User talk:Corretions

Comments
I have replied to your comment here: User_talk:Pdcook. Regards, P. D. Cook  Talk to me! 21:38, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020
Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. creffett (talk) 04:14, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * To expand on this - please don't remove the COI template from Piu_Eatwell. I understand your frustration with the presence of the COI tag, but it's a signal that an uninvolved editor needs to take a look at the article (which offered to do) and make sure there aren't any issues. The wording of these tags are vague ("may have been created," "may be connected to the subject," ...) because most of the time we'll never know for sure whether a particular editor was paid or is connected to the article. I ask that you withdraw your legal threat and let Pdcook review the article and clear the tag. creffett (talk) 04:30, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, these are not "baseless legal threats" because the tag referred to is defamatory, as it stands, and I am actually a trained lawyer. This is my reputation at stake and I can't afford to "wait" until somebody at Wikipedia "feels like" editing the article. As I explained originally, I paid WikiProfessionals, Inc, which seems to be a totally legit. online reputation management agency, to submit the article for acceptance by Wikipedia. I assumed, naturally, that they had made all necessary disclosures, and in fact they state on their website that they do so. I did not realize that they had not made those disclosures, and as soon as I saw the tag, I made a full declaration of the article source myself. I also stated I am happy to have the article deleted, if you consider that it is not a proper entry for Wikipedia. However, you have unreasonably refused to delete the article (so presumably you either feel it is of some merit, or are just being bloody minded). Nor, however, will you remove the tag, which is clearly defamatory as - by the use of the words "APPEARS" and "CLOSE CONNECTION", you are implying there is doubt and/or concealment of the source, which there is not. This is the first thing that users will see and it casts questions on my personal integrity. I have given you ample opportunity to correct or remove the tag, or delete the article, but you have obstinately refused to do so. Therefore, I am passing the matter to my lawyer who will be contacting Wikipedia shortly. This is not a "baseless threat" but a final recourse to defend my legal rights, as you have now also blocked me from editing content. A further - incidental - point is that the article is short, factually correct, fairly neutral in tone, and there is nothing stopping anybody adding to or amplifying it.

WP:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents
Greetings, I have started a discussion about these issues at the link above. You are welcome to comment there. Regards, P. D. Cook  Talk to me! 04:23, 25 January 2020 (UTC) Hello, these are not "baseless legal threats" because the tag referred to is defamatory, as it stands, and I am actually a trained lawyer. I have given you ample opportunity to correct or remove it, or delete the article, but you have obstinately refused to do so. Therefore, I am passing the matter to my lawyer who will be contacting Wikipedia shortly.

January 2020
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  04:32, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You can be unblocked if you unambiguously withdraw your legal threats. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  04:33, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Because you have persisted with your legal threats, your talk page access has been revoked. Please contact the Volunteer Response Team if you want to be unblocked. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  07:05, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Piu Eatwell
In case you are still monitoring this talk page, I just wanted to mention that folks have looked through and modified the Piu Eatwell article. The COI tag has been removed (and I'm happy about that). I understand your frustration with the process, but it just took a few days to sort it all out. Regards, P. D. Cook  Talk to me! 20:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)