User talk:RenamedUser5

Click here to align the page

Hello and welcome to my quint little home. Now please go away - I'm busy!

Perform some mischief

Lost? Click here!

	See my pictures
	Cintron Leave me a message

+

WP:BLP

Placing any more unsourced assertions about the pictures either in talk pages or articles will result in you being blocked. She does assert that she was underage when the pictures were taken, and possession or dissemination of uncensored versions would constitute trafficking in child pornography.—Kww(talk) 15:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Do not remove others' comments from talk pages

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Tericka Dye, you may be blocked from editing. Cresix (talk) 19:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Please do not template the regulars

[1] He was doing so according to WP:NOTAFORUM. As an experienced editor he knows the policies, so please don't template him.Jasper Deng (talk) 20:11, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

he gets a template cuz he screwed up. I don't know if he is a regular or not, or even what the definiation of 'regular' is. and why are u worried about it? Brittany Cintron (talk) 20:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

No, he did not mess up as he was following WP:NOTAFORUM, an exception to the guideline against deleting others' comments. Wikipedians help other Wikipedians. I meet a lot of new people each day. Do not template him because for him it can be considered rude. If you had read the link I sent you, you would've realized that Regulars means Experienced Editors.Jasper Deng 20:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I've removed them again. If you restore them again, I will block you. Read WP:BLP and my previous warning.—Kww(talk) 20:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I did read the link, but it offered no definiation as to excatly what an experienced editor is. In my opinion, an "experienced" editor would not have removed about a half a dozen peoples' comments on a talk page just because he disagreed with those comments! The issue being discussed - and the accusation being tossed about by Kww - was that the nude Vanessa Hudgens pictures were child porn and shouldn't be discussed on Wikipedia. Myself and others were trying to explain why that is not the case. He just tossed a fit and decided to delete all opposing comments. That, to me, shows that he is NOT an experienced editor. thus, he got the template. I supposed I could have gotten my brother who is an admin to do it, but I wanted to do it myself. If he wants to claim that he is an experienced editor, then he should do so himself. Brittany Cintron (talk) 20:20, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Brittany, I'm an admin. If you don't understand why accusing your father of possessing child porn or accusing an actress of distributing child pornography for profit is a BLP violation, I'm at a loss on how to explain it to you.—Kww(talk) 20:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Kww is an administrator, which requires a lot of experience. Take a look at our policies WP:BLP and WP:NOTAFORUM. Saying "I could have gotten my brother who is an admin to do it" constitutes a violation of WP:TPNO.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for BLP violations: unsourced accusations of distribution and possession of child pornography. Any admin can unblock when editor acknowledges the BLP violation and shows understanding of how her contributions violate it.. 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.

—Kww(talk) 20:28, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I am working on my appeal below - why would u delete it?

Because it repeated the same BLP violating information you were blocked for.—Kww(talk) 20:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

It is not a BLP violation because she was not underaged when those photos were taken. Please, please, I beg you, do some research on this first.

[BLP violation redacted]

But, Kww, your accusations against me and my father of child porn are way off base here, and I think they are wildly inappropriate. You have slandered and defamed my family with very serious criminal allegations. Brittany Cintron (talk) 21:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

BLP applies regardless of age and your sources are not considered reliable enough. Given the next editor's comment (by Cresix), I don't think you have a big chance of being unblocked while trying to argue that.Jasper Deng 21:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Note to admin: In addition to the above problems, please note this editor's history of multiple personal attacks. She was warned repeatedly about this, but it continued to occur. Cresix (talk) 21:34, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Brittany, I'm going to try to explain this to you without violating BLP myself, but it's going to be hard:

1. The uncensored versions of the first batch were taken down under legal threat. That threat was based on the claim that pictures were taken while the subject was a minor.
2. As best as I can tell, you are simply lying about the uncensored versions of the pictures and a DVD. They don't seem to exist. Sorry that I'm not assuming good faith here, but as best as I can tell, you are telling lies about these things existence, and then lying about your family's involvement in them. That's a BLP violation right there.
3. You brought unsourced accusations about another starlet into it.
4. Whatever you may believe about copyright law, there is nothing that prohibits copyrighting illegal material.

Getting unblocked is not a matter of defending your previous posts. That's not going to fly with me. It might with someone else: you can try actually following the instructions about an unblock request, and another admin may find that I'm off-base. For me, you agree that you understand why unsourced allegations like this violate WP:BLP and agree not to post them any more, and I unblock you.—Kww(talk) 22:14, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Brittany, I think you're getting the idea that Kww did the block based on his point of view; however, that's not true. Kww was doing it according to one of our key policies. To be unblocked, please show you understand the BLP policy.Jasper Deng (talk) 23:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, Jasper. It is/was my belief that he was doing this just to push his point of view. However,I do apologise for using unsourced or poorly sourced materials. But I do not agree with your contention that they are child porn. If that was the case, then she would be guilty of the making & dissemination of child porn. It is no defense to child porn laws that the child porn maker was him or herself.

Oh, and i decided to send an email to the copyright office (they have a form online where u can do that) to see whether or not one can copy right illegal material. I am just curious about that topic and will let u know what they say (in 5 or so business days, they claim).

But, anyways, to get back to the matter, I do apologise. Brittany Cintron (talk) 23:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)