InvestigativeNews

Lawsuit

On this 27th day of February 2021, we write to inform you that Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia so any one can edit an article. Wikipedia policy is verifiability, which states that all contributions should be well-researched from credible sources; information which is not may be removed. With these policies adhered to, any article about the subject “12 O’Clock Boyz” that appears in Wikipedia should give you no cause for concern.

The below Lawsuit Section which was added on February 26, 2021 to improve the 12 O'Clock Boyz article is based on verifiable and well-researched credible news sources. References to the URLs for the news sources were also included on the article. Therefore, the information may not be removed by you. "Verifiability".

Lawsuit for Copyright and Trademark Infringement

On October 23, 2018, Taje Monbo, the Creator of the original 12 O'Clock Boyz film series released in 2001 and 2003, filed a copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit in New York Federal Court against Lotfy Nathan, Oscilloscope Laboratories, and Overbrook Entertainment alleging unauthorized use of his copyrighted works and trademark in 12 O'Clock Boys.

For their roles in the production, distribution, and adaptation of Nathan's 12 O'Clock Boys, Eric Blair, Daniel Berger, Will Smith, Sony Pictures Entertainment, and others are also named as defendants in the lawsuit. The case is Monbo et al v. Nathan et al, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 1:18-CV-05930. The lawsuit is still pending. View the 450-page complaint which includes 59 exhibits.

InvestigativeNews (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

References

12 O'Clock Boys and 12 O'Clock Boyz

I removed content you added to this article and explained reasons in the edit summary. You have re-added some of that with no discussion or explanation. This is not how Wikipedia editing works, as it just leads to edit wars. If you wish to challenge the removal of content that you added you should start a discussion on the talk page of the article explaining why the information should be included. The fact that a documentary film includes very brief segments of other copyrighted work is generally not notable enough to mention, and references to copyright notices are irrelevant. In the case of 12 O'Clock Boys, the film also includes clips of many newscasts, which are also copyrighted material. But there is no need to mention that in the film's article.

It seems like you are either trying to suggest that there is a copyright violation (thus the repeated reference to the brief clip being copyrighted and the reference) or trying to imply that 12 O'Clock Boys is somehow a rip-off of the other work. Neither of those claims is supported by any sources and so the article should not be read to imply that this is the case.

Finally, you appear to be a single purpose account, only created for the purpose of editing this one article. This suggests that you might have some personal connection to one of the films involved in your edits. If that i the case then you might have a conflict of interest and should be cautious about editing the article at all.

If you wish to discuss your edits and the material you think should be included, please start a discussion on the talk page for 12 O'Clock Boys. But do not just restore the material without first gaining a consensus on the talk page as this is unproductive. Thanks 142 and 99 (talk) 21:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Avoiding discussion on the issue and continuing to edit war will only result in you being blocked from editing by Wikipedia. Please observe proper procedure and discuss the edit on the film's talk page. 142 and 99 (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

By continuing to re-add the same material and refusing to discuss the edit on the talk page for the article you are engaging in nonconstructive editing by edit warring. Later today when I get the time I will be asking for administrative intervention to address this matter on the administrators' noticeboard for edit warring. You will be notified when that happens here. I would advise, however, that it would be more constructive if before then you revert your own addition and open a discussion on the talk page for the film. As things stand, it is possible that an administrator could decide to ban you from editing. A good faith discussion of the material is better, but if you will not discus the edit and persist in edit warring there might be no other choice. 142 and 99 (talk) 19:27, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to try one more time something like a compromise. It keeps unnecessary information in the article, but removes the insinuation of being a rip off or violating copyright and removes the unnecessary repetition of the title of the film. If you don't like the change, please discuss it on a talk page (there or here) before making any changes. 142 and 99 (talk) 04:56, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

RESPONSE

Lawsuit

On this 27th day of February 2021, we write to inform you that Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia so any one can edit an article. Wikipedia policy is verifiability, which states that all contributions should be well-researched from credible sources; information which is not may be removed. With these policies adhered to, any article about the subject “12 O’Clock Boyz” that appears in Wikipedia should give you no cause for concern. The Lawsuit Section which was added on February 26, 2021 to improve the 12 O'Clock Boyz article is based on verifiable and well-researched credible news sources. References to the URLs for the news sources were also included on the article. Therefore, the information may not be removed by you. "Verifiability".

Lawsuit for Copyright and Trademark Infringement

According to news sources, on October 23, 2018, Taje Monbo, the Creator of the original 12 O'Clock Boyz film series released in 2001 and 2003, filed a copyright and trademark infringement lawsuit in New York Federal Court against Lotfy Nathan, Oscilloscope Laboratories, and Overbrook Entertainment alleging unauthorized use of his copyrighted works and trademark.

For their roles in the production, distribution, and adaptation of Nathan's 12 O'Clock Boys, Eric Blair, Daniel Berger, Will Smith, Sony Pictures Entertainment, and others are also named as defendants in the lawsuit. The case is Monbo et al v. Nathan et al, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 1:18-CV-05930. The lawsuit is still pending. View the 450-page complaint which includes 59 exhibits.

InvestigativeNews (talk) 19:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Why would a pending lawsuit be notable, for Wikipedia's purposes? It has not attracted much coverage in sources, nor has it left much of an impact in a relative field. 06:13, 1 March 2021 (UTC)Dimadick (talk)

References

Managing a conflict of interest on Wikipedia

Because your edits have concentrated on a very specific topic (WP:SPA) raising the possibility, I post the following standard message in case it can be useful.

---

Hello, InvestigativeNews. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. —PaleoNeonate – 12:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021

Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia because your username, InvestigativeNews, does not meet our username policy. Your username is the principal reason for the block. You are welcome to continue editing after you have selected a new username that meets the username policy guidelines, which are summarized below.

Per the username policy, a username should represent an individual and should not: represent a group or organization; be promotional; be misleading (such as indicating possession of special user rights or being a "Bot" account (unless approved for such purposes)); be offensive or otherwise disruptive. However, a username that contains the name of a organization and also identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87" is allowed, though, among others, the guidance on conflict of interest and the policy of paid-contribution disclosure are relevant.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our username policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you wish for your existing contributions to carry over under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

1. Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" from their talk page.
2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a change of name request.
3. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use. Therefore, please check the list here to see if a name is taken prior to requesting a change of name.

Appeals: If, after reading the guide to appealing blocks you believe you were blocked in error, then you may appeal this block by adding {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this notice. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

New Username Effective March 1, 2021

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

InvestigativeNews (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

Matt at InvestigativeNews (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Effective March 1, 2021, the wikipedia username will be changed to Matt at InvestigativeNews. Please make a note of this new change. InvestigativeNews (talk) 18:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

You already created the other account, so nothing more needs to be done here. 331dot (talk) 20:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of 12 O'Clock Boyz for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 12 O'Clock Boyz is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/12 O'Clock Boyz until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Narky Blert (talk) 18:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)