User talk:Udermu

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Romani people. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RashersTierney (talk) 01:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Romani People

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Romani People. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If the edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 20:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Single purpose account

You seem to be a single purpose account, advancing a certain point-of-view – or at least engaging an opposite point-of-view, with the aim on achieving neutrality. There is nothing wrong with that. However, what I find troublesome in your edits, is the removal of existing sources and their replacement with other sources, most likely more sympathetic to your POV. When making this kind of changes, you should never remove existing sources. You can modify the text to better reflect what is said in the sources, or if you think they are biased, introduce new, more neutral sources. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 17:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]