User talk:2600:4040:4771:7100:F477:6FD1:1578:A99D

October 2023
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. estar8806 (talk) ★ 18:33, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023
Your recent editing history at Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that 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. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.  City o f  Silver  18:33, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism warning
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Mike Johnson (Louisiana politician), you may be blocked from editing. KlayCax (talk) 18:37, 25 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Reverting long-term, consensus wording from the lead is not constructive. The:
 * Fox News
 * The Wall Street Journal
 * New York Times
 * Washington Post
 * And others have also stated that his opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion are notable parts of his political career. They've said similar about his attempts to dispute the results of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
 * I have no doubt that you're doing this in good faith. But you should check out Wikipedia guidelines before further removing the sourced text. KlayCax (talk) 18:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)