"

 Edit summary 

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled ""Edit summary"" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.  

I do, when I'm doing anything more than grammar. The only exception to this would be on Clan Fraser of Lovat, of which I'm the only editor at present, and I didn't think to add edit summaries. Otherwise, I believe that I have done so. If you have any particular situations in which I have failed to do so, I'd be happy to explain myself; I'd much appreciate it.  
See it for yourself: Green bars are for edit summaries, red bars are for edits with no summaries.  
That's quite a nifty tool there. I'm fully aware of edit summaries. I don't provide edit summaries on my own talk page, or my User Page. I also don't usually provide them on other users' talk pages. In earlier editing, I didn't take the summary seriously; if you're referring to anything from several months ago or more, I do apologize. Like I said: if you have any particular situations where you believe I missed one, please bring them up to me. I would sincerely like to know. Otherwise, I don't see what you're trying to accomplish here.  
I think the link speaks for itself.  As for what I'm trying to accomplish, I think my original comment explained just that.  
If you were trying to just helpfully remind me, I thank you, though I don't think it was needed. I saw the page; it didn't say anything to me, except that I finally know my edit count. If you really want to get a point across to me, I suggest you do so blatantly. If your original comment explained your motives, then we are done here.  

 Your ""nonsense"" page 

If you are interested in archiving your old talk, you may want to review Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.  Accusing other editors of ""defacing"" your talk page for politely reminding you of Wikipedia policies against personal attacks does not demonstrate good faith on your part, and will only make you look bad.  I suggest you move the archive to a more appropriate name like User talk:Canaen/archive1.  Furthermore, making negative comments about discussion by other editors, and claiming that their edits ""are not worth reading"" shows that you aren't interested in abiding by  WP:NPA, WP:CIV, nor WP:EQ.  If you want to improve your working relationship with other editors, it might help to avoid incivility.  
I'm not interested in archiving my old talk as of yet, but thank you for the suggestion. I use ""nonsense"" in a lot of ways other people do not, because I find a lot of other words to be boring at present. Likewise,  instead of ""cool,"" or ""awesome,"" or ""that's interesting,"" I'm currently in the habit of referring to things as ""nifty."" It's something I do. I know how to archive a talk page, I've done it before. I still do not consider suggesting ignorance to be a personal attack, because I've grown up in a rather intellectual atmosphere. I'm not going to change just because a few people are offended at my words. I thought that this was resolved by now. I have quite decent relationships with other working editors; it seems that a particular user and myself simply do not get along. It is regretful, but something which seems to be. If someone takes offence to my creation of a Nonsense page, they can bring it up to me personally, as you