385:) 07:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The matter is a court case. You removed adverse comments? There is also defamatory material reported here by others that is also a conflict of interest. What the transcripts do is balance that defamation. Which means wikipedia don't have to be sued for liable. There are many wikpedia pages that are longer. Every law student in Australia studies the Kable Doctrine in order to attain their law degree. That is why it is balanced and has been there for many years until you came along. Kable 2 is the same case. The short adjournment comment shows the speed at which the judges took to make their decision. Some readers would be most suprised.
423:
event. This article is not about perfection because perfection is a fallacy. What was written about me I can tolerate otherwise it would have been removed or edit. Some of it over the years has been corrected. However What was transcribed in a court of law is more reliable and accurate and in terms of the short ajournment fact. So facts should remain in transcript for law students to follow the letter of the law. No need to change facts.
534:
304:
628:
188:
Orthogonjal1 removed relevant material from court records. Nothing bias about it at all from Gkable. Neither a conflict of interest either. Simply removing legal transcript facts. What a judge or barrister said in a court of law. That material has been posted for many years. That is the truth of the
469:
Gee thanks. If eds understand and are not radical then I too can wisper words of wisdom and just let it be. Sometimes trying too hard for change is not called for. I am also glad to have discussed these issues with you and will use the legal link to wickipedia for a future discussion if necessary. I
344:
Actually you never explained why you removed the judges comments? If you wanted to discuss that then why didnt you? Because you came to remove and vandalise the truth under your heading that you have cleaned it up. But actually messed it up. Destructively. By removing facts not what I or some editor
267:
Othogonal1 would you or any other readers please not remove relevant transcript material and claim some reason like bias. You know it's the truth and the truth hurts. Those comments were made by senior judges and barristers in the courts. These are officers of the court. That is who they are and who
430:
This case started over 20 years ago and is finished. All have had time to edit and my patience is running out over the many years defending it and wikipedia should be able to understand that I am able to tolerate what has been written so far otherwise it would have been sued. And now lock the page.
404:
You're right about the fact that the short adjournment could have significance. I think that more readers would notice this if, instead of quoting the transcript, we replaced that part with something like "After hearing arguments, the court adjourned for four minutes, and then decided to refuse New
400:
What is the defamatory material in the article? I thought that the article was all true. Knowledge (XXG) has a strict policy about removing any unsourced negative statements about living people. If you can point to the statements that you don't think we can prove, and we can't prove them, then they
231:
is against
Knowledge (XXG) policy. You should try to discuss the topic and come to an agreement. Even when I have given you many chances to talk about it, you haven't, and have just kept reverting my edit without giving a reason other than calling it vandalism. Do not revert the page again until we
451:
Finally, while we might have got off to a difficult start, it's been wonderful talking to you and I am honestly happy to say that I have had this conversation. And I just want to congratulate you on convincing the High Court to give all
Australians new constitutional rights. Everyone is better off
422:
Defamatory material is what other editors wrote about the case not what was transcribed in a court. Better to just leave their descriptions to help describe the case for law students. What is truth? All eds have bias so do all judges, barristers etc. The facts of the case and the matter are a true
329:
When reporting a user here, your own behaviour will also be scrutinized. There are certain exemptions to 3RR, such as reverting vandalism or clear violations of the
Biographies of living persons policy; The three-revert rule is a convenient limit for occasions when an edit war is happening fairly
426:
So you see your argument about I'm at war doesn't exist really. I didn't write the article. Actually I love everyone. Anyone can come here and write defamation about me a living person who has feelings. I have no choice but to defend it, so banning me means I have to sue and can claim exemplary
564:
and remember that YOU are not a reliable source. We strongly prefer secondary sources that are independent of the subject of the article. Blogs and other self-published sources are very rarely considered reliable sources. You are in a situation that's happened before where the subject of an
565:
article wants to interject their views, particularly when there are controversial aspects involved. You really need to limit yourself to using the article talk page and suggesting edits based on good sources. That's the most helpful way for you to contribute to this article.
249:
You would do better to answer the talk. Removing transcript material from a legal page is vandalism. Simply trying to hide the truth. Vandalism is against any good will and it is you who should show some respect. This material has been posted for years. Please decist.
448:. They get many requests like this, and they know our policies much better than me. All editors, including me, have to accept their decision, so it would probably be more efficient for you to talk to them. Let me know when they write back and what their decision was.
54:
373:
I never objected to you including information about what the judges said, or including small quotes. I just think that we don't need *everything* - for example, I don't see how "AT 3.47 PM SHORT ADJOURNMENT UPON RESUMING AT 3.51 PM:" helps
282:
In relation to the bias comment it appears CLPO 13 and you have the same mo laying down wikipedia rules to suit your own vandalism and bias. Both came within ear shot of the other, because it is you. Please find something constructive to
618:~~ Youve gone out of your way to defame the writer with false and misleasing lies without any balance or right of reply. Oh no you cant post the aftermath posted by someone else. You cant take them to the court transcripts as they lie?
498:
The reason that I'm asking is, when we spoke in May, I was under the impression that you would contact the legal team and we would both abide by their decision, and it would be very helpful to know what that is.
203:
Subsequently CLPO 13 re removed the material suggesting bias from Gkable. Subsequently Gkable reposted the material. Subsequently CLPO 13 cited a COL tag. This was wrong. Gkable (talk) 23:59, 14 May 2016
39:
369:
The extracts were way too long for a
Knowledge (XXG) article - Knowledge (XXG) should summarise the important points in the article, and provide links to the transcripts if anyone wants to see them.
524:
hi
Orthogonal1 I did not contact any legal authorities. Actually Im currently in hospital fighting cancer getting kimo and radiation. I would appreciate it if you could just be at peace. Thanks.
377:
Now that I think about it, seeing as Kable 2 was a different case, do you think that we should give it its own page? I'd be happy to leave that page alone and let you do what you want to it.
427:
reason for damages. Also I have asked wikipedia to lock the page so that radical editors don't breach my tolerance any more but to date they have refused. That is also grounds for liable.
90:
308:
49:
To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See
53:
for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from
Knowledge (XXG), but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask
594:
224:
330:
quickly, but it is not a definition of "edit warring", and it is perfectly possible to edit war without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so.
79:
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see
46:
and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.
35:
538:
100:
129:
653:
232:
have come to consensus on the article's talk page. Doing so may be considered edit warring, which can result in penalties, including a ban.
43:
585:~~ Oh and you are a reiable source compaired to the court transcripts you removed? Youve gone out of your way to defame the writer.
542:
114:
119:
64:
One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately
649:
73:
645:
28:
640:
635:
69:
65:
123:
76:
or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)
312:
228:
95:
58:
23:
598:
189:
matter. I simply put back what was deleted. I have also asked for full protection to prevent further vandalism.
136:
445:
I'm not a lawyer, nor
Knowledge (XXG), so I think that the best course of action would be for you to contact
140:
152:
670:
You are not allowed to edit
Knowledge (XXG) while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.
605:
550:
504:
489:
470:
will also counter my claim on you wiki page so that you wont be villified for any statement I have made.
457:
410:
382:
320:
237:
144:
105:
307:
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at
572:
50:
672:
151:(~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
80:
659:
602:
546:
500:
485:
453:
406:
378:
316:
233:
173:
156:
608:
566:
561:
560:
I saw this on the noticeboard. You really need to read the
Knowledge (XXG) page on
110:
537:
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
513:
471:
446:
432:
386:
346:
331:
284:
269:
251:
205:
190:
168:
614:~~ Oh and you are a reliable source beside the court transcripts you removed?
648:. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may
627:
42:. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a
70:
usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation
484:
Hi Greg, I was just wondering if you heard back from the legal team.
227:
for the reasons that I removed it - I never once said the word bias.
38:, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a
676:
578:
554:
521:
508:
493:
479:
461:
440:
414:
394:
354:
339:
324:
292:
277:
259:
241:
213:
198:
178:
656:, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:
264:
Under the heading
Aftermarth 2 the talk tab discussion reads....
148:
311:
regarding a possible violation of Knowledge (XXG)'s policy on
626:
68:. Knowledge (XXG) generally does not allow editors to have
309:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring
34:
I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was
545:
incident in which you may be involved. Thank you.--
405:
South Wales' application for special leave to appeal"?
593:
Hi. I've put together a thread discussing you are the
595:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
589:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
528:
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
223:
I just got your message on my talk page. Please see
159:, or ask your question on this page and then place
225:Talk:Kable_v_Director_of_Public_Prosecutions_(NSW)
86:Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
539:Knowledge (XXG):Conflict of interest/Noticeboard
91:The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
72:. If you have a username like this, you should
298:Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
36:Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
8:
366:The copyright in them is owned by the Courts
646:making legal threats or taking legal action
135:I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
167:before the question. Again, welcome!
7:
588:
359:I'm pretty sure that I did explain.
96:The five pillars of Knowledge (XXG)
401:will be removed from the article.
14:
51:our help page on userspace drafts
532:
302:
120:How to create your first article
101:Contributing to Knowledge (XXG)
1:
677:00:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
609:00:13, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
579:23:57, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
555:00:49, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
74:request a change of username
693:
522:04:00, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
509:22:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
130:Simplified Manual of Style
24:welcome to Knowledge (XXG)
654:guide to appealing blocks
494:00:31, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
153:Knowledge (XXG):Questions
59:copy it to your user page
517:
480:21:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
475:
462:20:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
441:18:42, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
436:
415:12:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
395:08:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
390:
355:06:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
350:
340:05:39, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
335:
325:03:31, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
293:21:36, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
288:
278:21:17, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
273:
260:21:02, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
255:
242:20:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
214:00:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
209:
199:23:25, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
194:
179:22:22, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
115:How to develop articles
66:be blocked from editing
631:
452:because of your case.
664:Your reason here ~~~~
652:by first reading the
630:
541:regarding a possible
55:anyone from this list
543:conflict of interest
362:From the talk page:
40:conflict of interest
21:Hello, Gkable, and
650:request an unblock
632:
111:How to edit a page
29:your contributions
644:from editing for
143:your messages on
684:
675:
667:
575:
562:reliable sources
536:
535:
315:. Thank you.
306:
305:
165:
164:
27:! Thank you for
692:
691:
687:
686:
685:
683:
682:
681:
680:
671:
657:
624:
597:, specifically
591:
573:
533:
530:
482:
424:
357:
342:
303:
300:
295:
268:they represent.
265:
262:
229:WP:Edit warring
221:
186:
177:
162:
161:
19:
12:
11:
5:
690:
688:
633:You have been
625:
623:
620:
617:
613:
590:
587:
584:
582:
581:
529:
526:
468:
466:
421:
419:
398:
371:
370:
367:
343:
328:
299:
296:
281:
263:
248:
246:
220:
217:
185:
182:
171:
133:
132:
127:
124:Article Wizard
117:
108:
103:
98:
93:
57:and they will
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
689:
679:
678:
674:
665:
661:
655:
651:
647:
643:
642:
638:
637:
629:
621:
619:
615:
611:
610:
607:
604:
600:
596:
586:
580:
576:
570:
569:
563:
559:
558:
557:
556:
552:
548:
544:
540:
527:
525:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:
506:
502:
496:
495:
491:
487:
481:
477:
473:
467:
464:
463:
459:
455:
449:
447:
443:
442:
438:
434:
428:
420:
417:
416:
412:
408:
402:
397:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
375:
368:
365:
364:
363:
360:
356:
352:
348:
341:
337:
333:
327:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
297:
294:
290:
286:
280:
279:
275:
271:
261:
257:
253:
247:
244:
243:
239:
235:
230:
226:
218:
216:
215:
211:
207:
201:
200:
196:
192:
183:
181:
180:
175:
170:
166:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
131:
128:
125:
121:
118:
116:
112:
109:
107:
104:
102:
99:
97:
94:
92:
89:
88:
87:
84:
82:
77:
75:
71:
67:
62:
60:
56:
52:
47:
45:
41:
37:
32:
30:
26:
25:
16:
669:
663:
641:indefinitely
639:
634:
622:October 2016
616:
612:
592:
583:
567:
531:
512:
497:
483:
465:
450:
444:
429:
425:
418:
403:
399:
376:
372:
361:
358:
313:edit warring
301:
266:
245:
222:
202:
187:
160:
157:my talk page
155:, ask me on
134:
126:if you wish)
85:
78:
63:
48:
33:
22:
20:
603:Tagishsimon
547:Jack Upland
501:Orthogonal1
486:Orthogonal1
454:Orthogonal1
407:Orthogonal1
379:Orthogonal1
317:Orthogonal1
234:Orthogonal1
163:{{Help me}}
147:using four
122:(using the
568:Ravensfire
145:talk pages
137:Wikipedian
219:Talk page
184:Vandalism
139:! Please
662:|reason=
106:Tutorial
17:Welcome!
660:unblock
636:blocked
374:anyone.
250:Thanks.
81:WP:PAID
44:neutral
606:(talk)
514:Gkable
472:Gkable
433:Gkable
387:Gkable
347:Gkable
332:Gkable
285:Gkable
270:Gkable
252:Gkable
206:Gkable
191:Gkable
169:clpo13
149:tildes
673:Katie
345:said.
204:(UTC)
601:. --
599:here
574:talk
551:talk
518:talk
505:talk
490:talk
476:talk
458:talk
437:talk
411:talk
391:talk
383:talk
351:talk
336:talk
321:talk
289:talk
274:talk
256:talk
238:talk
210:talk
195:talk
174:talk
141:sign
113:and
283:do.
83:).
666:}}
658:{{
577:)
553:)
520:)
507:)
492:)
478:)
460:)
439:)
413:)
393:)
353:)
338:)
323:)
291:)
276:)
258:)
240:)
212:)
197:)
61:.
31:.
668:.
571:(
549:(
516:(
503:(
488:(
474:(
456:(
435:(
409:(
389:(
381:(
349:(
334:(
319:(
287:(
272:(
254:(
236:(
208:(
193:(
176:)
172:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.