User talk:Drozofilos

January 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 08:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Indo-European languages shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's 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. See BRD for 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 your 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 don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.You have now hit the policy line for an automatic block if you do this once more. DMacks (talk) 10:07, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Balto-Slavic
Dear Drozofilos, thanks for your contributions. You are certainly right that it may be in its place to mention the doubts surrounding the validity of balto-slavic as a grouping, however the text you wrote is not a possible addition to an article in the encyclopedia - rather it is formulaed as a personal essay, which is not the style we use in articles. The correct way to go about what you wish to do would be to find all the sources published by linguists who disagree with the balto-slavic hypothesis and summarize it in an objective literature review like style with references to the works summarized. Meanwhile you may want to insert your "note" on the discussion page where it can form the grounds for discussion of how the balto-slavic question should be represented in the article.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 17:50, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse!
from: Pnppl — Preceding undated comment added 17:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)