User talk:DrLenHorowitz

Hello, DrLenHorowitz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you created appears to be an article about yourself. This is a common mistake made by new Wikipedians—as this is an encyclopedia, we wouldn't expect to have an article about every contributor. Your user page, however, is a great place to write about yourself, making sure to stay within user page guidelines. Just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit it normally.

The page you created about yourself has been or will shortly be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, but if you want to use the content from it, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! SGGH ping! 22:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

May 2010
You have been indefinitely blocked from editing 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 would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. SGGH ping! 22:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoever you may be, I'm afraid Wikipedia does not accept legal threats such as the one you added to that article (suggesting civil and criminal charges against Wikipedia editors). Wikipedia regulates itself using such policies as WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. If you have a legal issue you may email the Wikipedia foundation, however by the policy of WP:NLT your account won't be allowed to edit until you have retracted the threat here. In the mean time, I shall leave here some links to policies on how to edit articles about yourself (which is itself discouraged). I hope this gets resolved soon, kind regards. SGGH ping! 22:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Advice
NW ( Talk ) 23:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

blocked for "legal threats"
Dear SGGH and Officials in the WikiMedia Foundation:

I am contacting you as the Editor-in-Chief of Medical Veritas journal, an internationally known authority in public health, emerging diseases, and an expert in media persuasion technologies research and developments based on my matriculation at Harvard University, Graduate School of Education, and School of Public Health. I am also an investigative journalist currently “on assignment” in regard to the following. . ..

Today, I submitted editions to the Wikipedia "biography" of Leonard Horowitz, to remedy obvious, serious, damaging biases expressed in partial truths published in violation of your administrative rule of "Neutral Point of View.” My editions, including legal notices, were “blocked.”

Several of my colleagues and I have been similarly thwarted in the past; prohibited from making edits to misleading biographies. Each time my colleagues and I have made objective factual corrections to our biographies posted on Wikipedia (e.g., Leonard Horowitz), editions were removed in short order, returning the biographies to their original, obviously remiss and heavily biased, states.

My editions today were posted on behalf of myself, several members of the Editorial Board of Medical Veritas journal, and a class of scientists, scholars, and medical professionals who have written of their discontent and abuse by anonymous editors of Wikipedia. The anonymous Wikipedia editors, who allegedly represent the general public, or WE THE PEOPLE, are believed to be engaging in fraud and misrepresentations. In service to the public, my colleagues, and this class of persons expressing grievances, I am advancing an investigation into the administrative policies of Wikipedia that pertain to the aforementioned grievances and available remedies.

Today, an anonymous editor identified as “SGGH” blocked my posting of legal and lawful NOTICES to cease and desist biased postings of half truths and contextually remiss facts that are damagingly to my person and humanitarian works.

Any reasonable person who values their life’s work would feel as my colleagues and I do, compelling us to advance this remedial investigation and demand that Wikipedia prove that their published policy of “Neutral Point of View” is enforceable under the current administrative program and communications system.

For these reasons I request a detailed reply to this mail articulating:

1)	How I, and my colleagues, can rationalize and legitimize the published policies (e.g., “Neutral Point of View”) of Wikipedia, so as to prevent future damages, remedy current disparities, and prevent legal disputes. 2)	Why Wikipedia’s policy discourages the Subjects of published “biographies” from correcting/editing contextual inaccuracies and partial truths that are completely misleading in their descriptions. 3)	Why Wikipedia, operating with all of its editorial anonymity, and the aforementioned challenges to journalistic integrity, can be trusted as a source of unbiased information. 4)	Why “SGGH,” who blocked my personal editions today, and is identified on Wikipedia’s promotional links as substantially invested in serving special military interests in subjects pertaining to biographical intelligence, should be trusted to referee a pacifist’s biography, namely mine? 5)	What, if anything, has been done by the leadership of the Wikimedia Foundation following published revelations that 34.4 million Wikipedia edits were performed by 2.6 million organizations or individuals ranging from the CIA to Microsoft to Congressional offices, linked to the edits they or someone at their organization's net address made? Meaning, the CIA et. al., are at liberty to edit their own Wikipedia postings, but my colleagues and I are not. Why is this unfair activity, facilitated by official policy, tolerated? 6)	What assurance does the Wikimedia Foundation provide that the approximately 1,000 “volunteer” editors, and Wiki-administrators, are not paid employees of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), British Secret Service, or other entity positioned to extend social engineering, population indoctrination, and mass media persuasion, (i.e., PSYOPS—psychological operations.) 7)	Given the widespread grievances expressed by myriad professionals, why should Wikipedia be considered anything more than a “yellow press,” or propagandist tool, operating on behalf of social engineers biased by multi-national corporate interests? 8)	Does SGGH, and other Wiki-agents empowered to block edits to biographies attempted by damaged Subjects, realize such actions exclusively serve the interests of globalists’ geopolitical and financial agendas; and thus may be viewed as treasonous and destructive to WE THE PEOPLE and US Constitution guarantees including equal rights, free speech, and freedom of the press? 9)	Why are claims of injustice against Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation pertaining to allegations of: 1) Identity fraud and/or “identity concealment” of editors claiming to represent WE THE PEOPLE; and 2) libel in the publication of biographies in which the Subjects are prevented from assuring “Neutral Point of View,” unfounded?

Thank you very much, in advance, for your prompt detailed response to this important inquiry.

Very sincerely,

Leonard G. Horowitz, DMD, MA, MPH, DNM(hon.)DrLenHorowitz (talk) 05:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC) Editor-in-Chief, [Medical Veritas]


 * If you wish to contact the Wikimedia Foundation, you can do so via their contact details. This page only serves for communication for working within Wikipedia's rules and guidelines and you have explicitly stated that you are not willing to follow those rules, especially not making legal threats. Please remember that posting your email address and phone number on a public website is a highly risky action and should be avoided. Regards  So Why  06:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In response to your questioning of the block. If you read WP:NLT you will see that the block was according to Wikipedia policies. Secondly, I assure you that I have no "military" bias towards the "pacifists" article because, with no offence intended, I have never heard of you before and still have no idea who you are. I don't need to know to enforce Wikipedia's policy on legal threats. Thirdly, do you really think that Wikipedia is a giant CIA/OSS conspiracy? Anyone is allowed to edit Wikipedia provided they stay within policy, as you would have been if you had stayed within it. Kind regards, SGGH ping! 11:25, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh and furthermore there is a policy on potentially libellous material on the biographies of living persons, WP:BLP, however it again does not permit legal threats such as that which you posted, and have still not retracted here. Incidentally, it is not always the best idea to broadcast your contact details online where everyone can see it. If you are concerned that you may get unwanted correspondence having revealed your identity, I can have it WP:OVERSIGHTED for your convenience, leave a message here and let us know. SGGH ping! 11:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)