Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adolescent sexuality in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Friends With Benefits (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason for redirecting Hookup to Casual sex? The disambiguation page was much more appropriate. Then you've created Hookup (disambiguation) which already exists? — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Went on IRC chat and discussed with other experienced editors, and went with Hookup (disambiguation) redirecting to Hook-up. We also discussed redirecting "Hookup" and "Hook up" to Casual sex and decided this probably isn't best. I guess if you still would really like to do that let's start a discussion on the talk page. Hopefully you understand why I reverted your redirects. Let's discuss further if need be. Cheers! — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hookup culture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hookup culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:32, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted all content from the page and left it untouched for over a month. I interpreted this as meaning that you wanted the page deleted. If you want it restored, just ask explicitly and I'll restore it. DS (talk) 17:46, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my last post on talk:hookup culture. You have already reverted content four times in the past 24 hours, breaking WP:3RR. This is edit warring, and it can get you blocked from editing. Please stop trying to ram in your own private draft for this page when there's no consensus for it. Multiple editors have requested that you stop adding contentious material and instead first discuss it on the talk page. If there is consensus to add the controversial material, then you may add it. If you continue to attempt to ram through your own private draft against the objections of myself and other editors, I will file a complaint on WP:AN3. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Hookup culture shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Wikipedia is not academia, nor a pulpit, nor a magazine. Simply put, you appear to be gaming the system to push your agenda about sexual behavior. Several editors, for the sake of neutrality, have attempted to respond to your edits constructively but at this point it has clearly become a case of patrolling them and appealing to other avenues of relief. The preferred option in this situation would be for you to take a self-imposed wikibreak. EBY (talk) 00:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Adolescent sexuality in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chlamydia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Psychological effects of adolescent sex is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psychological effects of adolescent sex until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Psychological effects of adolescent sex, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mental (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any WP:RS that favors sex among adolescents, though they doubtless favor it! I don't want to promote an argument on "AS in the US" if you consider the argument closed. I don't have an overall grasp of the deleted material, but can support (or not!) individual issues as they are raised on the talk page. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is an adolescent anyway? I know of sources that argue that it is best for female health to have children early. I also know of studies that argue that there are no adverse consequences of consensual sex among teenagers.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can discuss issues on the talk page. I just wanted to demonstrate my support for Illuminato's position, if backed up by WP:RS and not WP:UNDUE. But he probably knows that already. They've discovered in the past year or so that youth's brains are plastic (not totally formed) up until their early 20s. Probably shouldn't be letting them drive, vote or drink, until that happens, much less encouraging them to have sex. Student7 (talk) 16:31, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Pornography and adolescents has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Various edits, generally appropriate, have left this article empty of content.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nat Gertler (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]