User talk:Malbeare

[1] [ jack brabham engines share trading]

January 2012

Your recent editing history at Jack Brabham shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Favonian (talk) 11:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Simply having a fact does not merit that fact's inclusion on Wikipedia. We are not a collection of any and every fact that people can find. Therefore, your fact has very little reason to be included in our biography of Jack Brabham unless the legal case has been a major moment in the life of Jack Brabham. It currently does not appear to have been so, therefore the fact was removed.

Further, since your user name implies that you are yourself involved in the legal case, this is a blatant conflict of interest. You should not be editing the Wikipedia article of someone you are having a legal row with, no matter how factual your statements are. Your reason for adding these facts appears to be quite biased, therefore this is the second reasoning behind the removal of your addition.

Please do not continue to add information to the Jack Brabham article, no matter how factual it may be, while you have a legal issue with the subject. The³5₉ (Talk) 03:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Malbeare, I'm Qwyrxian, an administrator here at Wikipedia. Please note that the above concerns need to be taken seriously. Technically, you've already broken our rule on WP:3RR; the only reason I'm not blocking you is because you weren't made aware of that rule before. If you edit that article again in the near future, though, I will block you for edit warring. Furthermore, The359's point about your bias is very correct. You cannot use Wikipedia as a forum in which to advance your opinion about Brabham. If you are a party in that dispute, you definitely should not be adding it to the article. If you are able to do so in a calm fashion, you may start a discussion on Talk:Jack Brabham and see if other editors think inclusion is appropriate. As you do so, be sure to be civil, per our policy on civility. Especially, do not call the good faith contributions of other editors vandalism, as that word has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia (see WP:VANDAL) which definitely does not apply here. Also, be sure that you do not make any defamatory comments about living people in that discussion, because WP:BLP applies on talk pages as well as articles. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had to remove your talk page comments. The problem is that you copied the entire article. That's a copyright violation. Copyright law applies everywhere on Wikipedia--articles, talk pages, user talk, etc. If you want to talk about that article, simply explain what you think in it is important, and then provide either a link or full publication information. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Talk:Jack Brabham has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Use a talk page to discuss an article, not to copy and paste large chunks of copyrighted text. Pyrop e 14:10, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maleabre, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. The SOPA protest was not because we don't care about copyright, but because that proposed law did more harm than good, and probably wouldn't do anything to effect copyright anyway. If you post a copy of a substantial portion or a whole article again, I will block you for copyright violations. I explained above that you just need to provide a courtesty link, and you need to explain what information from that article belongs in the WP article. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:56, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

In addition to taking copyright seriously, we also take WP:BLP seriously as well. If you have some complaint against Brabaham, you know well how to deal with it through the press, the courts, etc. Wikipedia is not part of your options. If you make another edit on any article or talk page which appears to be for the purposes of furthering your personal claims against people you are/have been involved in litigation with, I will block you. I'm sorry to sound so harsh, but Wikipedia editing is for those whose purpose is to improve the encyclopedia. Until now, you've been pretty clear that that is not your purpose. I recommend that you back away from this subject completely, and find something else which you have absolutely no involvement to edit, because it is clear that your personal issues outside of Wikipedia are making it impossible for you to edit this subject neutrally. If you don't want to edit other subjects, then, again, I question why you are here. Qwyrxian (talk) 22:20, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

February 2012

Please stop using talk pages such as Talk:Jack Brabham for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Readro (talk) 20:44, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for violating WP:BLP. As I told you before, you may not use Wikipedia to put forth your opinions abotu Brabham. You are clearly unable to discuss this subject with neutrality. I have to block you in order to prevent damage to the encyclopedia and to the subject of the article. As I said before, you clearly need to either find something else to edit on Wikipedia, or you need to simply leave here, because this is not a forum for your opinions, not a place for you to show the world what kind of person you really think he is, etc., as you did at Talk:Jack Brabham. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]