User talk:Boy2boy

Hi. It's readily apparent that you have a strong anti-Catholic bias and that isn't going to go over well. I'd like to suggest you take a moment to read WP:NPOV before you make any further edits of the type you've been making. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I am actually Catholic myself and go to a Catholic High School, attend Mass, so I am certainly not anti Catholic. I believe that its important to share documented information about specific authors who were homosexual and are documented. These also include not only Saints, but also artists who were openly gay.

At any time if I do make a statement that is disagreeable, instead of deteling it, I think we should discuss it. I will always add my references to the works.

Thanks!

Sean


 * My friend, I too am Catholic and I find your username and user page patently offensive. If you are truly Catholic and are practicing this choice of lifestyle, you are in violation of the Church's teachings, period, turn the page.  It's your life and you may lead it as you see fit, but this site requires a huge amount of neutrality and you haven't shown any willingness to display neutrality; your user page says as much as does your username which is right on the cusp of being blockable as inappropriate. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

In case you weren't aware...
Your username (and some of your recent edits, although less so) is/are currently under discussion at the Administrator's noticeboard. While the discussion seems to be winding down, and most comments are in favor of letting the matter drop, you may wish to leave some comments of your own. Sorry, usually editors are notified of such discussions much sooner than this, and usually get much warmer welcomes as well. In any event, welcome to Wikipedia. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 03:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to extend a welcome. Neither your username nor the content of your userpage are offensive in any way whatsoever, and the edits you have made seem okay, too . Sorry you got jumped on. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is much like the wider world; it has reasonable people and unreasonable ones. Don't let the latter get you down—just follow the policies and continue to be unfailingly civil even when attacked. Fortunately, unlike the wider world, at Wikipedia it's only words they can throw at you. Rivertorch (talk) 05:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC) Added comment: The first link you added to Saint Dominic appears to have only the most peripheral connection to the topic of the article, so someone was right to remove it. (Someone was not right to make it personal.) The second link doesn't appear to be working so I cannot evaluate its relevance or suitability. Check out WP:EL for more info on adding external links. Also, be sure your edit summary accurately reflects the changes you make, otherwise it will make people upset. Rivertorch (talk) 06:15, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
(refactored notice of good faith indef block, now lifted.)

Please do appeal your block
Please do appeal the block, it strikes me as inappropriate and not in accord with policy. Do also read the thread at the Administrators' Noticeboard, as there are some legitimate concerns about a couple of your edits. Unfortunately, there is also some fairly blatant homophobia in the thread as well. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 09:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. This is a bad block, and I have said as much here. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If you review Wikipedia's blocking policy, you will find nothing in it to explain why you were blocked; it seems to have been arbitrary and capricious. If you're here because you legitimately want to help build this encyclopedia, I suggest you stand up and defend yourself. Rivertorch (talk) 16:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

You have been unblocked
As you have been advised, there is considerable discussion over the validity of your block. Although some of it derives from your choice of username, the message on your userpage, and your apparent advocacy of a lifestyle while pursuing your personal religious beliefs I have decided to unblock you simply on the basis that process was not followed, in that you were not warned and given the opportunity to explain or make amends. You appear to have either falsely or mistakingly provided incorrect references for the edits you made to St. Dominic. As Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, great store is given to the provision of accurate and honest references so that content may be corroborated - and the citing of bad references is therefore considered as being extremely disruptive. Under the circumstances I am giving you a "only" warning that any such repetition will result in you being blocked, again, for a suitable period: This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing.

I would further caution you that Wikipedia is not a soapbox upon which you are permitted to advocate your lifestyle choices. You may bring your knowledge or experience of a subject to bear upon the editing of the article, but you are not allowed to have your opinions to form how the content is presented. You are encouraged to be honest about your personal preferences where you feel it helps with building the encyclopedia, and likewise encouraged to respect the wishes of those members of the community who do not want to be involved in discussing your choices. Simply, the community exists to build the encyclopedia, and everything should be directed to that goal. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)