User talk:Melton Juan

April 2022
 You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (David Leeson) for a period of 2 weeks because of Violations of the biographies of living persons policy (WP:BLPCRIME); edit warring challenged content (WP:ONUS, WP:BURDEN) back into a biography of a living person in that area. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions again. 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:. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. Everything I’ve entered into this page is a fact and it’s verifiable and researchable. This man injured a 14-year-old girl and you don’t want people to know about it. That’s disgusting. Melton Juan (talk) 21:21, 27 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Please have a closer look at the message above, especially at the links about "biographies of living persons" and the link to the BLPCRIME section (see also WP:BLPPRIMARY). See also the links behind the words "edit warring", ONUS and BURDEN. If afterwards, there are open questions, do feel free to ask them. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:27, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

The man is DEAD. He pleaded guilty and accepted a plea deal. Melton Juan (talk) 21:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I have to admit I didn't really realize this, as I misread "March 2021" as recent and consequently incorrectly assumed the subject to be both alive and under sudden attention from people because of a recent event in their life. April 16 is close enough to still make the article fall under the biographies of living persons policy, per WP:BDP. You have not addressed the second part of the block reason. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

thanks for admitting that. I’m sorry I don’t see anything in those policies that prevent my edits. The man was convicted because he accepted a plea deal and was sentenced. He is dead I don’t see how proximity to April makes him not dead. Every source and every references in the public domain. He was a public persona because he won a Pulitzer Prize and he was a journalist. I don’t see any reason at all to put a barrier in front of these facts. They are important part of this person’s life and career and history. Melton Juan (talk) 21:52, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

I can accept the band if my edits are restored. I’m not trying to be at war with anybody I just want the facts to be recognized, and people keep deleting the facts so they can whitewash this man’s crimes. They’ve even left vaguely threatening messages on my talk page. Melton Juan (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2022 (UTC)


 * As my initial reasoning is so clearly based on an incorrect assumption, it makes no sense to uphold a block just because you may have joined an existing edit war. I'll strikethrough the block message, accept the unblock request and am out; I personally do not object to the restoration of the content, and you may like to point to this message here in case someone complains about you reverting my contribution. I just don't restore such material myself, in general, even if I had originally removed it; this is because my real life identity is hardly a secret and I'm legally liable for the content I add to Wikipedia.
 * Please do keep in mind that if someone objects, a discussion on the article's talk page is strongly preferred to further reverting and reverting and reverting; I can't provide a free ticket for edit warring, and the unblock shouldn't be interpreted as such.
 * I'm sorry for the inconvenience caused by my misunderstanding. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a second look at it I appreciate it Melton Juan (talk) 22:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy by inserting unsourced or poorly sourced defamatory content into an article or any other Wikipedia page again, as you did at David Leeson, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''Per discussions on the article's TALK page, this content violates WP:BLP. Until additional sources can be found, this material is inappropriate for this article.'' Pure RED  &#124;  talk to me   &#124; 01:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

See the messages immediately above that will show you that I’ve already had this conversation with an admin and I don’t need to have several more. Everything I have added to this page is legit in anybody’s attempts to remove it is disingenuous at best. Melton Juan (talk) 02:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Believe me, you'll be free to have another conversation with an admin if you keep this up. Pure RED  &#124;  talk to me   &#124; 02:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * OH OK, Daddy! Melton Juan (talk) 02:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Important notice
~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:20, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Stop edit warring at David Leeson
The material has been removed per WP:BLP and discussion is ongoing at the talk page. You need to provide valid secondary sources, per WIkipedia policy, court documents are insufficient (see WP:BLPPRIMARY). If you continue to return this information to the article without better sourcing, you may be blocked for BLP violations and edit warring. -- Jayron 32 15:07, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Quit removing verifiable and factual information that doesn't violate Wikipedia policy in an attempt to whitewash Leeson's criminal record. Melton Juan (talk) 01:49, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Thank you. Pure RED &#124;  talk to me   &#124; 02:39, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (David Leeson) because of persistent failure to follow Wikipedia policy, despite it haing been explained to you multiple times. 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:. Black Kite (talk) 07:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Upon reading the Melton Juan reason request, I am concerned that his argument itself violates Wiki policy because in his argument he makes non-cited claims of guilt for crimes, and even specifies a non-cited minor as an alleged victim of these non-cited crimes, this is not a matter for discussing openly on Wikipedia for multiple reasons related to harassment. I leave it to Administrators to confirm my concerns and decide how to address them. I simply want to raise them. --JohnBlutarsky (talk) 03:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

All you have to do is look at the court documents that I’ve cited multiple times. Everything is verified. This is utterly repulsive. Melton Juan (talk) 12:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)


 * How does reading a source unsuitable for Wikipedia help us with verifying anything? Nil Einne (talk) 13:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not unsuitable for Wikipedia in general, Nil. My contention is that this page isn't regulated by the BLP, and that's where the rule against citing court documents appears. Melton Juan (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * How many experienced editors are going to have to tell you that all biographies of living and recently-dead people are covered by BLP before you understand that you're wrong? Black Kite (talk)

May 2022
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. 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:. Black Kite (talk) 18:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)