User talk:Lmartval

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:46, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:21, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely
You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may place unblock on your user talk page to have the block reviewed. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia.

OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:07, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * As a professional with a high level of self respect, I will refrain from making any additional comments specially about my opinion of you such called "administrators" that I now have very little respect for and whom are solely responsible for the lack of trustworthyness in the information in Wikipedia. As mentioned above, shame on me for spending my valuable time on writing on a publicly reviewed database (by random people - with who knows what kind of professional background if any), when all my peer reviewed publications have been published due to that only subject matter experts are reviewing them. Good luck.Lmartval (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I would suggest having a look at another policy - WP:OR (Original Research). Peridon (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * BTW I wouldn't think any of us are full time volunteers - we do have lives outside. Peridon (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * The information I was adding cited published material in a patent application and also in a University Research Database, my research was funded by USDA, etc. I bet you all have a life outside of wikipedia, but I doubt its in the technical world where information like this falls under. Wikipedia is supposed to be a reliable form of free information and right now you all are blocking the publishing of true, documented and proven research data, and leaving information that is wrong Lmartval (talk) 21:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * No, we are preventing individuals and groups from using Wikipedia as a vehicle to promote their own interests. OhNo itsJamie Talk 22:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no affiliation with any organization that would benefit for what I wrote. In fact the reason I conducted the research with MY OWN IDEA at the University of Florida and gave all the rights to this patent to the University of Florida, was exactly because I had no personal interest than to create a technology the US coffee producing regions could benefit from. The US Department of Agriculture would not have funded my research with half a 1/3 millon dollars if it had been for my own interets. I did add the information about Coffee Primero which I understand NOW that it may be seen as advertising, so I will not add again, right now I am arguing about the fact that you blocked me without understanding the intentions of my posts - I am not a "wiki expert" i dedicate my time to reseach and for the first time in my life I have spent this much time dealing with a internet site.Lmartval (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)