User talk:37.152.197.68

December 2013
Hello, I'm Flyer22. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Battle of Leipzig because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Flyer22 (talk) 04:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Wrong. I changed "betrayal" to "defection". That is in line with non pov language, from emotional pov to non emotional. Dont accuse me of "vandalism" if you won't bother to explain yourself.37.152.197.68 (talk) 15:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You added "hi" as well, as clearly seen in my first and latest revert of you. Next time pay more attention to your edits before asking if someone else paid attention to them. As for use of "defection" in place of "betrayal," I restored that and will leave it up to others to decide if it's keeping in line with WP:Neutral. The word betrayal is very valid to use in Wikipedia articles, by the way, if the matter was a betrayal and the wording is not violating any of our policies or guidelines (such as Biographies of living persons); softening the language can be argued as emotional POV. Flyer22 (talk) 16:43, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea how "hi" got in there, i never intended it to be there, very strange. "Betrayal" is highly emotive and comes from a pro-French viewpoint. The german states of the confederation of the rhine were conquered by napoleon and turned into client kingdoms to furnish men and money for France, they did not see turning against him as betrayal. The Allies certainly didn't either, they described it in terms of liberation from the French yolk, both the allied and the French viewpoints are obviously biased. The word "defection" is factually correct and without any emotion, that is why it is better.37.152.197.68 (talk) 19:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I figured by your revert of me and initial response above that "hi" was a mistake on your part. Thanks for explaining your side of things. Perhaps "hi" got in there because you were reverting to or editing some earlier version of the article? Flyer22 (talk) 20:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)