User talk:Liviut11101

Retract your legal threat or you will remain blocked Ok Ian, I am retracting my legal threat. Let's discuss the content of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liviut11101 (talk • contribs)

Unblocked for now, but if you even mention anything relating to "legal rights" you will be blocked and your talk page access will be revoked. While you were blocked, the material was removed on the grounds that it was unsourced. Our policies regarding verifiability and biographies of living persons calls for the removal of any unsourced material, especially from articles about living persons. If you had bothered to ask other users how things work, someone could have told you that. This conversation would also be a whole lot easier for others (and probably you) to follow if you would put your new messages at the bottom, which I already explained is where new messages go. That's not advanced coding, that's basic formatting. Maybe you wouldn't have such a hard time if you even considered seeking help instead of blustering through with no intention of cooperation. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ian, I find it extraordinary that you are invoking Wikipedia rules like citing a source (and by the way, incidentally, if source is so important for Wikipedia, what source are you using to publish 1969/10970 as my year of birth??), but ignoring the core of my argument for removing the year of my birth: that there's current legislation that protects me against the publication of personal sensitive information. By your actions and by what you've written to justify them you are implying that the Wikipedia rules exist above the law and come before my personal safety. Is this what you really believe? You are choosing to ignore my concern - a real life threat - that I can become the victim of identity theft, which close members of my family have recently been a victim of. I know first-hand the consequences of ID theft as we, as a family, had to spend lots of money and time dealing with its consequences. I am simply taking immediate action to prevent such potential crimes that I could become of victim of and asking everyone that publishes online sensitive information about me to remove it immediately. I am not doing this on a whim. I am doing it on the advice of online security experts and I am doing it on the basis of law. I am asking for this information to be removed because it's my legal right to do so. Even if there are sources that currently publish my date of birth Wikipedia, I have the right to ask everyone who is publishing sensitive information about me to immediately remove it. And I already made such requests - including to Google. It is a right clearly given by EU legislation to all EU citizens (and all companies - including Google etc have to comply with it; the penalties are very high - in the tens of millions - if they don't - please read this legislation if you're not familiar with it). By your actions you are simply ignoring legislation that protects me against such threats and you are ignoring my rights. I would have much preferred to resolve this in a friendly way, but I am not familiar with all the Wikipedia rules and don't really have the time to study them. Also, I don't find Wikipedia easy to use. I've been trying to raise a dispute about this and I still can't figure out how to do it. I am not a computer wiz and I simply don't find Wikipedia (with its tones of pages & explanations that refer to code) user-friendly. I really don't have hours and hours to read everything and learn how Wikipedia works. All I know is that the law protects me and I am referencing the law so that Wikipedia removes references that are sensitive and helps protect me against real threats. In any community that recognises the law that should suffice. I will certainly retract my legal threats if any information related to my date of birth is removed. I hope you understand my position and take into account the basis of my arguments. It was not my intention to make a "mess" of anything. On the contrary, I was trying to exercise my right and put things right in the simplest way possible. And what you'll do next will tell me if you (and implicitly Wikipedia - as you are acting on its behalf) - recognise my legitimate concern to defend myself against cyber-crime and my rights recognised by current EU legislation, or if you believe that the right of Wikipedia to publish my date of birth come first and are above my safety and my legal rights.

(Liviut11101 (talk) 23:09, 26 June 2018 (UTC)).[reply]

It's not conditional, you need to retract your threat and promise to make no further threats, last chance. Otherwise, we would be rewarding your litigious terrorism. Making a lot of mistaken assumptions about me and Wikipedia doesn't change that. Throwing a temper tantrum doesn't change that. Whatever the article's content may or may not be doesn't change that. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the year of my birth because it infringes my privacy as per new European Legislation that came into force on the 25th of May 2018. The year of my birth constitutes personal identifiable information (PII) of sensitive nature and it breaches my privacy. I am well within my rights to legally request for this information to be removed. I have filed such a request with Google as well. People from my family have been victims of identity fraud precisely for these reasons and they had to spend a very long time dealing with the consequences. You have no right to publish my year of birth without my permission. The new European legislation protects me agains such actions (see https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/). I find it incredibly frustrating that I have to spend so much time trying to protect my rights. It is not fair! I am within my rights to request protection from the law. Please remove any reference to my date of birth immediately. (Liviut11101 (talk) 23:09, 26 June 2018 (UTC)).[reply]

New messages go at the bottom. As I explained below, Wikipedia does not tolerate any legal threats. You could have just pointed out "there's no source" and been done with it, but no, you decided to make a mess out of this. Retract your legal threat or you will remain blocked. The only reason you are being given the privilege of using your talk page is so that you can appeal your block. The only way to do that is to retract your legal threat. If you are not going to appeal your block, there is no reason for you to have access to your talk page. Now: are you going to retract your legal threat or not? Ian.thomson (talk) 23:14, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removing talk page access is always an option. - FlightTime (open channel) 00:36, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I already had the menu open for that. If he says anything beyond retracting his threat and promising to not make any further threats, I just need to click one button. Last chance was given second from top, because he completely ignored "new messages go at the bottom" before complaining about how hard the site is to use. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:38, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Liviut11101, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Liviu Tipurita, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:27, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No legal threats please

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Edwardx (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your legal threat

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:46, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to retract your legal threat if you do not want your account blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:46, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

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: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for unblocking me, Ian. You are saying that the material was removed. It hasn't. Currently the Wikipedia page about me references as my year of birth (1969/1970) - please check. What is the verifiable source for this?

If your private information is soo... important, why do you re-post it here ? - FlightTime (open channel) 20:50, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this is a troll. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This interview with you is cited, where you stated that at you came to the UK in 1990 at age 20. WP:DOB does say that your specific birth day (month and day) could be removed, but not year. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the exact quote in that article is that I left in the "'90s" and not in the '90. In the Romanian language - the language in which the interview was conducted - "ani nouzeci" (the nineties) can be written as '90. It'a mis-translation. It's also factually inaccurate that I have left in 1990. I have left in the 90s, but not in 1990. I have been very careful and never made any public references to my DOB (including the year). I am requesting that references to my year of birth should be removed from the WP article on these basis. I am very concerned about these references because - as previously explained - online security experts warned me about chance of being harmed. I've just read the WP: BLP which states that "the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages." Could I kindly ask you to exercise cautious editorial judgement, consider what I'm stating here and remove this reference to my year of birth from the WP article?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Liviut11101 (talk • contribs)

I'll relay that information to the article's talk page and see what others thing.Ian.thomson (talk) 21:41, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Further to my previous point, and taking into account what you just published on the article's page (in which you admit that as you don't speak Romanian you cannot verify the source yourself), I would say that given the fact that the quoted source was published in the Romanian language, that its translation is opened to interpretation and not directly verifiable by an English-speaking person, the source does not meet the criteria of "high-quality" requirement stated in the WP policy. The WP article is in English and is relying on a Romanian blog which is by no means a reputable & internationally recognised media source of "high-quality". An English speaking reader cannot directly verify this source or its reputation and therefore, I am regarding the reference as "contentious material". I am kindly asking again for the immediate removal of this reference. In support of my request, I'm quoting the WP policy on BLP: "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.[1]"

WP:WALLS - FlightTime (open channel)

Followup

Your date of birth has been removed due to an editor concurring that the source is not reliable, and thus is in violation of Wikipedia policy, but I have some follwup points for you to note. Theoretically, you do not have the right to have your birth year removed out of privacy concerns, per WP:DOB. It would have to be reliably sourced, but it is explicitly allowed over privacy concerns, as a matter of Wikipedia policy. Second, Wikipedia is not under the jurisdiction of European law: per Wikipedia:General disclaimer#Jurisdiction and legality of content, Wikipedia is hosted in the United States, is under the jurisdiction of American Law, and Wikipedia content is protected by American law. Not all Wikipedia content is legal in all jurisdictions, but content that complies with policies and American law cannot be censored. Lastly, please note that per WP:COI, you should not edit your own article. You can make a request for changes on the article's talk page using {{request edit}}, you can ask on the Help Desk, or you can bring it up on BLP Noticeboard. If you edit your own article, you may be blocked from editing. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Swarm ♠ 04:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]