"

 Four Edits in 24 hours: True.  But it takes 2 to Tango. 

{{unblock|reason=You asked about the State Bar article, and that's fair.  In chronological order, on September 2 the article was ""protected."" Why? The history shows that from August through November (4 months) the article was protected because the user SantiLak repeatedly vandalized the article.  The edit history, also shows that SantiLak reverted the article without any discussion whatsoever four times within 24 hours. He was warned previously by an Admin, but just took the warning off his Talk page and continued the pattern. Yesterday, the pattern continued.  I was merely attempting to keep the material from being deleted again without discussion.  If you find me in violation, I respect that. But at least, hold SantiLak to account as well because the history clearly shows he reverted 4 times in 24 hours, causing the article to go into protected status.  It’s up to you.  Whatever you decide, have a great day there’s nothing personal about this for me.  I just hope an article about a public entity does not get stripped to the point where it become little more than an advertising brochure bereft of noted criticism of that entity by the courts, mainstream news sources, and even former employees.  It’s a public entity, not a real person.  Some latitude seems appropriate, and some discussion before taking out huge chunks of information four times within 24 hours. 

Here is a clear showing of the article being protected after SantiLak vandalized it 4 times in less than 24 hours.

2 September 2014‎ ‪Callanecc. (Protected State Bar of California: Edit warring)

19:48, 1 September 2014‎ ‪SantiLak (talk | contribs)‎ . . (38,529 bytes) ‪(-4,579)‬‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit )
20:12, 31 August 2014‎ ‪SantiLak (talk | contribs)‎ . . (38,529 bytes) ‪(-4,579)‬‎ . . (Reverted )
10:08, 31 August 2014‎ ‪SantiLak (talk | contribs)‎ . . (38,529 bytes) ‪(-2,366)‬‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit )
09:05, 31 August 2014‎ ‪SantiLak (talk | contribs)‎ . . (38,529 bytes) ‪(-2,366)‬‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit)

And if I was insincere about the article being vandalized, you would not see 5 edits by the same user removing huge chunks of the article in less than 1 hour after the block was instituted - please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_Bar_of_California&action;=history  and look at

15:43, 28 November 2014‎ Srich32977
15:41, 28 November 2014‎ Srich32977
 15:39, 28 November 2014‎ Srich32977
15:37, 28 November 2014‎ Srich32977
 15:35, 28 November 2014‎ Srich32977

He removed entire sections 5 times in less than 5 minutes.  I didn't remove anything.  I tried to prevent exactly this from happening without discussion.  

 2.177.207.221  "