Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Richard F. Colburn. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.David (talk) 16:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Richard F. Colburn, 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.David (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
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; 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 continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. This pertains to the the continued removal of the Controversy section, when a discussion for consensus has been started on the talk page.David (talk) 16:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)Reply
(Adding to the above, edit conflict) It is not acceptable to delete valid and sourced content from an article, against consensus and without giving a valid reason, as you did to this article on at least 10 occasions to the article Richard F. Colburn. [1],[2],[3],[4],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10].
Wikipedia mantains a neutral point of view and sections of articles which explain valid information about public figures which is not libellous or otherwise prohibited is legitimate content for a Wikipedia article.
Although practice here is to Assume Good Faith, if you carry on attempting to censor this article without providing a reason, it is likely that you will be blocked from editing.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Richard F. Colburn. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.David (talk) 16:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Richard F. Colburn, you may be blocked from editing. Please discuss this on the articles talk page.David (talk) 18:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
