User talk:Viccol1

September 2010[edit]

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to the page Coventries. Blank pages can confuse readers, and are overall not helpful to the Wikipedia project; furthermore, blanking a page is not the same as deleting it.

If the article you blanked is a duplicate of another article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalized, please revert it to the last legitimate revision. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please use the appropriate deletion process. — $Jeff G. ツ$ 20:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary[edit]

The Coventry article looks very promising, there is quite a bit of cleanup to do. The reason why I have dropped by is to ask that when you make an edit please make sure the summary is quite accurate as to what you did, the more detailed the better. If you don't add good info in the summary there is much greater chance of getting your edits reverted by other editors.--Artiquities (talk) 08:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you insist on continuing to make numerous edits with no summary (e.g., Keith Coventry). Please STOP editing without summarizing.--Artiquities (talk) 10:48, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]