User talk:Hne123

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 February 2007 2 AIDS 3 Editing the AIDS article 4 An Automated Message from HagermanBot

[edit] February 2007

Please do not add unhelpful and non-constructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to AIDS. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and they have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gwernol 10:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I misread your edit; it looked like you had removed citations from the article, when in fact you had simply re-arranged them. I have reverted myself and struck out the warning above. A good way to help avoid this sort of thing happening in the future is to include an edit summary briefly describing the change you have made. Good luck, and apologies for my mistake, Gwernol 15:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

And since you haven't been formally welcomed to Wikipedia yet:

Welcome!

Hello, Hne123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Gwernol 15:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AIDS

With reference to your question to User:Gwernol re this article: you erased large segments of it; this is vandalism by definition. What point are you trying to make?--Anthony.bradbury 21:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

This was not vandalism - User:Gwernol has agreed with me - see his response and apology above Hne123 10:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing the AIDS article

I see that some changes to the wording have been happening, and reversion of those changes, apparently without any discussion on the talk page. When there is disagreement about the wording of a section, please discuss the changes on the talk page. It's helpful to put descriptive edit summaries, which can refer to the talk page e.g. "see talk" or referring to a particular section of the talk page where those edits are being discussed. Editors are not supposed to just revert other people's good-faith changes without discussion or explanation. Rather than repeatedly reverting others' edits, editors are supposed to discuss until consensus is reached before making changes to disputed sections. See Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. I would appreciate seeing the disputed wording discussed in an organized manner so I can see what's going on. I'm putting this same message on a few users' talk pages. --Coppertwig 11:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 11:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)