User talk:184.91.49.1

February 2024
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Old Calendarists. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. jayhawker6 (talk) 17:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Old Calendarists, you may be blocked from editing. ''It appears you may have a WP:COI or bias in this topic. Also, please preview your changes before publishing them as they broke refs. Before removing sourced content or really editing any content, you should also provide a proper and adequate edit summary.'' jayhawker6 (talk) 18:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * The fact that Bishop Matthew ordained multiple bishops by himself is false. He ordained one bishop by himself: Spyridon. The two of them together ordained the rest of a synod. They called themselves the Genuine Orthodox Christians of Greece. That's not my commentary. Matthew cited the 1935 of faith as a reason for breaking communion with Chrysostomos. This isn't my commentary. It seems like you're trying to deliberately block this information from going on this page. 184.91.49.1 (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, Chrysostomos was not the leader of the synod; that was Germanos of Demetrias (since he was the president of the synod. They also did not see themselves as a movement. They explicitly created a synod in 1935 as shown by the encyclical to their flock. It was also not a small one. 184.91.49.1 (talk) 18:22, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Filioque, you may be blocked from editing. ''Please note that you are using an unreliable source to engage in an edit war. Please seek editor consensus and utilize Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. ~'' Pbritti (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * Is it considered unreliable because it does not align with the Roman Catholic view you hold? The fact that you are trying to remove mention of Zoernikav's work from this article when it is a key work presenting the other side of the issue shows your bias. 184.91.49.1 (talk) 19:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * No, it's because an early 18th-century apologist can not be cited as a reliable source, regardless of affiliation. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:20, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * And now you removed Prosper of Aquitaine, Augustine of Hippo's most fervent disciple and supporter against Pelagianism from the list of Augustinian Philosophers because you aren't sure if he can be properly described as a philosopher? How can Fulgentius of Ruspe and Isidore of Seville be considered philosophers? How about Fulgentius Ferrandus? His article doesn't even mention Augustine or Augustinianism once. There aren't even citations on any of the so-called Augustinians until the last three figures. 184.91.49.1 (talk) 19:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Filioque shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Pbritti (talk) 19:18, 14 February 2024 (UTC)