User talk:LegalReviewer123

June 2020
Hello, I'm Sandstein. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person   on Richard Liebowitz, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. ''Please note that if you want to introduce negative material about living people, it must be supported by citations to reliable sources that support this material. That was not the case with your additions.''   Sandstein   17:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sandstein. I cited to an article in the Journal of the American Bar Assosciation, which is a pretty reliable source. I believe the removal of that citation at least is not warranted. I understand that the content is negative, but it is factual and well reported. To refuse it while including articles from more dubious periodicals such as Slate seems unfair and misleading about the nature of Mr Liebowitz's legal activities and intentionally ignores his disciplinary record. LegalReviewer123 (talk) 18:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , the problem is not with the source as such, it is that it does not support what you wrote. You wrote:
 * "Richard Liebowitz has been held in contempt for his legal practices and has been described by his defense Attorney in a November 11, 2019 letter to the Court as "an unmarried 31-year-old who resides with his parents" and someone who is "short on legal experience and training". "
 * But in fact, the text you quote between quotation marks in this sentence does not appear in the ABA Journal article. On Wikipedia, misrepresenting what a source says is serious misconduct, and if you continue to do so, you are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Sandstein   18:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry Sandstein, it was not my intention to misrepresent anything. The quote comes from a letter cited in the ABA Article, and I see now how that was improper to cite to the article. Thanks for explaining. I will be especially careful moving forward. LegalReviewer123 (talk) 22:21, 19 June 2020 (UTC)