User talk:John jay johnson

October 2014
Hello, I'm Donner60. I noticed that you recently removed some content from History of Kentucky with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 02:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at History of Kentucky with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 02:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at History of Kentucky, you may be blocked from editing. Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: History of Kentucky was changed by John jay johnson (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.972188 on 2014-10-15T00:32:15+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at History of Kentucky shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD 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. Dougweller (talk) 09:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Kentucky
What you should have done is what I've just done, see my edit. Dougweller (talk) 10:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)