User talk:Johnnyleepeter

February 2013
Hello, I'm Gyrofrog. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Gurage people, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ''See also WP:Source list and WP:LISTPEOPLE. There's nothing in your edit, nor in the Teddy Afro article itself, that corroborates his ethnicity.'' Gyrofrog (talk) 14:28, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

where is the RS?
The whole semitic speakers being habesha are incorrect..habesha is exclusively for amhara tigres..... "These came from three main groups: the Amhara, the Tigre (the Habash or Habesha)---both of which speak related Semitic languages and represent the Ethiopian Christian tradition" Baboon43 (talk) 02:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

its not about relation to the language..the habesha (abyssinian) refers to the amhara and tigray & then broadly anyone in the horn..you said the above description fits perfectly with ethnic gurage when that is incorrect..the gurage dont represent ethiopian christian tradition infact there's more muslims then christian gurages. im not from ethiopia but i have done enough research of that region.as explained "Habesha. A self-descriptive cultural definition derived from "Abyssinia", today applied to the members of the Tigrinya ethno-linguistic group, as well as Tigrinya- and Amharic-speaking Chritstians in Ethiopia".-Historical Dictionary of Eritrea-p.279 Baboon43 (talk) 04:33, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

wordpress is unreliable until you find RS that says gurage are habesha it will be reverted. & gurage are not descendent from axumite empire..they were part of the now extinct harla tribe as were the harari. these hypothesis linking semitic speakers to axum is incorrect when evidence shows there was a major semitic speaking tribe called harla in the region.Baboon43 (talk) 22:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. 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.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Baboon43 (talk) 00:06, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Baboon43 (talk) 00:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)