User talk:Rodneypuplampu

September 2019
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Queen of Sheba. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. JimRenge (talk) 16:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Dear Jim, Can you explain to me what makes my edit disruptive? I didn't delete anything and simply corrected a false narrative? I will be more than happy to discuss with whom ever I need to to get to an understanding or concensus, but I don't know who that would be? I am simply stating the clearest evidence in the matter, and as we all know with History, most facts are difficult to prove or as so much has been destroyed over the centuries. But some things are so blatantly false that they ahve to be called out. Who should I engage to start this discussion? Or since this may end up being a differences of opinion, should I create a new section?


 * Hi, the basics are explained in WP:BRD, WP:ONUS and WP:EDITWAR. Most important, stop reverting and go to the article page and try to convince other editors. If you continue reverting your editing privileges will probably be removed. JimRenge (talk) 17:56, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * How do I do that with someone who ignores my outreach? If I just repeatedly reverted someones edit and ignored their iquiry why, who would be at fault according to the Wiki Policy?  This openness is a flaw and blessing, deleting someones edit should have a check and balance, if I have credible references and citations, why is one persons edit with less citations and references more important than mine?
 * Your edits have been reverted by several editors because they violate wikipedia policies and guidelines, such as the ones cited above, WP:LEAD etc. JimRenge (talk) 18:10, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Queen of Sheba 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doug Weller talk 18:32, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

You need to start using article talk pages
I've taken a quick look at some of your edits. For the articles you are interested in, very few websites will meet WP:VERIFY and WP:RS - and yes, I'm sure those articles do use websites that should be replaced by academic sources. We also rely on mainstream archeologists and historians, so Richard Poe doesn't meet our criteria. Doug Weller talk 18:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Please revert your last edit as you've clearly violated 3RR and can be blocked
I don't want to do this but I did give you a warning. Doug Weller talk 18:44, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. JimRenge (talk) 19:20, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Queen of Sheba. 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 19:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)