Reed1967
Reed1967, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure! edit
May 2017 edit
Hello, I'm 損齋. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to The Holocaust have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Minimizing Studio (talk) 04:55, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
I've just seen your edits there. I would have blocked you indefinitely if I'd seen them at the time, and will if you do anything like that again. Doug Weller talk 09:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
June 2017 edit
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ley line, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 09:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Do not remove sourced content... edit
...as you have done at White nationalism, National Policy Institute, and other white supremacy-related articles. If you continue, you will be blocked. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 15:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Blocked edit
I don't know why you weren't blocked immediately for your deleted edit of 04:52, 6 May 2017, but you are now. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 18:22, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Reply from Reed:
And yet you felt it necessary to also remove the fact that David Irving is the author of an international bestseller (The initial reason he rose to fame)?. Roman Polanski is a pedophile and sex offender, but it still primarily lists him as an Actor. Political agenda perhaps? The fact someone who has alternate views on the nature of certain historical events that, for some reason, fears investigation and is effectively illegal to investigate in Europe is the Author of at least one international Bestseller isn't convenient, is it? So you went through my profile to find grounds to prevent me ever posting again. Granted, the vandalism by someone with access to my computer did on that page originally is worthy of blocking had I not already explained it. He has political views similar to mine and I asked him never to use my Wiki again. But using the block as a way to remove an inconvenient truth about someone who's page everyone wishes was just a hit peice on one of his views isn't the spirit of Wikipedia at all. You clearly have a political agenda. I suggest you add the fact that he is a bestselling author to prove that your bias isn't something that inhibits your ability to be a trusted Wiki editor.