User talk:Winntitle

February 2012
Your edit warring at Same-sex marriage in Maryland, including the continued insertion of material expressing a point of view, and your personal attacks at User:Teammm were not constructive and will result in your being blocked from editing. I advise reading WP:NPOV, WP:NPA, and WP:Edit war before making any further edits. -Rrius (talk) 21:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

You don't honest to God actually think the perversion of "gay marriage" in a Catholic state like Maryland is acceptable?
 * That you think that matters shows you don't understand what Wikipedia is about. Also, the text you seek to insert is factually incorrect. By far the majority of the referendums were constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage, not laws to grant or repeal existing grants. In fact, the Maine referendum is the only one that really fits (it was a vote not to enact same-sex marriage). California sort of fits too, but it wasn't a repeal either; it was a constitutional amendment that superseded a California Supreme Court opinion. -Rrius (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Same-sex marriage shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

Or you can say that all 31 initiatives in one way or another have gona against gay marriage...
 * First, it would be inaccurate. Arizona had a referendum (very few of these have been initiatives) to ban SSM and anything like it, but it failed. They then came back with one that only banned SSM, and it passed. More importantly, the information has to be conveyed somewhere where it is relevant. You need to be careful to use neutral language given the fact that you've gone around calling people "faggot" (since I'm straight, I'm choosing to assume you are calling yourself that name (making you a self-hating homosexual) on this page rather than attacking me with it, but you definitely attacked User:Teammm with it without any provocation) and answered a call to have you stop your disruptive editing by asking if I thought "perversion of 'gay marriage'" was acceptable in Maryland. -Rrius (talk) 22:17, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Your reply brings up several interesting points. I find the gay marriage thing wierd and annoying, as homosexuality is obviously a lifestyle choice as opposed to being born black or Asian, white, etc..
 * That is an opinion that ignores the facts. Studies have shown that sexual preference is an in-born quality, not a choice. -Rrius (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Removed Slurs from Page
I have deleted Wintitle's calling editors nasty names from his talk page. --Javaweb (talk) 23:17, 15 March 2012 (UTC)Javaweb