===Specific sections of BLP violated=== 
 Criticism and praise: Criticism and praise should be included if they can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, so long as the material is presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a disinterested tone. 

 The information was not originally presented in a responsible, conservative or disinterested tone, or repeated in that manner. It was copy pasted simply repeat the accusations and information. 

 Challenged or likely to be challenged  Wikipedia's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable, and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. 

 No references of any kind were used when this was placed in the article and repeated again on the talk page. 

 Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material  Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced; that is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see No original research); that relies on self-published sources, unless written by the subject of the BLP (see below); or that relies on sources that fail in some other way to meet Verifiability standards. 

 This constitutes original research and is not sourced at all. Returning the material is a violation of this section after my removal of it. 

 Avoid gossip and feedback loops: Avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to a disinterested article about the subject. Be wary of sources that use weasel words and that attribute material to anonymous sources. 

 The user that placed the material is an anonymous source and we cannot divulge who it actually is or is not, since the user used a username and not a real name and is simply a new Wikipedia user, it fails as a reliable source and should not be repeated even on the article talk page. 

 Using the subject as a self-published source:Living persons may publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if: 
 # it is not unduly self-serving; 
 # it does not involve claims about third parties; 
 # it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; 
 # there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; 
 # the article is not based primarily on such sources. 

 If Dualus is going on the assumption that this is indeed the actual person, it violates this section as being self published on Wikipedia and does not meet the standard for use on the article or the talk page. 

 Presumption in favor of privacy Avoid victimization: When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic. This is of particular importance when dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely or entirely from being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization. 

 The editor that placed this here is playing the victim even though he is not mentioned at all. By repeating these claims and accusations this violates this section. 

 Privacy of personal information and using primary sources: ''With identity theft on the rise, people increasingly regard