User talk:107.77.199.234

PROTECT Act
Hello, I noticed that you removed a statement about the alternative obscenity test under the PROTECT Act from the article Legal status of fictional pornography depicting minors. While your contributions are appreciated, and I understand your reasoning (I personally think many elements of the PROTECT Act are unconstitutional), I have nevertheless reverted your edit because the PROTECT Act did in fact establish that alternative test as a provision, and people have been tried under it (for example, in US v. Dean). If you have a reliable source that supports that this provision was ruled unconstitutional, please add on a statement with the source instead of removing the sentence detailing the provision. (If you are basing this off of the ruling in US v. Handley, the article mentions that case; it also mentions the case US v. Dean, which happened after Handley, where Dean was successfully prosecuted using the alternative obscenity test, with the court rejecting claims that it was substantively unconstitutional.) But I am not a lawyer, and if I have misinterpeted something, or if there have been any new developments in case law, feel free to add it to the article; just please don't remove factual statements about the PROTECT Act. Sandtalon (talk) 06:52, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

March 2022
Hello, I'm Ifnord. I noticed that you recently removed content from Innova (video game company) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ifnord (talk) 13:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)