User talk:RGA Jim

January 2018
Your recent editing history at ACT! for America 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 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. Doug Weller talk 19:00, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at ACT! for America. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. 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. 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:. Doug Weller talk 20:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

I have tried to correct the defamatory components of the ACT! for America entry. First time editor. Not familiar with all the rules. I corrected it once last night, and it was instantly replaced. Corrected it again and it was instantly replaced. Corrected it this morning and again replaced. I suspect someone working for the Southern Poverty Law Center or other such group has a paid position to troll Wikipedia to maintain their narratives, which are usually patently false or exaggerated. They are currently being sued for defamation. The Southern Poverty Law Center engages in a defamation war to discredit anyone who disagrees with their agenda. People lose jobs and credibility due to SPLC's relentless defamation, fueled by an asset base of $350 million. I apologize if I have re edited too often and now just learn I have been in an "edit war". Has the person who reedited my edits over 3 times been stopped as well? RGA Jim (talk) 20:32, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


 * After your first edit was reverted you made similar edits 6 times (counting sequential edits as 1). As you can see in the history, during this time 3 editors reverted you, with a 4th, another Administrator, reverting you after I blocked you. No one else reverted more than 3 times, so no one else should have been blocked.


 * What's important for you to understand now is that if you return after your block and continue to behave in the same way, you'll probably be blocked again for continuing to edit war. You now have to use the talk page and try to get agreement.


 * Your ability to use inline citations properly shows that you are unlikely to be a new editor. Do you have any previous accounts? Making claims that editors are paid agents of the SPLC can also get you into trouble if you can't prove them. Please read WP:AGF. Doug Weller  talk 11:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)