User:Pbarnes/Archive 1

Your attempt to redirect/merge Premarital sex to Fornication
Please stop trying to redirect/merge Premarital sex to Fornication without first getting consensus on such a move. Please see Merging and moving pages on the procedure to propose a merger. Additionally, your attempt to redirect the page failed because you had the redirect syntax incorrect. However, please do follow proper procedure before attempting the redirect/merge again. Thank you. -- Gogo Dodo 05:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Re your message: I am glad that you have decided to open the merger for discusssion as I do not believe that there was a consensus on the merge. -- Gogo Dodo 20:36, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during October 22 2006 (UTC) to Premarital sex
Please do not replace Wikipedia pages or sections with blank content. It is considered vandalism. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi and welcome. Have you reviewed WP:NPOV?  I think some editors might take issue with redirecting premarital sex to fornication as a violation of that.  Besides, reguardless of anyone's beliefs, the two topics probably merit separate articles.  Anyway, thanks for editing!  Let me know if you have any questions or comments on my talk page.  Peace, delldot | talk 06:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi again. Not to seem like I'm stalking you, but I reverted the removal of the stuff from the talk page at fornication because it's wikipedia custom to save old talk page material or archive it wholesale, not to remove bits.  Anyway, take care.  Peace, delldot | talk 06:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

fornication
Hi, thanks for the quick reply. Sorry for assuming you had not sought consensus on the talk page first, i see that I was wrong. Yet I still feel like the merger isn't really appropriate. maybe we could just cut duplicate material and link the two articles? I noticed I wasn't the only one that disagreed with the merge. Maybe we could ask others for their opinions? Peace, delldot | talk 06:29, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I see your point, but I still say we should seek consensus before going ahead. I noticed an additional person must think so too because they've been reverting your edits as well.  I think all this definitely merits more discussion.  I can ask others to join the discussion if you like.  Peace, delldot | talk 06:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Christianity and Sex
I indeed valued your contributions to fornication, I think that wikipedia doesn't have anything on this, and it deserves its own article, Christian Perpective of Sex, you're more than welcome to add to it.