User talk:Kingrivera

January 28, 2011

Edit war? How about be truthful. Intact is not the same as uncircumcised. Intact describes something that has not been damaged. Uncircumcised describes the penis of a man who has undergone foreskin restoration, "I am uncircumcising myself." Men in most of the world do not call themselves "uncircumcised" because they were never cut, they are INTACT. They have an intact penis with a normal foreskin.

February 2011

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Foreskin. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:55, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

I did not add commentary to Wikipedia, so what are you talking about? I corrected the page. The correct word for a man that has not undergone circumcision is "intact." K. M. @. if you're going to be a dictator and change everything to your own opinion instead of correct terms.

July 2011

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Masturbation, you may be blocked from editing. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 16:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Masturbation, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 17:41, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you carry on with your tendentious MPOV edit warring [1][2][3] and your uncivil personal attacks on other editors [4][5][6][7][8][9], you will likely find yourself permanently blocked from editing. It will be best for you to stop now. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C17:59, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for violating Wikipedia policy. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest this block by replying here on your talk page by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}}. You may also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list instead, or mail unblock-en-llists.wikimedia.org. Daniel Case (talk) 05:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I WILL NEVER AGAIN DONATE TO WIKIPEDIA.

THE REASON FOR THIS IS, WIKIPEDIA ALLOWS CENSORSHIP. I HAVE BEEN CENSORED BY JAKEW.

THIS FIGHT IS NOT OVER, JAKEW.

This is your last warning; the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at Human penis size, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. This is NOT censorship. You are repeatedly attempting to bend the encyclopaedia to a non-neutral point of view. This despite multiple requests over the past several months to stop. The reasons have been explained to you several times. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 06:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistent disruptive editing. It is clear that your only purpose in editing Wikipedia is to attempt to force your own opinion one one issue onto Wikipedia, and that you are totally unwilling to accept consensus. There does not seem to be any prospect at all of your doing any constructive editing within the collaborative framework of Wikipedia. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]