Talk:Lotar

Promo crap
OK, I removed the promotional crap from this article, wikified it, etc. but there's one thing wrong - it reads as if Lotar = Kapap, which isn't true. In fact, Lotar is a lot more than just martial arts, and it deals with the use of many real weapons (guns), which is barely mentioned in the article. Someone who has completed a course in Lotar (many IDF soldiers have...), please edit this article :) -- Y Ynhockey (Talk) Y 19:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

POV check
I've also flagged the article for not citing sources/references, and POV check. The article still reads largely like the result of two commercial academies fighting to own it, each claiming to be only "genuine", and reads overall more like an infomercial than an encyclopedia article. -- 62.147.36.190 21:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge
The Kapap article mentions the Lotar-Kapap system. Are they one and the same? This article is short without much extra info.Peter Rehse 04:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I shifted the page to a redirect to Kapap. If it goes back to an article an effort should be made to explain why it is different from Kapap and by that I don't mean because of an organizational breakup.Peter Rehse 03:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Ronin6969
Ronin6969 has indicated on the Help Desk that he is the President of Lotar Self Sefense. This presents a conflict of interest issue, in addition to the legal threats made on the Help Desk. I would encourage Ronin6969 to comment on the changes he would like made to the article here, as well as sources for those changes, so we can avoid this dispute in the future. -- Kesh 23:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * This not a place for the referral of KAPAP or Avi or Albert what they do is different then what we do...We both have similar systems but KAPAP is separate at this time. All the same I am fine with the change in description but once again the author is promoting a different system and leading people to believe that it is one in the same...this is untrue The promo crap was still in there...I tried to address the change back...please advise...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronin6969 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I asked you to discuss it here first, but you instead re-added your own promotional material, while removing cited material from the article. That is vandalism. Please do not make further edits to the page yourself, given your own conflict of interest here. If you want to suggest changes to the article, put that on the Talk page here, but don't put your own material on the article again. -- Kesh 23:59, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

the promo crap you were speaking of
I do have a personal interest someone sent me to this site to see the misinformation that was being put out. How you can justify saying that one system is the same as the other is just silly. As well it is just incorrect. This article that you are speaking of I helped to write because the state author could not write in English. So please do not tell me about the info in the article. I have tried all different ways to deal with the situation...in the end you have been the only person that I have spoken with to tell me that the information on my company is really not the correct information. It seems impossible that you are telling me what the information about my own company should be. I have asked for help over and over and as for replacement on the page I have just been adding the proper info to the page. I have read the KAPAP page and there is direct PROMO links and information on there please help me understand how that is different...I am asking for help not starting a fight with you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronin6969 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The big problem is your use of your personal information in the article. Wikipedia requires that you provide verifiable sources of information. We can't just take your word for it, we need to see the facts for ourselves from reliable, third-party sources. Second, your conflict of interest makes it difficult to take your edits at face-value. While the Kapap article needs some more work, it at least provides some sources outside of the academy to show what it is and satisfy our notability guidelines. -- Kesh 04:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I understand
I do understand what you are saying but the only verifiable info id being used by my ex partner in the KAPAP article...I wrote in info and the articles and when we split his started using all of them for his new venture. I do not care if I am not mentioned in the Lotar article or m schools etc... but I do care that it is leading people to his information...the only way I even know this was happening was when one of the Secret Service officers in the school let me know what was going on and that they were using the name on your site for their benefit and linking it to their site...I wrote asking for help with this and no one responded so I had to change it myself. I am still just trying to get the proper info up and it has been nothing but a nightmare to protect the usage of the information and name