User talk:2.28.247.221

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on 2019 Venezuela uprising; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Jamez42 (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Nice try, you are the one edit warring. 2.28.247.221 (talk)

Your recent editing history at 2019 Venezuela uprising 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 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 you being blocked from editing—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—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Jamez42 (talk) 15:45, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I see James has already explained, but please review WP:BRD, WP:EDITWAR, and please review the article talk page before re-instating edits, without consensus, that were previously removed. Starting a new section on article talk shows that you didn't review the talk page, and just creates a distraction for other editors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I read it all, I came to the conclusion that "Uprising" was POV. I created a new section because I didn't want to clog up the old section. I have also reviewed WP:EDITWAR, which James started, and broke the Three Revert Rule. Therefore, I'll be taking this to the appropriate Wikipedia authorities to have James investigated on his impartiality, and whether or not he should keep his position.

2.28.247.221 (talk)

Possible sockpuppet

In this edit summary, you are suggesting someone is a sock puppet. From the edit history there, the logical conclusion is that you are saying Jamez42 and I are the same editor. Casting aspersions without evidence will get you blocked fast, and you should NEVER do it in edit summary. Please review WP:SUMMARYNO, and WP:SPI is that-a-way. Since there are very few similarities between Jamez' editing and mine, you will not get far. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:58, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

---