Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that in this edit to Asexuality, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Asexuality. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:00, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Asexuality, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Asexuality was changed by Friendlyneighbourhoodgay (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.879413 on 2016-11-04T00:02:33+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Friendlyneighbourhoodgay. While it may seem like the Asexuality article is going by the opinions of Wikipedians, it isn't. It's going by what the sources used for the content state, with due weight, and it's framed as being from those sources when attribution is needed. See WP:Reliable sources, WP:Neutral and WP:In-text attribution. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:13, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And I reverted you here because, as explained: "Heterosexual" is the correct term. The other is unsourced ("panromantic" is covered lower anyway), and the other is WP:Editorializing. Do stop adding unsourced content and your personal opinions to the article. They will keep being reverted. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:18, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]