urgent re section deleted as per advice from several relevant authorities i have deleted the offending paragraph in the temple lot article and the identical one at 'church of christ temple lot ' i am not doing this as an amateur wikipedia editor but as the private citizen who is being 'outed' and defamed in two wikipedia articles so far i have been advised to delete the offending passage and then wait and see who exactly restores it that person unless it is a smackbot an automatic revert will in turn be 'outed' and 'named' as the subject of a criminal investigation yes this is a 'legal threat ' and i don't appreciate various inept wikipedia administrators threatening me in order to dissuade me from complaining to law enforcement about a crime which is being committed the willful invasion of privacy and defamation of a u s citizen in contravention to numerous local state and federal laws as well as in contravention to numerous strict and explicit wikipedia policies regarding inclusion of a person's name in a wikipedia article the following excerpt is just one example of wikipedia guidelines which have been willfully persistently and openly ignored and defied by wikipedia editor after wikipedia editor again whoever restores the defamatory passage which includes my nameor any paragraph sentence or article which includes my namewill be investigated and hopefully prosecuted for doing so in other words i will press criminal charges against the perpetrator privacy of names caution should be applied when naming individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event when the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed such as in certain court cases it is often preferable to omit it especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context when evaluating the inclusion or removal of names their publication in secondary sources other than news media such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories editors should take particular care when considering whether inclusion of the names of private living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value the presumption in favor of the privacy of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability is correspondingly stronger