User talk:Illuminato
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
older discussion
Contents |
[edit] Illuminato
This is a warning. I have noticed your 'clean up' of the Talk Page on adolescent Sexuality. However you removed mostly new and relevant discussions and left mostly old discussion.
you have a history of randomly 'cleaning up' your talk page and you use the excuse. "It was getting too long".
However the talk page for Template:Adolescent sexuality was hardly as long as many other talk pages and when you blanked your user pages It seems that all that 'cleaning up' took place right after i'd placed a concern or question or responded to you.
Also there is the question of your constant reverts and edits to the article on Adolescent Sexuality. Namely how you revert any changes made by anyone else but you still squeeze in information based on POV and ONLY POV.
I ask you to respect WP:NPOV and WP:Civility If I made spelling mistakes or grammatical or formatting errors then please excuse. You have used minor spelling mistakes to point out 'how young I am' and as an excuse in the past to delete large additions to the article instead of fixing those mistak esand I wish to let you know that any mistakes are accidental and to please correct any spelling errors you might find.
If you remove this request I will place a civility 2nd warning template on your talk page as your conduct on this site (especially towards me) has been uncivil, dishonest, and is clearly POV pushing that results in unfair edits and reverts to Adolescent Sexuality and Adolescent Sexuality In The United States as well as the section on adolescence in themain article on United states Culture that has little to no supplemental value to these articles whatsoever.
Please use care, you're REALLY acting like a jerk. (I'm sorry If i offended you but you've been a problem to me and have prevented me and others from getting little to no work done on these articles or sections in question for months)
Nateland 02:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion is needed.
I once added quotations to this sentence as it is OBVIOUSLY SOMEONES opinion and not a proven fact. (Trying to remove it from the lead, where it is unfairly made to look like world view) was reversed by Illuminato and so now I will keep it out of the article until YOU. Illuminato clarify some things.
What do you mean by Emtional Intimacy?
If you say this isn't someone's statement. Then WHAT IS IT?. If you're claiming it's a worldview then open your eyes and realize its narrow to think such a belief is a world view followed by almost 6.5 billion people.
Also, if this IS statement then don't remove the quotation marks I put around it and the citation needed. If it IS a statement then say WHOSE statement it is. And put in a section respective to the country. Putting the blow 'fact' into the intro of this article is unnuetral and defacing to the integrity and honesty of this article.
"When teens engage in sexual activities that are separate from emotional intimacy they may develop habits that will cause them to have trouble forming adult relationships in the future."
I and others would prefer you to discuss this instead of just instantly reverting the edit. Remember, many more people are AGAINST your additions then there are people FOR your additions. So consider that fact and always remember.
Wikipedia prefers a consensus to be reached by all users. It's not always such a good idea to be the 'odd man out'. (It'll lessen your credentials and integrity on this website) Nateland 21:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. Xiner (talk, email) 00:33, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Please note that the 3RR rule does not distinguish between which passage is reverted in an article, and you have reverted three times today. Xiner (talk, email) 00:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Exasperation.
Illuminato, Admit it.
Those two articles ARE simply copied text. I left the adolescent sexuality in India article stay as is because it wasn't carbon copied text.
Remember, your actions are putting undue strain on the servers. I'll put it up for vote in the talk page. And Illuminato, I'm sorry but you'll probably outnumbered. And seeing as you are about the only one objecting it WILL probably go through. I'm simply asking you to put aside your views and think rationally. DOZENS of people have complained about and critisized your actions on wikipedia. Far more than mine.
Sincerely, Nateland 00:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
