User talk:River3974

December 2022

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Seán Quinn, you may be blocked from editing. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:03, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the article referenced in incorrect. Sean Quinn did not use "right to be forgotten" legislation to remove articles from internet search listings.

The application was brought by Sean Quinn's Son in Law, Niall McPartland on his own behalf and had nothing to do with Sean Quinn or his family.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/sean-quinn-son-in-law-says-he-made-right-to-be-forgotten-requests-1.4729096 River3974 (talk) 12:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article now corrected, without having to blank anything. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 13:08, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that you have incorrectly stated that the reason Mr McPartland brought the application was to remove articles ‘that highlighted their lavish lifestyle before becoming bankrupt’.

This is factually incorrect.

Firstly it suggests that the extended Quinn Family were made bankrupt, which is not the case.

Secondly Mr McPartland confirms in the Irish Times article that the reason he brought the application was because the articles were “inaccurate, outdated and relating to proceedings which have long since been resolved”.

Can you please correct this.

Thank you

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/sean-quinn-son-in-law-says-he-made-right-to-be-forgotten-requests-1.4729096 River3974 (talk) 13:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First part: it doesn't. Second part: That's a claim McPartland made; it does not change the fact the newspapers in question published articles which he then sought to have removed from search results, which is what is stated in our article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:46, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]