User talk:Friendlyneighbourhoodgay

November 2016
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)

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)

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)

Opinions and sourcing
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)

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)
 * Flyer22 Reborn, please give me an opinion on the user name and ping me--it's a borderline case, since it can be read in a variety of ways. Editor: please see Username policy and consider changing your name. Drmies (talk) 15:31, 4 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Drmies, I'm not sure about the username. I didn't find it offensive. I did warn the user about sticking to one account, though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:43, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
 * OK --thanks. I cannot confirm that these are the same accounts. Drmies (talk) 02:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Drmies, I know, but they are; see the content they focused on and the timing of the accounts. I'm not looking for either account to be blocked, though. If I see both accounts editing, I will then seek that one of the accounts is blocked. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I saw that, but I was talking about CU. Yes, this sounds reasonable. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 03:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, although I wasn't sure if you had checked how both accounts edited alike, I know you meant CU. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)