User talk:Sallyknots

Welcome!
Hello, Sallyknots, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! GRuban (talk) 18:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Tina Machado deletions?
Hi, Sally. I notice you've deleted large sections of the article Tina Machado, especially in this edit about which you write: "Most of the previous writing was inaccurate.". Could you please explain more? I wrote most of that section, based on numerous sources -- including the Associated Press, the Los Angeles Times, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Phoenix Home & Garden, CBS, Phoenix Business Journal, The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, and CNNMoney -- which are normally considered quite reliable. Could you explain what was inaccurate and give sources that can be used to make it more accurate? --GRuban (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * It's been a week, so I'm going to restore those sections. If you still object, let's discuss it. --GRuban (talk) 10:36, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Made a section to discuss on Talk:Tina Machado. --GRuban (talk) 15:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

May 2023
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Tina Machado. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. -- Shadow  of the  Starlit Sky  03:12, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.


 * As above. We need Reliable sources, newspapers, magazines, books, that sort of thing. If you find such a source that says what you want to add, great. But we can't just write things without sources, and we shouldn't just remove things that do have sources. Please, talk to us. --GRuban (talk) 14:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. This is Tina Machado. It is very disturbing when a strange pulls articles which as we all know can be distorted. However, things as my age, my meeting personal truths of my relationship with Davis are wrong. We did not buy home together. He had a $4M home on Camelback Mountain and I purchased a home and the mortgage which was part the lawsuit where was claiming he owned but lost that, the home was a small home in North Scottsdale that was recognized in Phoenix Home and Garden. I did move to Seattle with Chili I met Chili there then I decided to move AZ where he decided to retire there as well as owning a home in Seattle. Regarding Bruce Friedman all I edited was true, I simply ran one of many of his businesses in AZ while is offices were located in Burbank. Instantly once the SEC realized I had no affiliation with the actions of Friedman I was released of all and ant assumptions of his dealings. If the is any documentation please get right hence why Wikipedia has a reputation of none truths. It seems as though you are building a story built on assumptions when it comes to the personal and professional truths because you simply do not have facts. Please correct your facts this is my life and my truths. Please contact me if necessary as to not misrepresent my life if you really are interested in the truths. Tina Sallyknots (talk) 14:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The items I am speaking of are the fillers or fluff. Even though this platform is just copying hearsay from the things written and we all know lacking fact checking. The "fluff" is what I am speaking of. Not proven by facts only based on your assumptions of what happened. I was not born in 1960, example, easy fact to fine, it is incorrect. I did not move to Seattle because of Chili, I met him there. Those are the storylines that you fill in, they are not facts, they were not written anywhere. The information which only my family and those who knows us know. So, your factual reasoning does not apply to the few items I listed to start, there are many so called facts which are easily proven not so, such as Chili had his home in Camelback built by Salcito Construction, while I lived in a track home in N Scottsdale that is not proven because that is not in articles. I do believe my truths are not what you seek or even attempt to seek. Example: you state I used the money I was awarded from my case for my home's redesign, completely untrue that was from my hard work. There is not one deposit in my bank from that case. I had to pay everything upfront cost of paper, court documents, etc. The $350K award went to the attorney who was pro bono. You do not state the fact that all 8 jurors (7 males and 1 female) found him guilty, unanimously. You do not win cases like that without 100% proof. There are many aspects of the case which proves why you have many facts wrong when it comes to Chili. As well as Bruce Friedman, a week after the motion was filed in court, the SEC found the women they were looking and it wasn't me with a month to month budget. As everyone knows the SEC never rectifies their mistakes, they didn't cared to take me off as co defendant, as I learned they just move on. By admitting I was their wrong target they would have had to deal with the mistake of slander. You do state I was found of no wrong doings, but, still not justify the truth. I wasn't on their maybe list after a week. They saw a bank account with no affiliation to me that was Friedman's. I wasn't even deposed. So, please understand there are many convenient untruths which are very frustrating when it's someone else's truths. Sallyknots (talk) 01:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)