User talk:Doctorcane08

Please do not make personal attacks on other people, as you did at Talk:St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Leuko 04:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but I vehemently disagree with your assessment of Mr. [User:Azskeptic|Azskeptic] and my comments concerning him. Verifiable facts about him are undisputed. The fact that you are siding with him in aspects of this issue when a large lawsuit is going on concerning the school is disconcerting at best. Some of us have knowledge of the school, investigations, and other facts which simply cannot be laid out for public consumption until the whole set of issues is resolved. I am not attacking Mr. [User:Azskeptic|Azskeptic]. I am merely pointing out his obsessive compulsive disorder and his actions which are fair game concerning his character. Please feel free to ask questions about it and I will answer when I can, but otherwise, please reign in [User:Azskeptic|Azskeptic] and his slander attempts toward the school or else Wiki risks becoming a defendant in the current litigation as colluding with [User:Azskeptic|Azskeptic] in attempting to bring about harm to the plaintiffs in the case in NJ. This is not a threat and the law firm IS monitoring all that is going on concerning this article and any harm will be assessed by them. Doctorcane08 17:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not only are you claiming that Azskeptic has a psychiatric condition, you are also threating to sue editors and the Wikimedia Foundation. That certainly sounds like personal attacks to me under WP:NPA. Leuko 20:01, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am claiming he has a psychiatric condition because it is obvious to any one with medical training that he does. Its quite common to have this disorder as well. Look it up. I am sure there is a citation on Wiki. I am saying quite clearly, that the student body has a legal right to be kept from harm and your actions could potentially subject Wiki to answer to Judge L for failure to abide by current agreements from the ousted leaders, et al. I am being quite clear to you that while we are not interested in suing Wiki, it becomes a possibility according to the law firm if you, by your actions insist on attempting to inflict harm on the students. I think that is more than fair. Reign in [User:Azskeptic|Azskeptic] and put him on a tight leash. Simple. We will protect our rights and abilities as future physicians abiding by US law and requirements. Again, I am not threatening to sue, I am merely pointing out that the law is clear about infliciting harm on students when a current case comes about. Please do your research regarding the law. Doctorcane08 15:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though you are couching your threats of legal action with statements such as "this is not a threat," it is clear that you are still making such legal threats. First of all, I have no control over what Azskeptic does, and your continued personal attacks against him should not be tolerated. Secondly, I am not trying to inflict harm on anyone, I am just trying to ensure that Wikipedia is as accurate as possible, and includes all verifiable facts. Leuko 17:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No legal threats

WP:NLT. Please stop. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has a right if they wish to remain completely anonymous. Posting private information about a user, specifically their (alleged) name and/or personal details, is strictly prohibited as harassment. Wikipedia policy on that issue is strictly enforced.

You have deliberately breached that rule and posted private information about a fellow user, such as their (alleged) name, identity and/or address, on Wikipedia, despite appeals to stop. For doing so, in accordance with precedent you have been blocked from editing this site. All personal information so posted will be deleted from the archives of Wikipedia.

I would say that the WIKI admin who made this decision fail to understand that the alleged individual since we dispute his existence, advertises himself all over the internet and that alone overrules the WIKI anonymity. The man stalks SCIMD students, this is a FACT. I am not harrassing him so much as he is harrassing US. What have WE the SCIMD students done to warrant that and the treatment by WIKI? HE is the one who started the disputes and refuses to back off. Why not ask him why? Ask him his qualifications as a self proclaimed consumer advocate. I have no made a threat of legal action. I have said explicitely that the student BODY thru its legal reps will not tolerate harm coming to it anymore than already has happened. I have also offered a conference call with said legal reps so WIKI understands the gravity of what said person is attempting to do to us. That was obviously ignored. Doctorcane08 22:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it was ignored, as all legal threats should be. Now, learn how to edit in a collegial manner, and quit attacking other people. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:05, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its really impossible to edit in a collegial manner when the admin is colluding with a user to inflict harm on students and is using ONE person in particular as a source. If you knew the entire story, you might see the frustration we see. I doubt you care.Doctorcane08 14:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zoe, why does it bother you or anyone else, that we, as a student body, would want to protect our rights from intentional harm being inflicted upon us because you side with one person whose name is splattered all over this site, who has an admin attempt to shield him knowing that, and I am blocked because no one wants to answer the questions we have couched? IF as a result of this article I am denied a residency because mr. skeptic called them and told them of it, am I not harmed? Whereas, I was not before? I seriously doubt any of you really have thought thru the magnitude of the harm HE is attempting to inflict and you and the others are merely tools of his using.

What bothers me is not only that you are attempting to make "your" institution out to be what it is not, but that you are being uncivil about it. WP:NPOV and WP:NPA are etched in stone, violating them doesn't make you look good. If you were to calm down, speadk in a civil manner, and follow the appropriate Dispute resolution process, people won't be blocking you and nagging you. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:12, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]