they have decided is 'correct'.
    2. [27] another back and forth with User:CrashD2025. Their edit explanation, "removing nascent patois unknown to the ancients to which this article points" is nonsense considering that BC and AD were not used in the 2nd century.
    3. 3RR violation (I acknowledge the violation is both mine and theirs.)



    Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

    1. See above


    Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

    1. [28]

    Comments:

    I am unsure how to resolve this issue when User:CrashD2025 does not have a talk page. Please advise. This lead me to violating the 3RR rule, for which I apologize. I wasn't sure how to proceed when I could not contact the user and was hoping that they would soon give up. Please advise on any discrepancies or errors in this report as it is my first! Thank you. Dont trap anna (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Dont trap anna: If a user does not have a talk page, you would simply write a comment and publish the edit the same you would as if you were creating a new section on a page, this creates the page. I've left them a talk page comment. While you were both edit warring, it should be noted that WP:3RR is {[tq|more than three reverts on a single page}}. I would suggest writing an explanation on the talk page explaining why you have been reverting the edit, and invite the editor to participate in that discussion. - Aoidh (talk) 19:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      @Aoidh: Thank you so much for your advice. I am relieved to learn that I had not yet broken WP:3RR but chagrined to have edit warred. I will certainly edit the section on the talk page to further explain why I have been reverting their edits. Thank you for also commenting on their talk page. Do I need to do anything else? What should I do if they ignore your comments and the discussion on Talk:Psyche? Do I modify this report or create a new one? Dont trap anna (talk) 20:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Declined The editor is a new editor that was not properly warned on their talk page so I will not block them at this point. @CrashD2025: if edit warring continues without a WP:CONSENSUS to change the MOS:ERA, you may be blocked to prevent further disruption to the article. Please discuss the issue on the article's talk page. - Aoidh (talk) 19:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring&oldid=1247751109"