User talk:Rvplpr

-- Wikinews Welcome (talk) 04:32, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Your contributions
Hi. You might find WN:PILLARS useful for a sense of how en.wn works. Then, there's lots of useful information in the Howdy template at the top of this page. --Pi zero (talk) 16:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

COI
It seems likely you may have a conflict of interest in writing about Cary Lee Peterson. Any such thing should be disclosed. Whether it's severe enough to prevent you from writing on the topic, remains to be seen. --Pi zero (talk) 23:33, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

RVPlus Inc PR account
I have started a discussion to have this id permanently banned as a promotional, single-purpose account.

Wikinews does not exist to serve your PR purposes, or to pump up the reputation of SEC-suspended 'junk' or worthless penny stocks.

You should never assume that because a site says "Wiki" you'll be able to game it as part of deceiving people and make false claims regarding zombie businesses that haven't turned over a red cent in the past few years. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:06, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

[Brian] I'm sure there others reviewing this will identify that your comments are quite libelous. Your references above are in reference to a 10-day stock trading suspension that was a year ago for a company that has absolutely nothing to do with the original article written or the content of the article. I wrote an article about humanitarian acts in world government. Not anywhere in the article or articles that were used as references of anything linked to the articles mentioned in the reference pertain to stocks or Wall Streets as Brian McNeil has used in attempt to defame the individual referenced in the article and gain supporters do delete my article. It appears Brian McNeil has had a history of this type of behavior on Wikiworld as I've discovered from past content dispute. Some quarrels were apparent and others marginal. Fact is that Brian failed to read the content or follow up with the references before making a public comment on the matter, which is not acceptable coming from an administrator, who is supposed to be reviewing content thoroughly and without bias or prejudice.

[ Admin@Wikinews ] If you see the hyperlink to the the Wiki discussion/dispute below you will see that Brian's comments were not accurate and hold extreme bias and prejudice. He's made more than one comment and rebuttal that led me to this response now. I have utmost respect for Wikiworld admin but I also know when someone is blatantly attempting to cut me down or insult me and is not paying close attention.

Talk:Cary Lee Peterson speaks at United Nations about social and economic development in the Caribbean and Asia-Pacific Region

McNeil's actions are very questionable to whether or not he's capable of making concise decision for Wikiworld. I am a student. Sure I have volunteered for the organization I writing news about. The sources are bonafied. Yahoo News, Reuters, UN.ORG. All legitimate sources. McNeil attempts to bypass these facts and rebuttals with slanderous comments and link to a press release talking about a stock tip from over a year ago that had nothing to do with the article that I wrote about a delegate's statement and meeting at the United Nations last month. Rvplpr (talk) 17:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Let me go ask Wikinews' in-house paralegal; but, first, I should point out that the correct word you should be using is defamation. You, personally, would have to drop your anonymity and demonstrate a reputation which had incurred actual damage. That would be through proving my statements were made with the intent to cause said damage, and that such statements were made with reckless disregard for the facts of the matter.
 * At the moment, with nothing published on Wikinews, you have zero reputation to defend. Your 'attempted' contribution history supports the allegations I have made, not your claim of 'Godly innocence'.
 * There's nothing questionable about my decisions here. Yahoo will publish any old crap that press-release pushers labeling themselves as a 'wire service' send them; that does not make such drivel news, no matter how many of these puff pieces you try gluing together. And, Reuters? Would that be this puff piece? The one with the disclaimer: "Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release"? Even the too-trusting United Nations don't list the Academy of Universal Global Peace as an academic institution; thus calling into-question their ability to issue any sort of degree, honorary or otherwise. That, similarly, gives an opportunity to have another guess at your identity: "Rahul Decosta", No?
 * In any case, I'm sure the project admins find your appeal highly-amusing. It's extremely unlikely to generate any sympathy, since we promote people to admin for critical thinking and judgment skills. Your "works" have already been used to conclude " it's no longer tenable to suppose they're anything other than a PR instrument". Plus, that your latest attempt to promote Cary Lee Peterson should be deleted.
 * I'm not a project administrator, but I could have banned you since I am a bureaucrat &mdash; a role with all the privileges of admin, and then some. The responsibility that comes with the extra privileges is protecting the project from timewasters and propagandists like yourself. You've wasted reviewer time over a period of months, and done nothing but attempt to create a positive spin on some character who has &mdash; somehow &mdash; ingratiated themselves with the UN.
 * By all means, keep complaining that I'm not nice. You've worn-out the welcome mat, and absolved me of any obligation to sugar-coat criticism. --Brian McNeil / talk 09:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry Brian, it appears you lost me, all of the reviewers and admin who are now onto this matter. What does your long- winded response of gibberish (which seems to reveal an apparent self-generated hatred towards a man and group of organizations publicized their mission of goodwill for the world) have to do with the validity of my article source from the UN statement (from un.org) published in the Yahoo News articles referenced?

Through all of your attempts to defame and slander someone's character, broadcast your own form of propaganda (about stocks and whether or not Reuters news articles are credible or not), threaten me, and then altering the hyperlink from my original response to the Wiki Talk page (displaying the proofs to my argument and the feeble minded notion of yours), what exactly have you accomplished here?

Now that you've openly admitted that as an administrator you reserve the right to bully and manipulate your appointed authority, I assume its time to address the matter at hand with the (wiki) board and remove any rubbish that one particular moderator has taken into his own hands, thus, has abused his privileges from authority. Its apparent you cannot handle your role and to imply that content from anyone delegating at United Nations is a joke, fraud, or in whatever way not news worthy is quite unacceptable. I do not think the several people who have dedicated their lives to philanthropy, humanity, and world diplomacy would find your comments or demeanor flattering. I think you've made your own bed mister. Good Day.

NOTE: Shall I talk a screen shot again in case you attempt to alter my original message (again), which confirmed the validity of the source from the UN statement published in Yahoo News articles referenced and confirming your various defamatory invalid and irrelevant to your initial reason for trying to ban a basic three paragraph article about a delegate speaking at the United Nations?

Rvplpr (talk) 10:25, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

??
Did you ever take this matter before the Arbitration Committee? Personally, I think you're just another PR hack, but I could be wrong. Brian McNeil has a pretty smart head about such things. Have you re-engaged here recently? Do you wish to engage in citizen journalism? --Bddpaux (talk) 02:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)