User talk:Ellios Sensa

April 2023
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to Roman Republic, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 08:54, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Roman Republic. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. ''Roman religion is separate from Greek religion. Roman civilisation was also clearly separate from the Greek part. Please stop making edits (almost only to infoboxes) attempting to assert the opposite without source or justification.'' Ifly6 (talk) 15:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * Roman religion isn't separate to greek polytheism roman kingdom is part of Etruscan civilization just as athens to greeks. Greeks colonized southern italy and parts of central italy way before rome arrived and many greeks lived in Etruscan area so the Etruscans are familiar to greeks the part where Rome arrived of Etruscan civilization is Hellenised. A lot people say that Romans adopted greek culture when they invaded greeks but they are wrong you can Clearly see Remains of Early roman kingdom is Clearly Hellenistic or similar to them their founder is even mythological. If you see Etruscan remains then you can see they are not similar to greek. And if you say that is because of the same roots then can you answer, greek writing system is Derived from phoenican Which is not Indo-European language and latin is driven form greek and you can Clearly see Early romans used latin script so if they are different from greeks then why they used latin script and had greek culture. Genetically they are different from greeks but culturally they are same. Romans ancestors might have used greek language thats why they have something like latin. Ellios Sensa (talk) 10:45, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The idea that the Roman kingdom was Etruscan is demolished in Cornell Beginnings of Rome (1995). Chapter 6, pp 151 ff, is literally titled The myth of "Etruscan Rome". See also Forsythe Critical history of early Rome (2005). You also should read on Roman religion; I recommend North CAH2 7.2 (1989) pp 573ff: some characteristics of the [Roman religious] system strike us as peculiar to the Romans and hence as representing a tradition distinct from that of Greeks, Etruscans or even other Italic peoples about whom we know enough to judge at all. (Nobody denies Etruscan or Greek influence.) The idea that Rome was actually a Greek city in the regal period or early republic – including the claim of Trojan descent – is an ancient and nationalistic fantasy that is not supported by the evidence. Ifly6 (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Why Early roman kingdom used latin Ellios Sensa (talk) 09:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You didn't read my whole reply Ellios Sensa (talk) 09:10, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

October 2023
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that your recent edits to Economy of India and Economy of Bangladesh did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! -- Toddy1 (talk) 13:27, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Toddy1. I noticed that you changed content in the articles on the Economy of India and the Economy of Bangladesh, but you did not provide a reliable source. Instead you parked your new data next to the citations that supported the previous data. That goes against our policy on verifiability. Your edits have been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add them, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave a message on the relevant article talk pages. Thank you. -- Toddy1 (talk) 13:27, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Your recent editing history 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. Jingiby (talk) 12:03, 14 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Jingiby Should be noted that this same editor is currently engaging in an edit war at Macedonia (ancient kingdom) over the issue of languages listed in the info box, and recently engaged in the same sort of edit war over at Roman Republic. Pericles of Athens  Talk 14:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)