Requests for comment/Systemic coordinated disruption on Bulgarian Wikipedia
This is a subpage; for more information, see the Requests for comments page.
TL;DR:
- Users Мико and Алиса Селезньова coordinate their efforts during edit wars to avoid hitting 3RR. They often disregard the consensus or the process for reaching one.
- Frequent lame edit wars in defiance of WP:5.
- We're a small wiki with 20 active users and around 4 active admins who by policy can't determine who is right or act as arbiters.
- Local mediation has been unable to resolve the issue.
- I'm requesting intervention to address this disruptive behaviour by two experienced users, one of whom is an admin.
It is to be noted that I myself have had my fair share of conflicts with the users discussed below. I'm reporting a pattern that affects the Bulgarian Wikipedia as a whole.
For over a decade, users Мико and Алиса Селезньова have systematically coordinated their reverts to disrupt the standard process for reaching a consensus, demonstrating tag-teaming and battleground behaviour. Typical sequence: Мико makes a change that someone else disagrees with and reverts. Мико and Алиса Селезньова take turns reverting until opponent hits the 3RR limit.
| Article: Куалком/Qualcomm | |||
| Diff | Date and time | User | Comment |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513739 | 14:37, 18 May 2018 | Zhoxy | User moves the page "Куалком" to "Qualcomm" |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513747 | 14:43, 18 May 2018 | Мико | User moves the page back to "Куалком" |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513749 | 14:43, 18 May 2018 | Мико | Copyediting, fixing grammar |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513755 | 14:54, 18 May 2018 | Zhoxy | User reverts Мико's edits |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513756 | 14:55, 18 May 2018 | Zhoxy | User moves the page back to "Qualcomm" |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513761 | 15:02, 18 May 2018 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts Zhoxy's edits |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513762 | 15:02, 18 May 2018 | Алиса Селезньова | User moves the page back to "Куалком" |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513764 | 15:03, 18 May 2018 | Zhoxy | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513765 | 15:04, 18 May 2018 | Zhoxy | User moves the page back to "Qualcomm" |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513769 | 15:05, 18 May 2018 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/8513770 | 15:05, 18 May 2018 | Алиса Селезньова | User moves the page back to "Куалком" |
| Article: Патрик Суейзи | |||
| Diff | Date and time | User | Comment |
| bg:Special:Diff/11096538 | 12:02, 28 August 2021 | Пища Хуфнагел | User makes an edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11104414 | 13:48, 4 September 2021 | Алиса Селезньова | User doesn't like the contribution and reverts the edit |
| ... | |||
| bg:Special:Diff/11113665 | 19:00, 13 September 2021 | Пища Хуфнагел | 9 days later, user makes another edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11113691 | 19:41, 13 September 2021 | Мико | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11113731 | 20:05, 13 September 2021 | Пища Хуфнагел | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11113945 | 07:08, 14 September 2021 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts the edit |
| Article: Гергана Данданова | |||
| Diff | Date and time | User | Comment |
| bg:Special:PermaLink/12846960 | 11:15, 11 March 2026 | ~2026-15362-51 | Article creation |
| bg:Special:Diff/12847386 | 14:08, 11 March 2026 | Мико | There was a long debate on whether the section should be named "Източници" (References) or "Бележки" (Notes) and an abuse filter was added. Мико often changes the name of the section in articles he edits in spite of the retain policy, this is an example of such a change |
| ... | |||
| bg:Special:Diff/12847660 | 18:13, 11 March 2026 | Carbonaro. | Reverting to the original name |
| bg:Special:Diff/12859927 | 14:17, 23 March 2026 | Мико | Reverting the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12860241 | 18:15, 23 March 2026 | Carbonaro. | Reverting the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12860288 | 19:14, 23 March 2026 | Алиса Селезньова | Reverting the edit, stating that "the article has been updated and improved" |
| bg:Special:Diff/12860311 | 19:46, 23 March 2026 | Carbonaro. | Reverting the edit, stating that there are two controversial changes – "Notes" and "References" and date formats |
| bg:Special:Diff/12860463 | 21:27, 23 March 2026 | Алиса Селезньова | Reverting the edit, neglecting the retain policy |
As for the most recent dispute, there has never been a consensus on whether years in Bulgarian should be written as "2024 г." (short) or "2024 година" (long) – user Алиса Селезньова has stated this themself.
However, one of them, usually Мико, often changes the style in articles, along with adding other content. When someone reverts to the original style, Алиса Селезньова joins and starts reverting to Мико's style, hence bypassing the 3RR rule, forcing the objecting party to quit.
Examples:
| Article: Аманда Хокинг | |||
| Diff | Date and time | User | Comment |
| bg:Special:Diff/11084230 | 09:29, 16 August 2021 | Мико | User changes the format to long even though short was used initially |
| bg:Special:Diff/11084324 | 10:35, 16 August 2021 | Rumensz | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11084328 | 10:35, 16 August 2021 | Мико | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11084342 | 10:43, 16 August 2021 | Rumensz | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11084347 | 10:45, 16 August 2021 | Мико | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11084886 | 19:40, 16 August 2021 | Молли | User reverts Мико's edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11085106 | 06:40, 17 August 2021 | Мико | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11085238 | 08:37, 17 August 2021 | Алиса Селезньова | User accidentally reverts Мико's edit, see next revision |
| bg:Special:Diff/11085247 | 08:43, 17 August 2021 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts to Мико's revision |
| bg:Special:Diff/11086190 | 10:14, 18 August 2021 | Rumensz | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/11086237 | 11:21, 18 August 2021 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts the edit |
| Article: Асен Панчев | |||
| Diff | Date and time | User | Comment |
| bg:Special:PermaLink/12509648 | 11:33, 20 February 2025 | Станислав Николаев | Revision as of 20 February 2025 |
| bg:Special:Diff/12847566 | 16:34, 11 March 2026 | Мико | User changes the date format without consensus |
| bg:Special:Diff/12847658 | 18:09, 11 March 2026 | Carbonaro. | User reverts to original format |
| bg:Special:Diff/12849012 | 07:07, 12 March 2026 | Мико | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12849018 | 07:12, 12 March 2026 | Carbonaro. | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12849019 | 07:13, 12 March 2026 | Мико | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12849115 | 10:32, 12 March 2026 | ~2026-15705-11 | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12852489 | 21:02, 15 March 2026 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts to Мико's revision |
| bg:Special:Diff/12852667 | 03:59, 16 March 2026 | Carbonaro. | User reverts the edit |
| bg:Special:Diff/12852870 | 09:41, 16 March 2026 | Алиса Селезньова | User reverts the edit |
We're a small community with around 20 active contributors. It is important to mention that Алиса Селезньова is also a sysop, although I haven't witnessed any misuse of their authority. Even after the most heated discussions the pattern continues. See for example Качество и справедливост, Качество и справедливост 2.0, Качество и справедливост 3.0. The discussion threads span hundreds of messages, but mediation has failed repeatedly.
The latest controversy is that citations, not only in our project, but in fact, in many wiki projects, should have their date written out in ISO format – for easier machine readability, webarchive retrieval, etc. It is also suggested in our documentation.
date: The entire date of publication, preferably in ISO 8601 format
archive-date: Date when the source was archived (archive-url must also be filled in), in ISO 8601 format
Алиса Селезньова started purposely writing the date out in long format only for Мико to start warring after someone converts it to ISO format.
| Article: Стражица | |||
| Diff | Date and time | User | Comment |
| bg:Special:Diff/13011237 | 10:32, 1 September 2026 | Алиса Селезньова | User is citing a source with dates written out in full: "1 септември 2026 година" |
| bg:Special:Diff/13012140 | 09:59, 2 September 2026 | Carbonaro. | Converting the dates to ISO format, stating in the edit summary that this is a standard practice outlined in the documentation |
| bg:Special:Diff/13012149 | 10:04, 2 September 2026 | Мико | Reverting the edit |
They have been warned in the past.
- Please do not engage in edit wars. You are an admin and there are no technical means to limit such behaviour of yours. [...] Please do not edit controversial articles until consensus is reached. – by Петър Петров at 09:11, 23 March 2018
- There was a consensus and in this consensus only Алиса Селезньова did not participate. – by Uroboros at 10:14, 23 March 2018
- Мико, why are you doing this? Whether the word is fully written or abbreviated does not matter at all. Both options are correct. It was written by Rumensz and he has the right to choose the way of writing. Justice requires retaining the style as it was chosen by the person who wrote the article. There is no point in escalating. – by Молли at 06:59, 17 August 2021
Other users have also expressed their frustration.
- What will this lead to? Incessant edit wars and counting like-minded people and counter-advocates. In addition, it will make the situation in the project several times more hostile than it is now. And it will probably make a lot of decent editors leave. I recommend that the Wikipedians think about this. – by Ted Masters at 17:32, 22 February 2026
- "Ha, I got you, didn't I? I'll teach you a lesson!", right?! And how many times do you revert my edits? And you take turns with Мико so that they don't become 4? I gave you enough reasons for my edits, you do not respect them! Is this collegial? – by Zhoxy at 15:19, 18 May 2018
- First you will have to issue a warning to Мико and Алиса Селезньова who have been conducting a coordinated attack on me for days by reverting edits in order to reach your intervention. [...] this is their attitude expressed in actions in three articles, absolutely confrontational. How long will that last? It looks like revanchism to me. – by Rumensz at 15:11, 16 August 2021
- There isn't a single instance where I've argued with Мико and you haven't rushed to take his side before even understanding the situation (it doesn't matter as long as Мико has support). – by Joyradost at 18:51, 1 July 2012
A fuller log of similar episodes exists and can be provided on request. Refusing to participate in discussions is a strategy often used. In the village pump (Качество и справедливост and the others mentioned above), when their behaviour was being discussed, you can count how many times Мико has participated. Every time a discussion is started so that a consensus can be reached, Мико remains silent. We've exhausted typical community mechanisms. Newcomers watch how experienced contributors' confrontational behaviour is being tolerated.
On some occasions, Мико will resort to calling his opponent a troll, even though his opponent is willing to have a civil conversation.
The latest Admin Noticeboard request concluded without further action.
To be honest, throughout the years, they have had their fair share of support too. For example:
- relationships within communities can be complex, [...] working in such a community requires the ability and willingness to adapt, [...] it is not always easy [...]. Indeed. I have seen many times people get frustrated. I have been frustrated. But I have never seen these features being circumvented successfully. Successful communities were those that, on the contrary, adapted to these peculiarities, [...] as for the behaviour of the Wikipedians – this is really a topic in which, in my opinion, it is better not to delve in, except when there are serious violations. – by Iliev as a means of de-escalation, shortened to save space, full version
- Randona.bg requesting that I be blocked "for purposefully inciting conflict", providing links to the talk pages Беседа:Спас Висулчев and Беседа:Асен Панчев where I've tried to start a discussion with the Wikipedians in question.
We couldn't handle this gracefully so a broader input is necessary. Thank you for your time. Carbonaro. (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2026 (UTC)
- Might raising the issue to U4C/Cases? It could be resolved faster. Ahri Boy (talk) 09:27, 5 September 2026 (UTC)
Disruption it is - we have ONE editor that insist on abbreviations in the text and several others that think this impedes perception. Мико (talk) 09:40, 5 September 2026 (UTC)
- We are long past arguing about the content itself, it is now a matter of conduct. The main problem is not whether abbreviations should be used, but the systematic breach of consensus-building norms and the coordinated evasion of 3RR.
- The pattern documented above – where two users alternately revert to restore their preferred version – demonstrates a persistent effort to impose a unilateral style through force rather than discussion.
- Мико's claim that "only one" editor insists on abbreviations while "several others" oppose is not supported by any diffs. The evidence, in fact, points in the opposite direction:
- I support "г.", not "год.". I would only like to point out, since I have recently edited a lot of biographical articles, that in some of them neither long nor abbreviated form was used, so I don't know how, in this case, it will be determined which style the article initially used. – by PirinP at 11:43, 28 July 2026
- I am also in favour of the abbreviation, as not only does it save space, which is not of such importance – it isn't running out, nor is it paid for – but the text is also, above all, easier to read. – by Like the windows at 12:06, 28 July 2026
- In my opinion, there is no room for debate, since the abbreviation "г." for "година" is an established form in our grammar. – by Божин Божинов at 16:55, 23 August 2026
- While multiple users explicitly express their preference for abbreviated forms, the users in question normally don't engage in these discussions. The disruption arises not from a legitimate disagreement over content, but from an ongoing refusal to respect opposing views and to engage substantively in reaching consensus. Carbonaro. (talk) 11:33, 22 September 2026 (UTC)
- And somehow you always fail to show multiple reverts of your edits by multiple other editors. The disruption is only coming from your refusal to accept that editors disagree with you and show it while you had to be blocked for not respecting Wikipedia basic policy systematically. This is basically your complaint - "they must be friends since so many people revert my edits and I can't have it my way".--Алиса Селезньова (talk) 17:58, 22 September 2026 (UTC)