User talk:Larry Jon Wayne

Your recent edits at Jehovah's Witnesses were exactly what WP does not want. POV pushing, NPOV viewpoints that don't contribute to an encyclopedia at all. If you wish to make changes, please be sure to read the relevant WP guidelines before doing so. Vyselink (talk) 21:02, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, do not mark edits that are several thousand characters in length as "minor". Vyselink (talk) 21:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Jehovah's Witnesses has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Jehovah's Witnesses was changed by Larry Jon Wayne (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.872154 on 2016-01-02T19:19:50+00:00.

Your recent editing history at Jehovah's Witnesses shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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 article's 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 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.

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. Favonian (talk) 19:41, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule, as you did at Jehovah's Witnesses. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Favonian (talk) 21:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I see that you have been suitably blocked for your inappropriate activity at Jehovah's Witnesses. Your POV rant about for whom Jesus may or may not be a 'mediator' is not encyclopedic content. Their view on the matter is already suitably presented in an encyclopedic fashion in the article: "His role as a mediator (referred to in 1 Timothy 2:5) is applied to the 'anointed' class, though the 'other sheep' are said to also benefit from the arrangement." No further elaboration is required, and it is particularly inappropriate to make claims in the article about whether their view is 'good' or 'bad' (unless the information cites reliable sources that directly address the topic). The information is not notable for the lead of the article.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 23:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)