Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl. I noticed that in this edit to Maria Bartiromo, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —Qwerfjkltalk 17:32, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Maria Bartiromo. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Philipnelson99 (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC) [reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Maria Bartiromo, you may be blocked from editing. You have removed referenced material, please use the Article's talk page to discuss these changes first. Ifnord (talk) 17:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, as you did with this edit to Maria Bartiromo. Philipnelson99 (talk) 17:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Maria Bartiromo. —TypicalWikimedian (talk • contribs) 17:58, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Maria Bartiromo. CodeTalker (talk) 18:08, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Maria Bartiromo. —TypicalWikimedian (talk • contribs) 18:15, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary, as you did at Maria Bartiromo. —TypicalWikimedian (talk • contribs) 18:27, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although 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. CodeTalker (talk) 18:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:173.56.190.28 reported by User:Ifnord (Result: ). Thank you. Ifnord (talk) 19:00, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources when determining what sources are reliable or not. The community has determined such. You are always free to debate and challenge reliability.--P37307 (talk) 19:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 19:28, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.