User talk:Nathanael Hahn

June 2022
Hello, I'm Praxidicae. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Classical education movement seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I undid your revision before reading this message, sorry about that.
 * I'll contact you on your talk page. Nathanael Hahn (talk) 16:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This can be discussed here, on your talk page. Please read WP:NPOV and WP:V. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:52, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * What are your reasons for seeing my revisions as non-neutral? Nathanael Hahn (talk) 16:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Classical education movement 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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 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.Since you don't appear to read your talk page, read my previous warning and do not restore the content. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I see your warning. Please answer my question. Nathanael Hahn (talk) 16:57, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You haven't explained anything, other than that you think my edits are unbiased. I've read significant history and other writing on the topic. Please explain your opinion. Nathanael Hahn (talk) 17:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think your edits are not neutral and not well sourced. Because they aren't. And you're restoring external links that are promotional and do not belong in the lead or the body of the article. Read the links I gave you earlier. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:05, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I never added any external links, sans one to child development, which is not promotional.
 * Let's talk specifically about the "restoration" language. How do I source the nonexistence of something? This kind of educational model has never existed prior to this century. I could cite dozens of works which don't include this movement's model, but that's hardly what you're looking for. Frankly, there's no citation for the claim that it is a restoration.
 * To be clear, I am not against this movement; I teach at a classical school myself. But this should not be called something it's not. Nathanael Hahn (talk) 17:13, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This is a content dispute, take it to the talk page and discuss it there. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:14, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * You appear not to have read the talk page. I already took it there before I made the edits. Nathanael Hahn (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

January 2024
Hi Nathanael Hahn! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. glman (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for pointing this out; I wasn't aware of the specific definition. Is there a way I can unflag it, or would I need to revert the edit and re-edit it? Nathanael Hahn (talk) 21:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * You're good - just a heads-up for the future! glman (talk) 16:48, 4 January 2024 (UTC)