User talk:Cbadinelli

May 2022

Hello, I'm Zac67. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Passive optical network seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Zac67 (talk) 15:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Security[edit source]

Developed in 2009 by Cable Manufacturing Business to meet SIPRNet requirements of the US Air Force, secure passive optical network (SPON) integrates gigabit passive optical network (GPON) technology and protective distribution system (PDS). Changes to the NSTISSI 7003 requirements for PDS and the mandate by the US federal government for GREEN technologies allowed for the US federal government consideration of the two technologies as an alternative to active Ethernet and encryption devices. The chief information officer of the United States Department of the Army issued a directive to adopt the technology by fiscal year 2013. It is marketed to the US military by companies such as Telos Corporation. LIKE THIS IS NOT SELF PROMOTING? BUT YOU DON'T SEEM INTERESTED IN REMOVING THIS. LET ME ASK YOU WORK FOR ONE OF THE COMPANIES SELF PROMOTING? Cbadinelli (talk) 16:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Because you have been engaging in self-promotional editing and have an obvious conflict of interest, I have blocked you indefinitely from editing Passive optical network. You are free to make properly referenced Edit requests at Talk:Passive optical network. But before you do so, comply with the mandatory Paid contributions disclosure. Please read the Guide to appealing blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 16:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As zac67 is an industry bot, you don't see any conflict of interest? Allowing corporations to self promote is not a conflict of interest? I understand that it may be difficult for you to read or understand the US Patent CITED. but no different that calling Thomas Edison the inventor of the light bulb or another inventor who i have seen multiple listed from posting actual fact. As you can see I am a new user, and I apologies for posting my comments in my edit, but removing content as an industry bot as "good faith" is an issue, even more so that you allow "paid contributors" to dictate factual content from misinformation. I am retired for 14 years, there is no promotion of anything, just STATING and CITING FACTS. Clearly wikipedia is solely interested in its "paid contributor and not FACT. Cbadinelli (talk) 16:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Security[edit source]

Developed in 2009 by Cable Manufacturing Business to meet SIPRNet requirements of the US Air Force, secure passive optical network (SPON) integrates gigabit passive optical network (GPON) technology and protective distribution system (PDS). Changes to the NSTISSI 7003 requirements for PDS and the mandate by the US federal government for GREEN technologies allowed for the US federal government consideration of the two technologies as an alternative to active Ethernet and encryption devices. The chief information officer of the United States Department of the Army issued a directive to adopt the technology by fiscal year 2013. It is marketed to the US military by companies such as Telos Corporation.LIKE THIS IS NOT SELF PROMOTING? BUT YOU DON'T SEEM INTERESTED IN REMOVING THIS. LET ME ASK ZAC67 WORK FOR ONE OF THE COMPANIES SELF PROMOTING? Cbadinelli (talk) 16:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zac67 is a human being and not a bot. You are making serious allegations against an editor who is FAR more experienced than you but have provided zero evidence. You are now entering the territory of personal attacks and are violating policy. So, either provide the evidence or withdraw the personal attacks. Consider this a final warning. Cullen328 (talk) 16:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, neither you or zac67 took the effort to read the cited material that shows I am the inventor of this technology in addition I have over 30 years of experience in the IT Industry an am the owner of Patent US9490929B2 with the original filing in April 2009. Far before, any Secure Passive Optical Network information was ever submitted to wikipedia. There are clear references from the patent even diagrams that are used in your current wikipedia post from my patent filing which could be considered copyrighted material. In no way am I making issue, but its pretty clear there is an obvious bias from 'Paid Contributor" and the actual facts on wikipedia which is more than misleading to your readers. I cited the evidence https://patents.google.com/patent/US9490929?oq=christopher+badinelli or if you would rather I cite Method and apparatus for protecting fiber optic distribution systems the results are the same it is my invention https://patents.google.com/patent/US9490929?oq=Method+and+apparatus+for+protecting+fiber+optic+distribution+systems

As for referring to zac67 a bot, /i was not reference he/him/her/she/them/they (or whatever the correct pronoun zac67 identifies as) actually monitoring actual and making changes whimsically, with not thought of context or facts similar to an algorithm software.

with this said, I would hope you can reconsider my edits as they are factual, and not self promoting as I am retired for 14 years and doing nothing in the IT industry since I retired and just growing fruit on my farm in Costa Rica. You can probably tell by the IP address. Thank you Cbadinelli (talk) 17:32, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a checkuser and have no access to your IP address and do not care where you live. Even if I was a checkuser, it would be contrary to policy for me to investigate your IP address in this situation. If I also have no interest in the details of the content dispute, and administrators do not adjudicate content disputes anyway. My involvement is because of your behavior, nothing else. You need to stop attacking other editors, stop hollering at people, and make your case calmly on the article talk page. Cullen328 (talk) 18:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I apologized for my comment on the post, the others I have no reason to. Its clear you have little interested in keeping wikipedia fair and relevant, you should be. Cbadinelli (talk) 18:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More falsehoods from you, followed by more ignorance of how Wikipedia works. If you take a look at User:Cullen328, you will see that I have written more than 100 Wikipedia articles and significantly expanded many hundreds more. Per WP:INVOLVED, once I act as an administrator, I am not permitted to get involved directly in the content dispute. Cullen328 (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still open to working on issues with the article (as long as they're reasonable to me), but you need to stop making groundless allegations and accusations NOW, or I'll make an effort having blocked entirely. If you had bothered to check my contributions to WP you had never gotten all those funny ideas.

My interest is to improve articles and information here. My first revert was driven by the poor quality of your first anon edits, then I tried to integrate the information more properly - you were making that impossible by your edit warring. If you start to understand how WP works – WP:BRD is essential, then we could get somewhere. --Zac67 (talk) 18:32, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]