User talk:Bill.williamsfour

March 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
The following is the log entry regarding this warning: ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy was changed by Bill.williamsfour (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.869925 on 2012-03-03T03:06:01+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 03:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy with this edit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 03:25, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Washington post retract

Washington post retract:

This article about the community organizing group ACORN incorrectly said that a conservative journalist targeted the organization for hidden-camera videos partly because its voter-registration drives bring Latinos and African Americans to the polls. Although ACORN registers people mostly from those groups, the maker of the videos, James E. O'Keefe, did not specifically mention them.

The article was not fully retracted. There was no mention of Latinos nor African Americans in ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy Therefore I have fully reverted your edits. Please discuss this on talk:ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy before further edits to ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 04:06, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

      Jime1138 I never said the articled was retracted. Please pay attention. The statement was retracted and quoting half of a retracted statement is

misleading. Get a life because you are obviously enjoying having this terribly biased article out to mislead the public. Did you choose to suck at life or are you paid to do so?

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Xenophrenic (talk) 04:53, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistent disruptive editing, as you did at ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Tiptoety ^talk 07:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]