User talk:2603:300A:D0F:4400:D8B:458B:3ADC:F1E4

February 2021
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ana Navarro, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  Acroterion   (talk)   18:12, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The article itself shows that Navarros 1) fund raises for Democrats; 2) votes for Democrats; and 3) opposes Republican candidates. Review article please for sourcing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:300A:D0F:4400:D8B:458B:3ADC:F1E4 (talk • contribs)
 * As did many anti-trump Republicans. Please cite a reliable source that says she's a democrat, not merely an anti-trump Republican. Bennv3771 (talk) 22:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The article itself shows that Navarro opposes Republican candidates, fund-raises for Democrats and votes for Democrats. You are not a Republican if you oppose Republicans the way she does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:300A:D0F:4400:D8B:458B:3ADC:F1E4 (talk • contribs)
 * Go to the article talk page, review the previous discussion regarding the topic, and get consensus for the changes you want to make.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 60 hours for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:.  Acroterion   (talk)   23:07, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.