User talk:Samuelboyle96

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! GAB^gab 21:03, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This line makes the implication that abortion is justifiable due to the fact most cases are rape "and widespread sexual violence results in many women getting pregnant against their will"

You need to prove that there is an epidemic of pregnant women due to rape in Latin America. This is unlikely to be true. It is very likely to be a very very very small amount of pregnancies are due to rape. It is 1/2000 in the US.

Whether or not you believe in abortion or not you can't dismiss it as being a purely Roman Catholic idea without exploring their thought process "ccess to contraceptives is limited in the predominantly Roman Catholic region,[146] and widespread sexual violence results in many women getting pregnant against their will"

Why not just say a majority of Latin Americans think abortion is unethical. The implication is religious people are stupid. So the quote should say: the Roman catholic church is unsure when life begins therefore many of the region take the stance to not allow abortion after conception. The quote is more clear and it doesn't demean people for having a certain view different from yours. The content here assumes abortion is always justifiable. That is a controversial opinion and not a FACT.

Samuelboyle96, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Samuelboyle96! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Policy regarding living persons

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Suzanna Danuta Walters. In this case there is consensus that the material you continue to restore does not meet Wikipedia's policy regarding living persons or WP:NPOV. Please join the discussion on the article talk page and gain consensus for inclusion of the material instead of restoring it wholesale.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:53, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was referenced. It quoted what she said.

Sorry you have a political agenda. Please read the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaron_Lanier#Wikipedia_and_the_omniscience_of_collective_wisdomPlease read the following.

If you restore the disputed BLP-violating content again you will be blocked from editing.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you would do that.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaron_Lanier#Wikipedia_and_the_omniscience_of_collective_wisdom

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for edit warring to restore disputed content to a WP:BLP without consensus for inclusion. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]