User talk:Bobby.jennings

Welcome!

Hello, Bobby.jennings, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

But...

Remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. However, Wiktionary is our sister project and they will accept article of the type you are creating. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 07:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Recent edits to AR Fox

Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit(s). In particular, something potentially negative or defamatory about a living person needs a reliable source Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! DemocraticLuntz (talk) 17:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

It is a know fact that AR Fox participated in a gay porno. I cited my sources. I can even provide the video link. I don't think its fair to say may contribution is defamatory it is true. AR Fox was arrested for drugs and has a mugshot. That is illegal. However, no one deleted that evidence saying it is harmful or potentially negative to him. I find your position to be biased and prejudiced against homosexual behavior. Did you even look at my source before deleting my post? Did you conduct your own investigation or do a simple google search? How can something that is publicly know not be accepted by wikipedia?

December 2013

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at AR Fox. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  17:36, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Please cease adding the same information to the AR Fox page. If it's true, you need better references per Wikipedia's WP:BLP policy. If untrue, well, obviously that's no good. You will almost certainly be blocked if you continue to add it. --— Rhododendrites ^talk |  17:37, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Animosity happens when bigoted, self righteous writers try to manipulate others into accepting their version of the truth no matter how ridiculous. AR Fox knowingly participated in a gay porn video. As someone who markets himself to the public, he chose to make decisions that not only affect him, but his fan base as well. A simple google search, or even viewing my references would have proven this. I will not stop reposting the truth about AR Fox. In addition I have written to Wikipedia about the hypocrisy of preventing others from knowing the truth about AR Fox. His pornographic video is available for viewing. He made that choice. Bt, to deny me from writing about it, even with credible sources is censorship. Threaten to delete my account? You should never have been given one.

I'm just going to ignore the insane allegations of bigotry and point again to the Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons. Truth is irrelevant here and elsewhere on Wikipedia -- it is about what the cited reliable sources say. You did not cite a source in a specific enough way to satisfy the policy -- the burden is on you to add specifics, not on the reader or on other editors to Google. There is no conspiracy. --— Rhododendrites ^talk |  18:06, 25 December 2013 (UTC)