331
edits
WikiIndex talk:Prohibited content: Difference between revisions
→Controversial sites: amazing.
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) |
(→Controversial sites: amazing.) |
||
| Line 107: | Line 107: | ||
::::However, if you just look and react to what you think "boylover" would mean, I can easily see why you would think BoyWiki was highly offensive. This much is clear. "Boylover" is ''not'' a term for sexual preference. On the other hand, some with a pedophilic male sexual preference might call themselves "boylovers." Many "boylovers," apparently, to the contrary, condemn unlawful behavior, including sexual contact with children. Some may not. Leucosticte has shown no sign of being either kind of "boylover," his agenda is always disruption and debate, especially where he thinks standard thinking is wrong. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 20:31, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ::::However, if you just look and react to what you think "boylover" would mean, I can easily see why you would think BoyWiki was highly offensive. This much is clear. "Boylover" is ''not'' a term for sexual preference. On the other hand, some with a pedophilic male sexual preference might call themselves "boylovers." Many "boylovers," apparently, to the contrary, condemn unlawful behavior, including sexual contact with children. Some may not. Leucosticte has shown no sign of being either kind of "boylover," his agenda is always disruption and debate, especially where he thinks standard thinking is wrong. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 20:31, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
:::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boylove&oldid=70544713 This] is the most recent WP article on the topic of boylove. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | :::::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boylove&oldid=70544713 This] is the most recent WP article on the topic of boylove. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:44, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
::::::Why does L. link to a 2006 version? Because the current version is a disambig page. Someone who is not careful can miss that. It's easy. I missed it at first! That 2006 article was unsourced. The question would not be what someone on Wikipedia thought 8 years ago, and as to general usage of the word, but how the web site itself defines it, and it does.[https://www.boywiki.org/en/Boylover#Boylover_culture] What I find amazing here is that Leucosticte is attempting to stir up animosity toward the site, by associating them with pedophilia, while, on the site, he's portraying himself as their friend. Remarkable. Here is not the place to make specific community decisions about specific wiki pages. "Prohibited content" is not going to be a specific list of wikis -- though such might be complied. Hah! indexed.... --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 01:41, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | |||