Anonnyc

January 2013

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your recent edits to Charles J. Hynes have been reverted as they could be seen to be defamatory or potentially libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Eyesnore (talk) 21:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Eyesnore: Please explain how an in context direct quote from an article in the New York Times can be seen as "libellous"?Anonnyc (talk) 22:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

February 2013

Hello, I'm BigDwiki. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made to this edit to Charles J. Hynes, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, BigDwiki (talk) 04:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I restored the entry you undid. I disagree with your opinion that the information is not "constructive." A Federal Judge finding that an elected District Attorney is prosecuting innocent people is important information. This was important enough for the New York Times and the New York Law Journal to publish reports on and the decision itself, which is linked to in my entry, is important information to share with the public. Do you see this differently? Anonnyc (talk) 04:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Anonnyc, 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:

• Introduction 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

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 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! BigDwiki (talk) 04:45, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism

Most of the article is copy and pasted from various news sources, which is not appropriate. You can use those articles as source material but not directly copy their content. Please do not re-add the same material. In fact, since your POV related to the subject is quite obvious, it is probably best if you don't edit the article at all. Grsz 11 23:17, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Your additions are copied word for word from a number of different sources. They should be removed as they are plagiarism. Grsz 11 23:28, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I am disputing much of the content in the article that violates WP:NPOV and WP:BLP and you are now edit-warring to keep this in, and have refused to engage on your talk page. Please stop re-adding controversial material. Grsz 11 23:45, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Copyright

Grsz11 has asked you politely not to restore material that is in violation of copyright. I am now telling you, if you continue to restore this material, I will block you from editing. CIreland (talk) 00:03, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Please specify the copyright violations and I will cure them.Anonnyc (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Pretty much the entire page is copied from sources such as the NYT, Post, and others. Just because you say, "according to the New York Times" doesn't mean you can then copy the text of the article. Grsz 11 00:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The copyright violations are those sections already pointed out by Grsz11 when he removed them the first time. You can see in the article history which those are. CIreland (talk) 00:11, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Because you have restored the material, even after I advised you not to do so, I have blocked you from editing for 48 hours. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} CIreland (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2013 (UTC)