User talk:Polyopulis

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your constructive contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:-
 * Introduction       An introduction and welcome to Wikipedia.
 * Five pillars       The five pillars of Wikipedia.
 * Tutorial           A tutorial.
 * How to edit a page How to edit a page.
 * Article development How to write a great article.
 * Manual of Style    The Manual of Style.

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, or you could ask me on User_talk:Terry0051 (my talk page), or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Happy editing. With good wishes, Terry0051 (talk) 13:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edit to 'Three-body problem'
May I also refer to your recent edit of 'Three-Body Problem', and bring to your attention that Wikipedia has standards for editing and for discussions about editing.

You changed some abbreviations without explanation, only saying in your edit summary "taking out those bloody i.e.'s". That comment does not appear to give any rational explanation, and seems to be merely offensive. Also, the Wikipedia manual of style (MoS) appears to have nothing against the abbreviation 'i.e.'

While most of your style changes seem neutral, one of them adds inaccuracy. You changed "laws of classical mechanics, i.e., Newton's laws of motion and Newton's law of gravity" to "laws of classical mechanics like Newton's laws of motion and Newton's law of gravity". The laws referred to here are not 'like' Newton's laws, they are Newton's laws. Accordingly, this particular edit does not seem to be constructive.

In your edit summary you also said "I think that the description of navigation should be taken out". In the first place here, this misrepresents the current content of the article, there is no "description" of navigation in the article as it currently stands, only a mention, which is a very different thing from description. In the second place, you give no objective or proper reason why this element of the subject matter on the page should go. Removal of subject matter without proper reason given is not contemplated by Wikipedia editing policy (WP:EP), and it can in a number of circumstances be seen as a contribution to a pattern of disruptive editing (WP:DISRUPT) or edit-warring (WP:EW). It is believed to be apparent that the current role of the mention of navigation in the history section of the aricle is as part of an explanation how some of the mathematicians and astronomers came to be motivated to address the subject of the article. If you have a proper objection to the presence of this mention, please explain it on the article's talk page.

With good wishes for your constructive editing, Terry0051 (talk) 13:06, 24 July 2009 (UTC)