Hello, I'mMaterialscientist. I noticed that you recently removed some content without thoroughly explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurateedit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use thesandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message onmy talk page. Thanks!Materialscientist (talk)04:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your ownpersonal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did toPhilippine Military Academy. Doing so violates Wikipedia'sneutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.Acroterion(talk)00:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, andwelcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in anedit war with one or more editors according to your reverts atPhilippine Military Academy. Although repeatedlyreverting 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 thenormal 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 aconsensus on thetalk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to beblocked 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 thethree-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 ablock. Thank you.Acroterion(talk)00:42, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop yourdisruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia'sneutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did atPhilippine Military Academy, you may beblocked from editing.Acroterion(talk)00:42, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not insert commentary into articles. It's OK to apply a "disputed" tag provided you state your concerns on the articletalkpage in sufficient detail to allow other editors to understand your concerns. Simply calling for more sources does not justify a disputed tag: you should use the appropriate "citation needed" tags. Calls for further investigation do not belong in article space.Acroterion(talk)00:46, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK- now you should put a short, polite summary of your concerns on the article's talkpage. Remember that the talkpage isn't a forum for your views on the subject, it is only for discussion of improvements to the related article.in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines. Suggestions for specific edits, supported by reliable sources are particularly appreciated.Acroterion(talk)00:55, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]