Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:59, 5 June 2013

WP:IRE-IRL

NI may have courts but it has nothing to do with the Four Courts, as per WP:IRE-IRL use ] in the lead and info box. There are a few discussions in IMOS about it. Murry1975 (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC) Here are the last couple of discussions at IMOS, , . And yes I am at the crux of it. The guideline gets overlooked in the scheme of things. Some for polical reasons others just an oversight or misreading. An exception is where the state forms a major component of the topic (e.g. on articles relating states, politics or governance) where ] should be preferred and the island should be referred to as the island of Ireland, or similar (e.g. "Ireland is a state in Europe occupying most of the island of Ireland"). Politics or governance in this case. In others its simply from the fact that it is a place within the state. I hope this clears it up. Cheers. Murry1975 (talk) 13:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The rule of thumb is ambiguity. "Ireland is a state in Europe occupying most of the island of Ireland" - is not ambiguous. Similarly "Ireland has been a member state of the European Union since 1973." This is what is meant by the state forming a "major component" of the article. It's when we're referring to the state as a legal person and set of institutions rather than as a place.

When we're referring to the state as a place it's different. "Cork is a city in Ireland" is not ambiguous but "Cork is the second biggest city in Ireland" - is, and for obvious reasons. Your edit at Four Courts is of the second biggest city variety. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 14:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The rule of thumb? No it is a guideline. There is no ambiguaty, there is no mention of the island in the lead and it clearly concerns the governance of state, an area you mainly edit it (legal stuff). If you wish to discuss this futher it should be done in the relative MOS. Murry1975 (talk) 14:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

PS thanks for your quick response. Murry1975 (talk) 14:23, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

sovereign state

Hei Blue-Haired Lawyer,

I just looked up who wrote the most basic definition of a state in the article of the sovereign state, looks like that was you. I think it's a pretty good definition so I wondered if you have any source on that?

Yours sincerely Elisabeth — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.191.123.182 (talk) 13:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid it's basically just a compilation of different sources. Those that I have are cited in the footnotes in the article. Most of it is a repetition of the Montevideo convention. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 18:05, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Canadian identity documents

Hi, I altered Template:Canadian Identity Documents, so that the two items to altered now link to their generic pages. If pages show up describing the Canadian refugee doc or Canadian provincial health cards Id be happy to have them direct there, but I would the template direct to something than nothing. ie Old Age Security Card directs to a page describing Old Age Security Benefits, because the card really isn't notable enough to have its own page. However, it is one of the accepted federal government produced ID documents. Dowew (talk) 05:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with red links. If you want to write an article on Canadian identity documents I'd suggest you do so. But pointing a reader interested in finding out about a certain identity document to a page on social welfare benefits is a misdirect. If a topic isn't notable enough to be listed in a template, it shouldn't be there at all: see Misplaced Pages:Red link. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox treaty

Sorry about that; I thought I'd tested it properly. I'm sandboxing now. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 15:04, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, it's exactly the kind of thing I'd do myself. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Leigh Francis

FYI, Leigh Francis currently has articles in cy:, et:, es:, ga:, id:, it:, ms:, oc:, pt:, simple:, tl:, and tr:. Is it appropriate to restore the interwikis, or do you think that they should stay out for now? Nyttend (talk) 01:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes I had noticed. As far as I could see only simple Misplaced Pages had any substance and the rest were much the same as those created and then deleted from other wikis. (All of them say he's an actor, some that he's from the US!?) I suppose you can put them back. With the interwiki bots banned they won't be removed if the articles they point to are deleted but that hardly the end of the world.

We should really delete the whole thing after a few days anyway. Hopefully this guy will get bored. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 14:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Schengen Area Map Update (per Schengen Area Talk page)

Hello, we have a debate on Talk:Schengen_Area , you are kindly invited to join the conversation. You have the necessary skills to make the necessary edits on svg file :) I hope you exclude Ro, Bg and Cy from the map by the conclusion of the debate. Thank you.--Camoka4 (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Here is the reference that you questioned. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:HZ6zI0qlmCEJ:student.bus.olemiss.edu/files/jeggington/OLE%2520MISS%2520PHD%2520Program/Fin%2520635/2/fama.pdf+&hl=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShpCDPr7BIMJiXVeXse8Oa9AxEdpUmZ3mj_Fo7Xu3OVN2Zh9GUc0VPMvjjx-XRKysKBEy5FQpo4MXefdquGEAJ9VmRwP-9hfs9DVnX6ZZsnjDk17y5wcaoBRNRRW7tvEsxj7Xbt&sig=AHIEtbSUoW3FuPE_mipn11n8MxYtWgXzUA&pli=1 Good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigiheri (talk • contribs) 12:31, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Administrators' noticeboard

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:26, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Children's rights referendum, 2012, Blue-Haired Lawyer!

Misplaced Pages editor Titodutta just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

The article has a good start, some parts need to be Wikified, and add more inline citations!

To reply, leave a comment on Titodutta's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Irish constitutional referendum, November 2012

Please be aware that the standard naming format for referendum articles on Misplaced Pages is "Fooian type referendum, XXXX". See Category:2012 referendums for examples. Cheers, Number 57 19:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

This is clearly a controversial move and you should have a formal move request rather than just forcing the issue. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 09:48, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

It's clearly not a controversial move as it's moving something to the standard naming format. If you want to break from the system, then you need to justify it. Number 57 11:12, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

You clearly shouldn't have edit warred over the name of the article. There are no article on a single Irish referendum which follows your supposed naming convention. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 12:36, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Democratic Republic

Hi, Blue-Haired Lawyer.

About my contributions to the voice "Democratic Republic", by writing a section about Italy, I was trying to challenge the simplistic idea that democratic republics are usually not free. In my opinion, the article cannot simply include those states which have "democratic republic" in their names. Those states which consider themselves democratic republic, as Italy does in article 1 of the constitution, should be mentioned as well. In this way, the article shows an example in which democracy and republic are not mutually exclusive.

I hope you will consider my request to leave my contributions as they were. Thank you very much, best wishes. ItaMatt (talk) 20:04, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

In English the phrase "democratic republic" is a euphemism for a dictatorship. Including an section on Italy in the article gives the appearance of mockery and implies that Italy is not a democracy. In any event there are a great many examples of countries which are both democracies and republics. I can't see why Italy is particularly special. I'd strongly suggest finding a better place for your contributions such as Constitution of Italy. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 20:05, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Italy was particularly special for me because, being italian, it constitutes the best example I can describe without speculating. It was not in any way meant to be a mockery... I would have considered it a start to elevate the term "democratic republic" from a simple "euphemism", and to improve the page. Anyway, fair enough, if you think it is better to do so, I'll find another place for my contributions, but I would suggest you to change the article in order to underline the fact that many democratic republics are in fact free. Thank you for your time, best wishes. ItaMatt (talk) 20:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I fear you are missing my point. The actual meaning of expressions don't always follow the literal meaning of the words. We're not here to try and change the English language. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 13:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Would you help me deal with a vandal?

I discovered a user who has been self-referencing himself on tons of articles, using multiple user names. I'm contacting you because you reverted one of his edits earlier this month: . I'm not an experience user but I was wondering if you could help me deal address the issue.

I already opened a sock puppet investigation, which you can find here: , but I don't know how to appropriately notify the user of his abuse and how to proceed from there. I've removed some of his vandalism already, but maybe there's a faster way to do it than going page by page.

Thanks!

Higgyrun3 (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I went through and deleted all the "citations" I could find, so I'm good on that end. But I would still like help with how to address the user going forward. Higgyrun3 (talk) 10:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		A year ago, you did a great copyedit in Italian nationality law and I do appreciate it. Italick (talk) 08:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Ventimiglia

Hi, agree with revert. But it shouldn't need a WP:RM to revert this by WP:BRD. You can use WP:RM {subst:RMassist|old page name, without brackets (])|requested name, without brackets (])|reason for move} instead. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:12, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't realised. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:09, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

File:EU evolvement timeline.png missing description details

• File:EU evolvement timeline.png

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

Shareholder Ownership

We had it out on this topic years ago and you lost. Now here you are again, like you've forgotten your beating. Go ahead and undo my change, then prepare to be embarrassed. I have multiple cites from peer reviewed law journals waiting for you. LET'S DO THIS!!!...again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigiheri (talk • contribs) 23:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm really not sure if you understand what Misplaced Pages is meant to be about! — Blue-Haired Lawyer 20:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I guess you'll find out. Make the undo and let's have it out in TALK. Don't be scared, homie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sigiheri (talk • contribs) 01:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC) \

Yo, Holmes. I put that same thing on the finance shares page like you wanted. Let's do this!!! I'm waiting for you now!!Sigiheri (talk) 01:24, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

In the corporation article, you removed part of the term's formal meaning in American English (aside from its possibly more inclusive vernacular acceptances). This is the fact that shares of a US corporation are generally transferable without the need of consent of other shareholders. This transferability differentiates corporations from other limited liability business structures in the US. Italick (talk) 10:51, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you're confusing the closely-held / loosely-held distinction with the meaning of the word corporation in US English. In the US companies which in the Ireland and the UK would either have "Ltd" or "plc" after their names, tend to have "Corp." See or from Misplaced Pages Types of business entity#United States: "Corp., Inc. (Corporation, Incorporated): used to denote corporations (public or otherwise)." — Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

All I mean to mention here is that the ability of shareholders to convey their shares is a meaningful part of describing what "corporation" means in the US. If a US corporation is "closely held", this tends to mean that it has a small number of shares issued, and of shareholders. The shareholders may still transfer their shares to other individuals without securing permission from the other shareholders. The shares of closely held US corporations may be ineligible for listing in stock exchanges, but shareholders might still transfer their shares to relatives, donees, creditors, and willing buyers. Joint business owners in the US who do not desire interests in the business to be so movable to new parties can start LLCs and partnerships. Italick (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "An Bord Pleanála". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot 15:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

An Bord Pleanála article dispute

Hi, it's pointless me reverting your edits ad infinitum so I've put in a request for help at the Dispute resolution noticeboardSun Ladder (talk) 16:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, just spotted the previous section announcing the same point.Sun Ladder (talk) 16:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Cameron11598 a volunteer at DRN I have opened the case for discussion feel free to join in if you are interested in participating --Cameron11598 (Converse) 22:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, from a DR/N volunteer

This is a friendly reminder to involved parties that there is a current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard case still awaiting comments and replies. If this dispute has not been resolved to the satisfaction of the filing editor and all involved parties and no further comment is made at the opened filing, it may be failed and suggested that the next logical course of action be formal mediation. Please take a moment to add a note about this at the discussion so that a volunteer may close the case as "Failed". If the dispute is still ongoing, please add your input. Cameron11598 (Converse) 03:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to you let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You do not need to participate however, you are invited to help find a resolution. The thread is "corporation, joint-stock company, shareholder, share, finance, corporate finance, and others". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! You may receive a duplicate notice on this matter as this one is being given manually because our bot is down; you may receive another when it comes back up. --TransporterMan (TALK) 21:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

On the same topic, the disruptive editor just got blocked for a week. I already reverted his edits twice, so I'm not going to 3 times, but maybe you would like to put the Corporation article back together correctly. I see you have a good grasp of the problem. Cheers Legacypac (talk) 01:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For fine work on neglected topics. bobrayner (talk) 01:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)