User talk:Marketingsupport

Johnpdavid - whether using your main account or newly created accounts, please refrain from edits unless they are sourced and valid encyclopaedic edits. wikipedia is not an advertising platform. Thanks.

RandomStuff

I believe this message is intended for someone else. I am not johnpdavid. Furthermore, all information posted is cited where applicable.

RandomStuff

RandomStuff-

Would like to contact you regarding the article for Biscayne Landing. Please send me an email so we can discuss. I am also available to speak by phone (preferred).

Please contact me via email at your convenience. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketingsupport (talk • contribs)

What email/phone # shall I contact you at? --RandomStuff 19:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomStuff (talk • contribs)

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketingsupport (talk • contribs)

RandomStuff-We would like to work with Wikipedia to make sure all salacious and libel comments are removed from this entry. While we have no issue with posting the articles and external links for anyone who wishes to read them, we do take exception to people who obviously have a bone to pick with the City of Miami and falsly paraphrase or omit factual information from sourced materials in order to cast dispersions on this project and the site.

For this reason, we would like to pursue a course of copyright infringement as owners of the name Biscayne Landing and have all references to Biscayne Landing be removed from Wikipedia and this entry be deleted.

Again, I am available to speak anytime.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketingsupport (talk • contribs)

Legal Threats

My edits to the page where sincere attempts at npov, and sources where cited. This is more about the community risks of Munisport, your project is unfortunately affected since it is being constructed prior to cleanup of the site. Munisport has a long history of (illegal) pollution and dumping, and according to some reputable sources the site has never been properly cleaned. There have been many documented instances of political/financial considerations in re-classifying polluted sites and fudging results, this site included. If you were to sue me for libel/slander, you know full well that there are reams of documents that would be entered into discovery and the public record showing, among other things:

Initial reccomended cleanup of Munisport never completed
city or developers could have cleaned up property by removing all toxic waste for approx. $25-30 mil, but chose not to take this route
delisting was contested, with documetation that the testing was never thorough enough for a site with the contaminants documented to have gone into Munisport

If you were to be foolish enough to pursue your threatened action against me, your legal team could be presented with filing cabinets full of documentation of everything that has gone wrong with the Munisport site prior to Biscayne Landings project, from illegal and unsupervised dumping to testing irregularities. If, on the other hand, your claim is that the article and citations are correct and the only violation you claim is "Copyright Infringement," a few pointers:

You posted your rendering on wikipedia under Creative Commons License Public Domain, you cannot revoke this license.
You contributed to the article, as did John Paul David, read wikipedia licensing re: posting/copyright.

I think it would be more constructive to work on an NPOV factually accurate (non-PR) article, rather than to resort to threats of litigation. Your behavior is contrary to wikipedia community standards. --RandomStuff 16:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree with the legal threats part, I think you need to prove that this is indeed the same user and that "Johnpdavid" had rights to even use the image in the first place. But yes, no legal threats on Wikipedia. Sasquatch t|c 17:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JohnPDavid works for the pr agency for Boca Developers - [1], I erroniously mistook this account to be a sock puppet account for johnpdavid due to shared ip addresses between identical postings, but it appears by the email address above that this account belongs to a different Boca Developement employee. According to Johnpdavid's initial postings, he was working under direction of Boca Developement when he posted the image under creative commons public domain. So it looks like Boca Developement first posted/cc licensed the photo to wikipedia through their pr firm, then retracted the license when they were unhappy with the contents of the article. If this is a legal issue, the ip address johnpdavid posted the image from is in the logs, and as an agent of Boca Developers he has the right to publish the image and enter it into CC public domain. There is legal precident that once an image is entered into CC public domain by an agent of the owner of the rights, said rights cannot be revoked. While wikipedia may decide to cave on this one, the law and past decisions are clear, and again, ip address logs of wikipedia will show that johnpdavid is who he says he is, a pr agent for Boca Developers. So the real legal action perhaps should be against johnpdavid for giving away the copyright of his clients' image while representing him? --RandomStuff 18:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to re-read my post. I never threatened "legal action", but instead am choosing to enforce our copyright of the name Biscayne Landing, which we legally own. You have not requested permission to use the name and are therefore in violation of copyright laws governing usage of the name. We request you cease and desist from using the name Biscayne Landing forthwith.

If you have an issue with regards to copyright, please look at this page and follow the instructions therein. Making demands of individual editors is rather less effective, and the language above does suggest a legal demand; I'd recommend reading the no legal threats policy before continuing on that path. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 18:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Biscayne Landing talk page

Marketingsupport: I have copied this discussion verbatim to the Biscayne Landing discussion page, as that is the proper place for this discussion to be held. Please direct future comments re: problems with the article to this page. --RandomStuff 18:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your blanking of Biscayne Landing

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. -- Gogo Dodo 18:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name Biscayne Landing is copyrighted. Use of this name, without consent by the owner this site in violation of copyright infringement law. As an agent of the owner, I have every right to delete use of this name and will continue to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketingsupport (talk • contribs) 18:56, July 13, 2007 (UTC)

Names are not copyrightable. Period.--SarekOfVulcan 19:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct. They can be registered as a trademark, but United States trademark law does not prohibit Wikipedia from using trademarked names in encyclopedia articles. -- Satori Son 19:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Biscayne Landing, you will be blocked from editing. -- Gogo Dodo 19:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No need to discuss further as it has been taken up with Wikipedia.

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Biscayne Landing. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. -- Satori Son 19:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also please note, using a new account with the same ip address, User:NoMoBS, to get around 3RR is also in violation of wikipedia rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RandomStuff (talk • contribs) 19:33, July 13, 2007 (UTC)

My cited and sourced edits are being removed. I have a right to post factual information and when it is removed I will continue to post them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketingsupport (talk • contribs) 19:37, July 13, 2007 (UTC)

I have no opinion whatsoever on that particular dispute. I'm just giving you a head's up that if you continue to edit war over that article, you will be completely blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Three-revert rule very carefully. Users get blocked each and every day for violating that policy, whether they are right or not. -- Satori Son 19:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest information

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Biscayne Landing, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you.--SarekOfVulcan 19:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Three-revert rule violation on Biscayne Landing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Kurykh 20:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Marketingsupport (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

user appears to be making effort to play by the rules, and may have valuable contributions to subject matter

Decline reason:

Block already expired. — TexasAndroid 17:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.