Talk:Varian v. Delfino

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject California (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Law (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Untitled[edit]

Some of the language used in this article seems to be biased 68.39.174.150 09:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please be specific. Even better, please fix it. Thanks, -Willmcw 20:26, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
These two edits fixed the worst of it. It's readable without cringing now. Thanx... 68.39.174.238 23:16, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Another user with an exclusive interest in this case has inserted links to a sales pages for a book related to the case in unrelated entries. The entry starter and this user may be related. [1]

lots of issues | leave me a message 06:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

To the original editor. Please stop adding details of your case into general/unrelated entries about the law. This is considered nonsense, and the edits will be reversed. Please also stop promoting the book by adding the sales link to unrelated entries. This is considered spam, and those contributions will also be removed. Wikipedia is a useful reference tool for millions. Please do not ruin the hard work of countless thousands of contributers by turning it into your soapbox. I'm sure this case was a dramatic event in your life, and I am sorry if you still boil with anger, but the Wikipedia is not the forum for raising awareness about your personal cause.

Regards, lots of issues | leave me a message 07:08, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This entry appears to be written by one of the defendants in the case. Their views are extremely biased, so the reader is directed to look at the actual court documents to better understand the facts involved. Also note the case was appealed in a court (CA 6th Appeals Court) which is strongly liberal in its interpretation of the law. While in itself not meant to be a good or bad opinion of their views, it has, unfortunately, favored the defendants in the face of blatent defamatory behaviors towards Varian personnel.

A note of caution to readers of this article: The individuals involved in this case (Mike Delfino and Mary Day) are both former employees of Varian Medical. Mike was terminated for cause and Mary voluntarily resigned soon afterwards. Both have been embroiled in a bitter and often libelous campaign against Varian Medical, in particular key executive employees of the company. While the court case blazed rather liberal internet free speech law opinions in the state of California, the remainder of the discussion, such as personal opinions, links to commercial sites selling books, etc., are not germaine to the discussion and are best ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiknut (talkcontribs) 02:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like you have serious issues with Dr. Delfino and Ms. Day not to mention your unfounded impression of the Calif. Sixth District Court of Appeal which ruled against Delfino and Day. You certainly need to do your homework as I find the Varian v. Delfino article, an important free speech case, both well written and well referenced. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amberjacker (talkcontribs) 01:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

removing POV template without ongoing discussion per Template:POV instructions[edit]

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Varian v. Delfino. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)