User talk:Josh Dean Roy

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.  Will Beback   talk    20:17, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Tacosunday is spamming with slander!
That moron needs to be blocked!!


 * Please use the article talk page to discuss the issue. From a brief look at the disputed material, I don't see what the libel would be. If an allegation has been made in reliable sources then it is permissible to report it in Wikipedia, potentially with attribution if it is a POV or a disputed fact.   Will Beback    talk    20:59, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The "Pittsburgh Times" and the "Pittsburgh Trib" as well as PKWV radio reported that the one killed was not Mr. Lloyd's "girlfriend", Hardy was already married to his CURRENT WIFE, and that she was an informant who tried to murder the two. The court documents state this, plus I was there...!

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive conduct. The next time you make a personal attack, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Mfield (talk) 21:39, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Why am I getting this warning, and "taco" gets a slap on the wrist?
 * He had already been given that warning by another admin, but they are both equally serious, at Wikipedia we don't tolerate personal attacks. Mfield (talk) 22:03, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * He started it by first slandering Mr. Lloyd, and then claiming I am he...

Don't attack me
You haven't cited any references to refute the sourced content that says the woman Lloyd killed was his girlfriend. If you have anything to contribute on that front, then you can edit the article (talk) to add it. Nevard (talk) 08:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You now seem to be proxying for Lloyd's legal threats. Legal threats are grounds for being blocked. Removing them would be a good idea. Nevard (talk) 08:32, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That is blackmail, sir, and I shall report this to the authorities...!

Please refrain from further editing of Creativity Movement
It is clear from your comments on article talk that you have a conflict of interest. You should not be editing the article with respect to the views and opinions of one involved person, this is an encyclopedia based on NPOV and cited fact. Your argumentative attitude with editors who are merely asking for you to provide sources to back what you are claiming is unacceptable, as are legal threats. Wikipedia as a community has rules on verifiability to protect both reader and subject of articles, especially where living persons are concerned, and information that cannot be verified cannot be included.Mfield (talk) 08:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

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.


 * Where have I made any threats? So, if someone disagrees with your biased "reporting", you block them and slander them?! And I have already told you, I cannot post, nor link to, any court documents!! Send me $100 US dollars and I can send you a copy, but it cannot be legally posted, nor do courts have such documents online!! Let me get this straight, if I create a fake newspaper website and post a link here, then that becomes a SOURCE??? WTF?!?!
 * The threat that you made was here where you claim Mr Lloyd said in a note "I have sued successfully a local reporter who refused to recant, and I have no bones about suing Wikipedia, either". I have unblocked your talk page editing so you can explain this. Please note I am not concerned with the content of the original dispute, only in why you would be repeating this threat on behalf of the third party and what you as an editor intended by it. If there has been a misunderstanding of your involvement with Mr Lloyd and of potential conflicts of interest on your part then you need to clarify now or you will remain blocked indefinitely. Your behaviour, contributions and interactions with other editors strongly indicate a conflict of interest. Mfield (talk) 17:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I interviewed Mr. Lloyd. The interview was printed in the Pittsburgh Times. I quoted him to give him a voice, since the "sources" being used to slander him are so outrageously false...! He was married to Lisa Lloyd already by the time of the shooting. And since you are allowing such statements to be used as "sources", I had no choice but to quote his response, which is a direct source!!
 * OK, well the important thing here is to calm the situation down. If you have no stake in this and merely interviewed him, then there should be no reason to be so seemingly emotional about the edit war you have got into. The only way to solve this is to step back for a second, post the proposed modifications complete on the article talk page with the relevant citations, and let consensus decide the outcome. You can cite any reliable sources that are a matter of record, but not private or unpublished conversations and interviews as that constitutes self published and/or original research. You have to stop the edit warring and personal attacks from getting in the way, as they compromise your position. You have to remember that no one on Wikipedia knows who you are, and no reader will know who you are as a contributor so your contributions have to be100% independently WP:verifiable. If you can commit to not stopping the battle that you have been having in its current form, and not repeating legal threats or inflaming the situation with your interactions with other editors then I will unblock you so you can continue to work on the article. Mfield (talk) 19:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The Pittsburgh Times - please clarify some details about this publication as Googling it returns not one hit. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette merged with the Pittsburgh Times in 1900. Did you mean the Times?Mfield (talk) 21:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The Pittsburgh Times is an actual newspaper in Pittsburgh, an american city. They have no website. Hardy Lloyd was not dating Lori Hann! How am I to prove this to you if I cannot quote Mr. Lloyd or the Pittsburgh Times or PKWV, and the Pittsburgh Trib article was deleted off their site...? All the "sources" being quoted attacking Lloyd are false. How are we too clarify this?


 * Wikipedia and the United States are two wonderful reasons on why democracy is wrong!! "Concensus" is never based on fact, only the norm or the majority being asked, and they are almost always wrong...!

I am not Hardy Lloyd
I am not Hardy Lloyd!

Sources have been given!
PKWV radio's interview with Mr. Lloyd! Pittsburgh Times articles! My interview with Mr. Lloyd! Pittsburgh Trib's articles! Court transcripts, police reports, FBI reports, and his bloody website!! The "sources" you have posted are from biased people who lie about Mr. Lloyd simply because they hate his racial views...! Those are not "sources"!

Mr. Lloyd was already married!

 * Mr. Lloyd was already married, and had never dated Lori. The woman had joined the "Church of Creativity" to spy on Lloyd and his friends for the FBI. This is all in the court records!! The papers lied to slander Lloyd in the publics eye because of his racist views. All the sources you are quoting are false, and thus should not be allowed. Would you like me to call Mr. or Mrs. Lloyd for comment? Who in WIKI do I call for comment? I have decided to write about WIKI's biased writing and sources. Four million readers won't be wrong! And this wont be the first article to bash your little website...  :)


 * Mr. Lloyd killed someone who was trying to murder him and his wife, FACT! Mr. Lloyd was already married, FACT! Mr. Lloyd had never dated Lori, FACT! Mr. Lloyd at the time ran a Creativity Church which Lori had joined wanting to post fliers and other racial activities, FACT! At the trial it came out that she had been keeping files on Mr. Lloyd and all of the members of his Church which she turned over to the FBI, FACT! The papers, hating White Racists, kept some of these FACTS out of their newspapers, FACT! And lied about other items, FACT! Such as Hardy "losing his job of six months at Giant Eagle"... Mr. Lloyd was not working for Giant Eagle, FACT! Also, that Hardy was "dating Lori"... Mr. Lloyd was already married to his wife, Lisa Lloyd, who can be heard in some of his net-broadcasts off of his website under "Wolf Radio", FACT! The papers claimed they were not married, but a civil document proves that they had been married since before the shooting, FACT! FACT, the stuff proving Hardy's claims are mostly court documents which I cannot post here, and which are not posted anywhere online, unlike the lies posted off of the slanderous newspaper websites, FACT!! FACT, all of the “sources” for “Tacosunday” are anti and biased sources, FACT! Since they have lied, and are biased, they cannot be used as sources, FACT!


 * Threatening to bash Wikipedia in the media is not constructive. It does nothing to elevate your arguments or prove your points and merely demonstrates an unwillingness to cooperate in the community element of this consensus and driven project. The only issue to be concerned with is reliable sourcing, as everything else stems from that. Please concentrate on the facts. You should also remember that everything you type on Wikipedia is permanently recorded, something to bear in mind is that people will be able to read all these comments in 40 years time. Mfield (talk) 19:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * lol
 * I guess you may as well remain blocked then. It is apparent from your answer here and other answers above that you have not read any of the guidelines and still do not understand the concept of reliable sourcing. Since you seem to have nothing but disdain for the project and the community around which it is based, it is for the best if don't continue to edit or you will only have further issues. Mfield (talk) 03:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)