User talk:Oxycut

Welcome!

Hello, Oxycut, 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:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which 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 ask your question there. Again, welcome!

meco (talk) 11:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

nice— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Counter-terrorism in Syria

A tag has been placed on Category:Counter-terrorism in Syria requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Super Mario Man 19:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Counter-terrorism in Syria

Category:Counter-terrorism in Syria, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Jeancey (talk) 20:37, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Hi there. I noticed you redirected 2012 in UFC events to Ultimate Fighting Championship#UFC 100 .E2.80.93 late 2000s-present. While being bold is encouraged, I have reverted this redirecting as the article 2012 in UFC events is currently undergoing discussion at Articles for Deletion, and the redirecting of a page under discussion is proscribed, as doing so removes the AfD notice. Please allow the discussion to come to a close; even if consensus is 'delete', the WP:BOLD creation of a redirect can still be done afterwards. Thank you. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:24, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My bad a~nd I apologise. I didn't know about that rule but now I do because you've shown me.Oxycut (talk) 06:59, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Size rule

Please stop trying to cut down the article due to the size rule. If you read my explanation on the talk page, the side rule only applies when the readable prose is too large. Currently the readable prose is at around 50kB, which is well within acceptable size guidelines. Readable prose means that we don't count references, infoboxes, pictures, picture comments, templates, see also sections, and other non-prose sections such as that. Jeancey (talk) 19:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian civil war

This is your last warning. The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did at Syrian civil war, you may be blocked from editing by an admin without further notice. Sopher99 (talk) 11:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Syrian_civil_war#Image_in_infobox

Category:Monorchistic people

G'day Oxycut, 'Category:Monorchistic people' is not only misspelled, but does not exist as a category in WP. I have reverted your revert. Please ensure that a category exists (and is spelled correctly) before adding it to an article. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Monorchid categories, etc

What are you trying to accomplish with these categories? Zagalejo^^^ 08:33, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a gap as a result of the existing 'Category:Castrated people' where monorchids are not recognised. This category helps to make that recognition and fill that gap and complement existing monorchism content on this database. It does credit to wikipedia and is fair and evenhanded when the expressions of the culture of partial castration are not neglected in comparison to the culture of other genital modifications (castration, Category:Circumcision, Category:Genital piercings, Category:Female genital mutilation) and of other disabilities (Category:People with cancer, Category:Intersex people)Oxycut (talk) 21:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can make your case here. I'm still not convinced this is appropriate. And calling people "soloballers" seems demeaning. Zagalejo^^^ 03:21, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you see that it's a more informal and evocative term than the formal medical classification which may be confused with a type of flower

Syrian civil war

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

And I've reverted you. Again. Take your ideas to Talk:Syrian civil war and get the hint that your unilateral attempts to create a content fork are not supported by consensus. Major changes must be discussed and agreed to by editors before being implemented. Wise up and learn the rules. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see it was archived without any comments from admins. This user has done it again. Mohamed CJ (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Syrian civil war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Sopher99 (talk) 11:54, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was a request on the talkpage to acknowledge the distinction of the Uprising and War which I actioned. I have referred to it in my edit summary. You, or anyone else, should have spoken about that request at the time if you felt with such certaintly that there could be no logic behind it. It has been before admins and they have found no need to take action, which ends the matter. 114.73.108.242 (talk) 20:27, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposed change was unanimously opposed by fellow editors. The matter is not ended until you stop making this change. That can either be of your own volition, or it can be because you get blocked from editing Wikipedia. Your choice. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:42, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living persons, as you did to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Thank you. Categories must reflect well referenced article content Geraldo Perez (talk) 01:56, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Monorchistic people

Category:Monorchistic people, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 22:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Monorchism

Category:Monorchism, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 00:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zoophilia in the Sexual intercourse article

Hello, Oxycut. I moved the zoophilia information to the Ethical, religious, and legal views section (while unbolding the terms) because it is more relevant to that section than as a standalone section. Since zoophillia is not as prevalent and is rarely ever referred to as sexual intercourse, it is WP:UNDUE WEIGHT to give it a section by itself, even a subsection, or to include much information on it, in the article. Although I initially thought about making it a subsection of the Ethical, religious, and legal views section. As also stated in my edit summary, we generally title sections on other species as In other animals so I changed your title of In nonhumans back to the aforementioned title. Flyer22 (talk) 23:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I concede your point. Some zoophilia is sexual intercouse while some is not and may rather be considered as deeply penetrative compassion pulsating back an forth between two experiencers.Oxycut (talk) 00:20, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Surely most sexual intercourse is in nonhumansOxycut (talk) 00:21, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like I stated, zoophilia is rarely ever referred to as sexual intercourse. This makes no difference to the fact that most sexual intercourse takes place between non-humans because there are more non-humans than there are humans.

I've had to revert you again. See what I stated in that edit summary. Firstly, you linked "human." That is WP:OVERLINKING because "human" is such a common word, one that doesn't need to be linked to for readers to understand what we mean. Secondly, you added "of the same or differing species" to the line that is talking about fingering and strap-on dildo use, which are human behaviors. We go by WP:Reliable sources here and, seeing as fingering and strap-on dildo use are human behaviors, the sources are speaking of humans. Which leads me to my next point -- the article is mostly about humans, as the top of the article states, referring readers to the Animal sexual behaviour article for sexual intercourse in other animals. The article is mostly about humans because the term sexual intercourse is usually reserved for humans and we have the Animal sexual behaviour article for non-human sexual activity. Furthermore, most non-humans do not engage in a variety of sex acts. As the fourth paragraph of the article states: "Sexual intercourse between non-human animals is more often referred to as copulation; for most, mating and copulation occurs at the point of estrus (the most fertile period of time in the female's reproductive cycle)..." This paragraph also mentions how sexual intercourse bonds some non-human animals by stating, "Like humans engaging in sex primarily for pleasure, this behavior in the above mentioned animals is also presumed to be for pleasure, and a contributing factor to strengthening their social bonds.", which takes care of your wanting that bond to be mentioned. Besides that, it is mentioned lower in the article, both in the Bonding section and In other animals section. And, finally, adding "human" before the words "college students" makes no sense at all because there are no non-human college students.

Since you are still fairly new to this site and apparently still don't understand a lot about how things work here, I suggest you thoroughly read the guidelines and policies provided to you in the Welcome template at the top of your talk page. Flyer22 (talk) 01:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think this has to do with health risks as a result of having sex? It's not a WP:Reliable source, for one thing. Read over what WP:Reliable sources are. I have to state that I feel that you need to step back from editing Wikipedia until you have a better grasp on our guidelines and policies. From what I have seen of your edits, you should at least broach/discuss things on the talk page first. Flyer22 (talk) 01:36, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Outcast status and inferiority complex are mental health risks and consequences.Oxycut (talk) 01:49, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]