User talk:Zant739

September 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2020 United States presidential election. 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. ''There was clear consensus on the talk page not to include Jorgenson in the infobox. Please respect that consensus.'' --WMSR (talk) 19:19, 16 September 2020 (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 noticeboards.
 * 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.

331dot (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 21:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

To enforce an arbitration decision and for breaking 1RR/edit warring, you have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours&#32;from certain pages (2020 United States presidential election). You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions. If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page:. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)  Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Your recent editing history at 2020 United States presidential election 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. — Tartan357   ( Talk ) 21:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Jorgenson
Please stop edit warring. The consensus does NOT include faithless electors for the same reason there aren't seven candidates in the 2016 infobox. Nojus R (talk) 21:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

You need to go to the talk page and discuss instead of edit warring(especially on a page that is under 1RR). If you agree to stop reverting, I will remove the partial block. 331dot (talk) 21:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)