User talk:General Veers

Welcome!

Hello, General Veers, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for joining our community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. First thing: be bold! Editors are always happy to correct or revert mistakes and discuss changes with which they disagree. Here are some links you might find useful:

And for more detailed information:

Help pages - the instruction manual, contains everything you could possibly want to know
The five pillars of Wikipedia - our principles, or how to get on with other editors
Manual of Style - how to format articles, where to place pictures, and other stylistic matters.

You can also check out the community portal, which has lots of ideas on how you can help Wikipedia.

All of this information can be daunting, but if you have a question and can't find the answer, you can always ask me on my talk page or go to Wikipedia:Where to ask a question. One last thing: please sign your name when leaving messages for others on article and user talk pages using (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. I hope you enjoy editing! --Sam Blanning^(talk) 16:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism to many articles

May I ask how I have vandalized many articles? I have been jumping on the recent junk edits via the "Recent Changes" button and un-doing what idiots change. If by accident I reverted TO the vandalized version instead of the clean one, I am sorry, but that is hardly a crime. General Veers 17:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i checked through General Veer's contributions, doesn't appear to be any vandalism. i believe all edits were made in good faith.--Alhutch 17:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:General Veers added the phrase "It is really a homophobic piece of garbage cult set on murder, corruption, and destruction." to Scientology. I do see now that his other edits seem to be reverting vandalism, but the comment inserted into the Scientology article still makes no sense because it was not in the previous edit. I apologize for jumping the gun if such is the case. wikipediatrix 17:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[1] I reverted to this version, by accident, which has the line you cite. I did not "add" it, but accidentially reverted to a version containing it. In other words, an accident, not "repeated vandalism." General Veers 17:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize again. Apparently your mistake was compounded by RexNL's beating you to correcting the vandalism, making it appear in the history as if you were the one originally inserting the comment. wikipediatrix 17:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]