User talk:Garp21

DS Violation
I see you that you blanked 's warning about violating the editing restrictions at Trump–Ukraine scandal. If you violate editing restrictions again, I will seek to have you sanctioned at WP:AE. Please play by the rules.- MrX 🖋 23:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

FYI....
At this diff your edit summary asked: "How is a www.whitehouse.gov document/ transcript a disreputable source?" Well, it's a primary source that should not be used if it's unduly self-serving, and especially if it's a falsehood. This quote is something to keep in mind: "The president is possibly the single most unreliable source for any claim of fact ever to grace the pages of WP." -- MPants 04:57, 2 October 2018 (UTC) Let's face it, the only reason we quote Trump is because he's notable, not because he's reliable in any sense of the word. -- BullRangifer (talk) 03:08, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Edit-warring on William Barr
The Barr page is covered by discretionary sanctions and does not permit more than one revert within 24 hrs. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 22:50, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Discretionary Sanctions violation at William Barr
These two reverts, on a 1RR article, are another violation of Discretionary Sanctions. Given the various warnings you've received, I think it would be prudent for you to undo the second one. .

While I'm visiting, I am curious: Have you edited under any other Wikipedia ID's? You seem to be uncommonly comfortable for a new user navigating this website.  SPECIFICO talk 00:36, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually I only removed content that that was added back by another editor without consensus. I believe you're posting on the wrong user's talk. --Garp21 (talk) 01:52, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it's still a violation and it's only a matter of time until somebody feels like reporting it. You've got more violations per week on Wikipedia than anyone in recent memory.  SPECIFICO talk 02:25, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Someone should check editors with an affinity for rightwing conspiracy theories who were banned in the last few months and happened to edit Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019) a lot. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 02:05, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Your comment is not only bordering on harassment, but is a clear violation of WP:ASPERSIONS. Please stop. --Garp21 (talk) 02:42, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've asked Snooganssnoogans and SPECIFICO to stop, but they persist. Consequently, I blanked the last comment and will blank any additional ones that falsely imply that I'm an account banned in the last few months. --Garp21 (talk) 03:19, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

mishandled inept disaster
Avoid inserting personal opinions such as mishandled, inept, and disaster. See the Wikipedia policy pages for Neutral Point Of View, No Original Research, and Verifiability. Alsee (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2019 (UTC)