User talk:Pro-Lick

Important Wikipedian References

Hello, Pro-Lick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -GTBacchus^(talk) 04:31, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of Anti-Abortionists' Threats

Enjoy the do-it-our-way or we'll burn, bomb, and shoot you logic.

Regarding your edits to Abortion

Pro, the particular sentence you are objecting to has been accepted by consensus. At this point, attempting to edit the sentence can only be seen as an attempt to overturn the NPoV consensus. Refusal to abide by consensus canhave serious consequences, up to and including being blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Please re-read the discussion on the talk page, linked above, If you feel you have additional information or new arguments, please feel free to make them--but please do NOT simply ignore the consensus that has already been established. Justin Eiler 03:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing comments

Pro-Lick, hi. You've really chosen a spot at which to dive into Wikipedia. I hope that you're maintaining good spirits about it - the discussion can get a bit vehement, and at times negative. I wanted to let you know about a certain article of Wiki-culture, regarding talk pages.

Apparently, I posted a comment in an area that was reserved for citations. I didn't realize that until after you removed it, because I'm not used to that sort of thing. Somehow I read right through the words "Not for opinions" without it registering that you were declaring that section a comment-free zone. I noticed also that, elsewhere on the page, someone pasted a suggested rewrite of a section, and you commented somewhere in the middle of it. They moved your comment outside of the bordered area, with an explanation as to why they did that.

I don't mind if you want to set up some kind of structure on the talk page, but you should know this, from someone who's pretty familiar with multiple aspects of Wikipedia: Removing or altering things that other people post on a talk page is considered exteremely rude here. People will get very upset about it, and if anyone removes your comments, which may happen, you are fully within your rights to put them back. If you spend any time on Wikipedia talk pages, you should either learn to respect that custom, or be prepared to run afoul of a lot of editors.

If you want to set up some structure: some "=sources here=" area, fine. Subpages are one traditional way to do that, and people will generally follow whatever rules you set up there, to a reasonable extent. Sections of the main talk page can be kept neat by Refactoring, but if you touch someone else's comments you should move them, not remove them. Removing what someone else posted - unless it's utter vandalism or illegal or something - is a big taboo, non-kosher, faux pas, party foul. Whatever you call it. Wikipedians consider it disrespectful.

I thought you should know. I'm putting my comments back now, in a comments subsection. If you've got a better idea, refactor away, my friend. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:31, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]