User talk:Paxsilvestris

Welcome!

Hello, Paxsilvestris, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Kbthompson 09:35, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To Neil. No threat of any type has been made, certainly not Legal. Please read my statements carefully. I have pointed out the laws of Libel of the England and Wales to three users indicating that that items concerned ARE libellous. I am qualified to make such statement. For reasons you will appreciate, I have not and would not choose to make any such threat at Wikipedia, now or in the future. If the libelled individual wishes to take action I'm certain they are able to do so outside Wikipedia.

I have asked individuals making allegations of Libel in several places to justify those statements (which they have declined to do) and to be properly identified with such extremity, if they believe it to be true. Complaints will arise from those individuals. Please accept this also as a complaint against the three users concerned and their allegations of libel

I would like to complain about editors in question who have made statements on these fora, that items ARE libellous, without any qualification or knowledge. I trust those accounts will be blocked?

Further, two editors, MRSC ("The text (which has been re-added) contains libel(l)ous material") and 81.107.65.89 indicate libels are present in this article. With another editor, they have also done so elsewhere on Wikipedia. I have to say that this serious allegation has not been matched by evidence, or indeed understanding of the statute. Indeed, I believe it to be baseless and unwise. This is itself, potentially defamatory. I suggest withdrawal and apology might be apposite, at least if the editors have any assets at all in the real world! Such allegations without requisite 'bona fides', must be unacceptable in a work of this nature and I would advise that it could potentially lead to action in the Courts. Obviously there is an issue about whether the defamed party can be identified from his/her user name, but I suspect that in this case s/he can be. I remind the group of editors who seem to be involved together in this issue, of these responsibilities. Of whatever limitation, this is a published work and not an undergraduate or A-level piece for instance. It must be possible to professionalise this forum to stamp out these problems and create genuinely informed, unbiased and above all, mature content Paxsilvestris 07:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a legal threat (I have bolded the particularly applicable segments). The account will be unblocked if you can a) admit this was over the line, b) apologise, and c) refrain from doing so in future. Your refusal to accept this is concerning. Neil ╦ 12:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MRSC

I see we have both had problems with this user. He's helped set up some badly named categories which I am trying to get changed and would welcome you supprot for a rename at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_9#Oldham. Thanks. 88.104.86.191 09:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]