User talk:Heavyboatman

Welcome!

Hello,, 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: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Bearian 20:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

May 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. 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. ''Especially that cited controversy about her clothing. Don't think that it isn't noticed.'' Pandacomics (talk) 07:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I am still in the midst of editing it. The controversy part should not grouped together with her humanitarian works, but instead somewhere else.

Please do not be mistaken.

Heavyboatman (talk) 08:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

First reminder
Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, your recent edits, did not appear to conform with Wikipedia policies and guidelines: Please stop, and consider the above guidelines if you want to contribute postitively to Wikipedia and to avoid any unneccesary disputes and frustration later. Thank you. -- Aldwinteo (talk) 09:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Removal of maintenance tag: Do not remove legitimate tags that were posted by any members of WP:FACT or by a Reviewing Admin when it was explicitly mentioned in the in-line text previously, . Either provide the relevant sources or rephrase the statement concerned for further clarity. Making unhelpful or vague comment doesn't help the article or the reviewers later.
 * No reliable sources for multiple citations: Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, and not based on self-published sources, especially articles on living persons. WP:Verifiability describes some criteria for assessing reliability of sources.
 * Lacking edit summary: This is considered an important guideline. Even a short summary is better than no summary. An edit summary is even more important if you amend or delete any text; otherwise, people may question your motives for the edit i.e. likely vandals, trolls or sockpuppets.
 * Possible conflict of interest: If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, whereby an editor must forego advancing the aims of Wikipedia in order to advance outside interests, that editor stands in a conflict of interest according to their tone of edit and edit history to date. COI edits are strongly discouraged. When they cause disruption to the encyclopedia in the opinion of an uninvolved administrator, they may lead to accounts being blocked and embarrassment for the individuals and groups who were being promoted. See reported cases at COI Notice Board and also the outcome those users/IPs/sockpuppets who try to push their POV edits onto the Ho Yeow Sun article previously.