Page: Akan language (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Bono dialect (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Bono people (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Twi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Bosomba Amosah (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [1]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Multiple comments on Bosomba's talk page, such as [2], now deleted; plus discussions at Talk:Twi etc

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

Comments:

@Austronesier: and I have reverted Bosomba multiple times for the same edits on the same articles, for failing to respect his own sources, explaining that we need to follow those sources, and we've gotten thanks from other editors for doing so. Bosomba has conceded a few points, but it's like pulling teeth. He has provided a couple of nice sources in Dolphyne, and I now use those sources almost exclusively for my edits, and because of this I have abandoned some of my earlier positions, which were based on less reliable sources. Yet Bosomba only follows Dolphyne where she agrees with him, and ignores her where she doesn't. For example, he insists that Bono is a literary dialect of Akan even though Dolphyne says it isn't even written, and AFAICT he has provided no sources that the situation has changed since she wrote [which was decades ago; the situation could easily have changed]. He also insists that Bono is a single dialect; Dolphyne says that the 'Bono dialect' is actually a cluster of dialects, with as much internal diversity as other clusters of Akan dialects that have individual identities, that is, are considered to be separate dialects. Bosomba's argument is that since Dolphyne calls it the 'Bono dialect' before going on to explain that it's actually a dialect cluster, 'dialect' takes precedence and we need to follow that. I don't know if that's obstinacy or incompetence, but it's a refusal to follow his own sources. [There are other inaccuracies that he repeatedly restores with his reverts, but I don't know which are intentional.] The other major contention is that Twi is named afteer a Bono king named Twi. Bosomba has provided two sources. One does not say what he says it does, and he adamantly refuses to provide a quotation from it that would support his position. [In case we both missed where it supports him.] The other source he does quote from, but neither of us have access to it, and given Bosomba's apparent incompetence, we don't trust that he's quoting it accurately -- especially since he insists on keeping the first source despite it failing verification. There are other issues, such as the definition/scope of the name 'Twi', where he will only accept one definition, but I haven't had the time to delve into the sources for that.

— kwami (talk) 17:17, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Declined - this report should be taken to WP:ANI. Bbb23 (talk) 17:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  Why? This is the edit-warring page for ANI, but I'll move it to the main page — kwami (talk) 18:13, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  Well, you didn't post any diffs, for one things. And when you then post a wall o' text like that, you're telling us the issue is complex enough to be better reviewed at AN/I (Compare this to all the other reports here). Daniel Case (talk) 20:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Page: 1872 United States presidential election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
1876 United States presidential election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
1852 United States presidential election (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) User being reported: Ecotto29200 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Comments:

• Ecotto29200 has been making edits to the infobox of multiple presidential election pages. Multiple users have reverted their edits as shown in 1, 2, 3, 4, and others. They have also made inappropriate edit summaries calling other users dumb and idiots.

User notified here Jon698 (talk) 16:42, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

I have blocked Ecotto29200 for harassment. PhilKnight (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

@Jamessharison has broken WP:3RR, despite a warning on their talk page and a request to take it to talk via edit summary.

Reverts 1, 2, and 3.

The user's only contributions since their account was created yesterday have been to revert the same text. This IP user and this 9-day-old account also made the same edits in the last week, so I'm not sure if these are the same user, but it seems an unusual hill to die on for three completely unrelated people. Lewisguile (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

User notified here. Lewisguile (talk) 16:30, 1 March 2025 (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. Bbb23 (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Oops. They've only made three edits so far anyway. The others were an IP account and another new account. Withdrawn. Lewisguile (talk) 16:58, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Sima Kotecha (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Melody Concerto (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [4]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

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

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

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

• Talk page queries: [8], [9], [10], [11]
• The user deleted them all without response: [12], [13], [14], [15]

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

Comments:

A few days ago, I happened to read Sima Kotecha, and found so many grammar errors that the article was almost unreadable. I fixed them all. Searching in the article's history, they had all been introduced by one now-banned editor in a likely act of vandalism.

For no apparent reason, the editor I am reporting has repeatedly restored all the errors I fixed to the article. They have given no explanation for their actions in edit summaries, and have simply deleted my posts when I asked them why. They have not been content to simply revert my edits; they have also sought to get the article protected with a shockingly dishonest report ([17]), and unfortunately an administrator obliged. So, the article is once again in a shocking and unreadable state. I suggest that significant action needs to be taken against the user I am reporting for their totally pointless edit warring, deliberate harm to the article's quality, and bad faith abuse of Wikipedia tools and processes. 2A00:23C8:D30D:7C00:64ED:3C90:5AB4:BE56 (talk) 13:16, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• No violation. The article was also semi-protected. Bbb23 (talk) 14:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The article is not semi-protected; it's pending changes protected. As I described above, that is thanks to a shockingly dishonest report by this user, whose edit warring you are apparently condoning. 2A00:23C8:D30D:7C00:64ED:3C90:5AB4:BE56 (talk) 14:55, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

The IP is right about the protection level. The IP is also now blocked (/64 range) as WP:BKFIP.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:08, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Social Democratic Party of Switzerland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: ZlatanSweden10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [18]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [19]
2. [20]
3. [21]
4. [22]

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: [23]

Comments: Wants to remove an ideology which is verified by reliable sources. Serial edit warring despite being reverted by different users multiple times (see history). Stockenboi (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• 3RR is 4 reverts in 24 hours, this is 4 reverts over months. No violation. PhilKnight (talk) 20:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: National Socialist Network (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC) "removed "carrying offensive weapons" - claim not supported by police statements and/or multiple sources"
2. 10:54, 1 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278249433 by GraziePrego (talk) - Source is innacurate as demonstrated in Talk"
3. 03:06, 1 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278211052 by TarnishedPath (talk) - source cited is factually incorrect"
4. 02:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC) "the article stating that they were charged with carrying offensive weapons is incorrect. Replaced with accurate article."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 11:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on National Socialist Network."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 12:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC) "/* Removing "carrying offensive weapons" */ Reply"

Comments:

The editor is a WP:SPA who is clearly here to engage in WP:ADVOCACY. A review of their contribution history indicates that all of their edits, away from their talk, are to do with National Socialist Network, it's leader Thomas Sewell (neo-Nazi) or a section of text that they were trying to insert into Telegram (software) about the National Socialist Network. TarnishedPath^talk 00:34, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Partially blocked – for a period of 2 weeks ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:09, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Illit (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Helpinghandsinhands (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
5. Diff
6. Diff

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: Diff

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

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

Comments:
Persistent addition of WP:NOTPROMO, non-WP:NPOV, non-WP:MOS, non-WP:RS materials for 5 times straight despite multiple editors reverted such materials. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:38, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely As NOTHERE. Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Alexander Kozhevnikov (ice hockey) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 206.198.189.134 (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 08:11, 2 March 2025 (UTC) to 08:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
   1. 08:11, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "no one else is using the talk page, nor will anyone give me a reason why they are defending having this crap on the site ... how many times have i explained mtself"
   2. 08:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "there is nothing on the talk page, who do i talk to, myself"
2. 08:07, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "why why why why why and why ... please, someone, give me one good reason this crap should be on wikipedia, and i'm ok, just one"
3. 07:50, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "please, give me one good reason why this utter filth, to quote directly from the article, should be on wikipedia ... it is lies, anti LGBTQ, prejudiced against several nationalities, and if you bother to check, the links are fake"
4. 07:35, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "what the heck, can someone give me a good reason why my edit is wrong, it massively improves the article by cleaning it up and removing OFFENSIVE material ... did you read it?"
5. 06:47, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "dude, i explained myself, the content is propaganda and lies ... did you read it? it is offensive and totally untrue, it is a russian using wikipedia to criticize and whine about rightful sanctions"
6. 06:39, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "what the heck ... conflict of interest? i am the person himself? no way, i'm just a guy in canada who knows unadulterated propaganda bullsh*t when i see it .. the stuff about russian hockey players are real men, and the french iihf president is not? what utter crap, all because russia was rightly kicked out of international hockey because of their horrific invasion of another innocent country"
7. Consecutive edits made from 05:42, 2 March 2025 (UTC) to 05:58, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
   1. 05:42, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "what the heck that VIEWS section was complete propaganda, with him protesting the correct and right suspension of russia from international hockey because of the invasion of ukraine, who let this CRAP be posted?"
   2. 05:44, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""
   3. 05:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""
   4. 05:57, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""
   5. 05:58, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 08:09, 2 March 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on Alexander Kozhevnikov (ice hockey)."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

• Blocked – for a period of 24 hours Note this IP's /24 range has a three year pblock from 1985 Ice Hockey World Championships, so this is not their first rodeo. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:30, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Palestinian Arabic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: MM3987 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [24]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [25]
2. [26]
3. [27]
4. [28]
5. [29]
6. [30]
7. [31]
8. [32]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [33]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [34]

Comments:
Clear case of WP:NOTHERE.[35] Mellk (talk) 11:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 72 hours JensonSL (SilverLocust) 12:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: 1919 British race riots (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Historymam (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: This user is simultaneously edit-warring on at least three articles, inclusing the one indicated in this report. --Technopat (talk) 12:24, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Technopat, it is your responsibility to include diffs in all reports here. Rather than marking this as malformed, I blocked because it was obvious. Bbb23 (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Chloë Annett (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

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

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 13:57, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278608159 by Opolito (talk)"
2. 13:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278605763 by Opolito (talk)"

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

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Reverted also as User:49.156.94.160. [37] and [38] Codename AD ^talk 14:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of one week. Bbb23 (talk) 14:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Assassin's Creed II (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 186.209.204.159 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 11:11, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Then do the same as all other Assassin's Creed"
2. 10:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "In which country does Assassin's Creed II take place? Oh yeah... YOU ARROGANT"
3. 10:37, 3 March 2025 (UTC) ""
4. 10:22, 3 March 2025 (UTC) ""
5. 17:17, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""
6. 17:11, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 11:09, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Assassin's Creed II."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

IP made personal attacks and continued edit warring after warning. StephenMacky1 (talk) 12:14, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Blocked – 48 hours. A pattern of reverting categories on articles that relate to Assassin's Creed. This may be the same user as 186.209.202.0 (talk · contribs). EdJohnston (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Pope Benedict XVI (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Alainprost2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 04:52, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278556535 by CycloneYoris (talk)"
2. 04:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278551253 by Darth Stabro (talk)"
3. 01:35, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Review"
4. 23:43, 2 March 2025 (UTC) ""

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

Warned after third revert on his talk page, and afterwards did a fourth revert ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 15:55, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 48 hours. Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Page: Republican Party (United States) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: JohnAdams1800 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 23:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "What are non-consensual edits? I will take this to arbitration if necessary. Undid revision 1278682162 by GlowstoneUnknown (talk)"
2. 23:36, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "Undid revision 1278677581 by GlowstoneUnknown (talk)"
3. 14:37, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "/* Europe, Russia and Ukraine */ This isn't a trivial matter or violating NPOV--Trump is siding with Putin's illegal invasion over Ukraine."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 02:26, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "/* Discussion: Can we call the Republican Party's foreign policy as Russophilia and opposed to Ukraine? */ no"
2. 02:27, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "/* Discussion: Can we call the Republican Party's foreign policy as Russophilia and opposed to Ukraine? */ Reply"
3. 23:47, 3 March 2025 (UTC) "/* Discussion: Can we call the Republican Party's foreign policy as Russophilia and opposed to Ukraine? */ cmt"
4. 00:13, 4 March 2025 (UTC) "/* Discussion: Can we call the Republican Party's foreign policy as Russophilia and opposed to Ukraine? */ Reply"

Comments:

Also please see the first, and second edits that the user made attempting to add the term "russophilia" to the article and change "is divided on" to "is opposed to" Ukraine aid. This user themselves started a talk page thread asking if the changes could be made (Talk:Republican Party (United States) § Discussion: Can we call the Republican Party's foreign policy as Russophilia and opposed to Ukraine?) but continues to make the change.

There are multiple users who have responded to that talk page section with reservations or outright opposition to the changes being proposed, including (courtesy pings) User:The Four Deuces, User:GlowstoneUnknown, User:GoodDay, User:Simonm223, User:Springee, and myself. The level at which there has been opposition ranges from insufficient sourcing, to generally "problematic", to outright opposition. By my count, there is only one user that supports the desired edits without reservation (courtesy ping), User:HiLo48, and one or two others who have expressed they may be okay with the edits but are undecided at the time. The user reported has now claimed that it's a "hill [they're] willing to (figuratively) die on", which to me is a clear indication that they intend to continue to edit war if necessary.

Though by my count they are only at 2 reverts in the last 24 hours (assuming you count the middle diff as a re-addition), they are at a total of 5 attempts in the past few days to try and change the article to say what they want even over significant opposition/reservation on the talk page. I'm not sure if this is better suited for WP:AE as it is a contentious topic (WP:CTOP/AP), but I believe some action needs taken. This user appears to understand that edit warring is prohibited and is a long time editor, who has been previously made aware of this topic being a contentious topic - which make me think a warning for this instance would not be helpful. If it is thought AE is better, please advise and I will file there instead. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 00:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I am not opposed to inclusion if sufficient sources can be found but, as things stand, no such sources have been found. And I looked a little bit myself. Simonm223 (talk) 00:33, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Berchanhimez that JohnAdams' actions are inappropriate, their decision to open a discussion page thread and, when faced with opposition to their edits (at least in the form they were being implemented), to reinstate their changes non-consensually, isn't productive and could be described as disruptive. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:38, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Please read my response below. It appears clear to me that the Republican Party is supporting Vladimir Putin's war of aggression that violated international law, and are espousing outright false narratives about the war.

Link: False or misleading statements by Donald Trump#Blame for start of Russo-Ukrainian War JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

This isn't the forum for a Wikpedia content dispute to be discussed, this is about your conduct as an editor and the actions you took in editing Republican Party (United States). – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:42, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm the user in question. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is a contentious, extended-confirmation protected topic. This issue is extremely serious and it appears objectively clear to me that Trump and the Republican Party are engaged in historical negationism and espousing Russian disinformation about the invasion. This isn't about political views on a contentious issue like say abortion, but about Trump and Republicans espousing outright lies about what occurred.

• Trump accused Zelenskyy being a "dicator" who "should have never let the invasion happen."
• As I write this, it appears Trump has at least temporarily cut off all aid to Ukraine. It's clear to me that Trump is betraying Ukraine for Russia. US pauses military aid to Ukraine, says White House (Reuters) JohnAdams1800 (talk) 00:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't know what to do. I can't even get JohnAdams1800 to sign their posts correctly. Is that an example of WP:IDHT?, it's frustrating. GoodDay (talk) 01:11, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Pblocked for two weeks from editing Republican Party (United States).--Bbb23 (talk) 01:20, 4 March 2025 (UTC)