User talk:RevRoland

February 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Masturbation, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. "Although no-one disputes that masturbation is practiced by heterosexuals, male masturbation is generally presented as only a homosexual activity in pornography websites." - What rubbish, do you have reliable sources for that statement? ⊃°HotCrocodile...... + 03:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Anal masturbation. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. ⊃°HotCrocodile...... + 04:04, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the word 'rubbish' indicates a level of intellectualism insufficient for editing an encyclopedia. Please DO NOT vandalise any more posts or I shall report your bullying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RevRoland (talk • contribs)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Masturbation, you may be blocked from editing. ⊃°HotCrocodile...... + 20:00, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FINAL REPSONSE This note is made further to continued vandalism by user ‘hotcrocodile’who deletes anything he doesn’t like.

In an ideal online encyclopedia like Wikipedia, there would be strict controls on extremism.

The deletion by ‘hotcrocodile’ of a safety note directed to the vulnerable and impressionable could be considered criminal negligence in some common law jurisdictions.

To assist the vulnerable and impressionable I shall point out that choosing a username 'hotcrocodile' to refer to a serious encyclopedia writer suggests a puerile, shallow, and vain nature.

A certain fixation upon demonstrating acceptability of anal masturbation does, from medical literature, suggest a sexual and emotional dysphoric incapable of forming healthy and normal relationships with members of the opposite sex.

Taken all together a criminologist might set an above average probability of a criminal sexual nature of the correspondent.

I shall therefore, regrettably, be blocking any further communication from Wikipedia and advise vulnerable and impressionable persons to engage in no dialogue with this abusive user.

It is hoped that Wikipedia can overcome the problem of extremism and the ‘hot crocodiles’ that abuse it.

This is the last entry I shall be making here.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. 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.

If you do not intend to edit here again then clearly will not concern you. But if you do, please try to understand that wikipedia is not censored, by intent and by consensus, and there is no place here for point-of-view-orientated editing. We all have our own viewpoints on sexual, moral and behavioural matters; wikipedia wishes to hear none of them. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC) I agree blocking this guy was fucking ridiculous, and just oillustrates the total faggotry of Wikpiedia. Honestly people would be more willing to cooperate othwerwise.[reply]