User talk:Cmchir

I note the threatening comments you left on my user page about making efforts to track me down for the contributions I made to the articles on Herbert Ganado and Joseph Flores. You assert that the comments I have made are libellous, and that you are personally connected to the families of the individuals. You may want to note, however, that the information is not original research but comes from published and referenced sources. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedic resource; it is not a vehicle for personal benefit. I take threats to my wellbeing very seriously and would like to inform you that I have referred the case to wikipedia administrators to consider an appropriate response. Contaldo80 (talk) 15:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

January 2009
You have been from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for making legal threats or taking legal action. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia as long as the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. If you believe that a legal action is warranted, you may contact our information team at [mailto:info-en@wikimedia.org info-en@wikimedia.org] and they may forward it to our legal counsel or a more appropriate venue. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below.

You threatened to take actions to trace his identity along with stating that. The only reason you would want to know his identity is to take legal action, therefore it was a legal threat. 24.99.242.63 (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm concerned about the edit war you were in when you were blocked. How do you plan to proceed? Toddst1 (talk) 17:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd like to suggest that reviewing admins look at the content of the edit in question. It seems to me unencyclopedic and highly POV, and this editor may well have quite correct to remove it. Were the subject alive, it would be a clear BLP violation. This editor might have breached NLT; however, this editor might well also be in the right here. A word to the other editor might be helpful. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 18:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think merely calling something libelous should be considered a legal threat, if nothing else it's something we need to be able to discuss to cover our asses legally. As the claims in the articles seem to be stripped down to to what can be supported with references now, I think there's something to be said for unblocking and starting with a clean slate, with everybody remembering that the suggestion of legal threats is something to be carefully avoided. I'll leave a note on Protonk's talk asking him if he'd agree. --fvw *  05:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)