User:BD2412/Archive - Law (fifth 50)
RFC[edit]As I understand it you (as creator) close the RFC by removing the RFC template from the page. Rich Farmbrough, 16:01 6 February 2008 (GMT).
I have nominated Tax protester constitutional arguments as a feature article candidate. If you're interested in responding to comments and addressing any issues that arise, please add the above FAC page to your watchlist. Also consider voting on the article. Thanks Morphh (talk) 17:53, 03 March 2008 (UTC) Suggested changes in the WMF privacy policy[edit]Hello, I posted some suggestions for changes in the WMF privacy policy at the WMF site: [1]. The gist of the suggestions is to institute a requirement for notifying those registered users whose identifying info is being sought by subpoenas in third-party lawsuits. These suggestions are motivated in large part by a discussion that took place in January 2008 at the Village Pump (Policy) page [2] in relation to an incident where identifying IP data of sixteen Wikipedia users was released in response to such a subpoena. I also left a note about these proposal at Village Pump, WP:Village_pump_(policy)#Suggestions_for_changes_in_the_WMF_privacy_policy. Since you have participated in the January Village Pump discussion, I hope that you will contribute to the discussion of the current suggestions at the WMF website, [3]. Regards, Nsk92 (talk) 12:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC) Request for comment at Talk:Tax protester statutory arguments[edit]Dear BD2412: I have initiated a request for comment regarding edits by a user called Ram2006. The Ram2006 edits were made at Internal Revenue Code but my request for comment is found at Talk:Tax protester statutory arguments, because I believe user Ram2006’s edits really relate more properly to the article Tax protester statutory arguments. See also Talk:Internal Revenue Code. Because my request for comments involves a request for an interpretation of the recent RfC, Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment, which you initiated, your input would be considered valuable. Yours, Famspear (talk) 02:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC) On the "Gaylon Harrell" thing, you may already be aware of this, but Daniel B. Evans has a page on Gaylon Harrell at Dan's "Tax Protester Dossier" web site (which is separate from his Tax Protester FAQ). Here's the link, [4], just for your reference. If I recall correctly, despite Harrell's acquittal on the Illlinois charges, Harrell is currently on trial -- or is about to go on trial -- in an Illinois court for still more alleged state tax violations. Harrell is discussed from time to time at the Quatloos web site. Yours, Famspear (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC) OK, I see, his latest Illinois criminal trial is set to begin in May 2008. Famspear (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
AfC and Case Law[edit]Hey BD, I've been seeing a few proposed articles on court cases at WP:AFC and thought you might help point me in the direction of a guideline regarding wiki articles about court cases so I can be better equipped to review those entries.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 07:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Dear friend: The anon added some incorrect and confusing language to the article, which I have tried to correct. I assume that this was unintentional on the part of the anon. I know I need to get back to this article and do some more work. Thanks for your help. Famspear (talk) 16:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of List of Ron and Fez Show characters[edit]I have nominated List of Ron and Fez Show characters, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ron and Fez Show characters. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Rtphokie (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC) Merger[edit]I think your proposal to merge probate is great! --CyclePat (talk) 15:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Follow-up question[edit]Hi BD. Please cast your mind back to User:BD2412/Archive - Law#Work for hire question. Apparently this comes up pretty often at PUI. Could one possibly characterize these types of photos as gifts, thus transferring copyright to the camera owner? Or would a signed statement still be necessary? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 00:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Just to say thank you and well done on going out your way to make the page. All the best, Drum guy (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC) Courts of the United States[edit]You mean adding things like Florida First District Court of Appeal, etc.? I can help with that a little, I think. Neutralitytalk 01:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Copyrights of machine-generated pictures[edit]I'm wondering now about machine-generated images such as x-rays, MRI pictures, etc. Since those involve no human creative input, are they even eligible for copyright protection? Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello![edit]Hello I noticed that you have interest in legal articles and great knowledge. Can you plz. take a look at this article i just wrote Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York and tell me what you think? Do you want to team up to work on legal articles together? JeanLatore (talk) 01:57, 16 May 2008 (UTC) Would you be willing to edit an article that I have started?[edit]I picked you in a semi-random manner and am wondering if you would care to come and collaborate on Toibb v. Radloff with me? Didn't realize how badly it was written until I self-nominated for WP:GA and got a reality check from a more experienced editor. I want to see what it takes to fix my work up into a good article; more interestingly, one of the comments left by the reviewer ("And how it's studied in law school etc.") is something about which I am absolutely clueless. Please edit it mercilessly. By the way, I like the forum-selection clause at the top of your user talk page. Very clever. Bwrs (talk) 04:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Nightmare or Gordian knot[edit]Hardly urgent but...
Thanks! Nice to say hi again. My oldest boy is starting college this August down your neck of the woods--Florida Tech. Got nearly a full scholarship which is definitely a good thing! Cheers // FrankB 17:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Hi, BD. Just want to let you know that I will be out on vacation starting Monday and will be gone for a week. I won't be able to review the artcile then. However, there's no need to rush on finishing the GA nomination. We can keep the GA nomination open for a while longer if you need extra time. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 13:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
This is probably pure speculation, but...I know that there were rumors that Frank Murphy was allegedly the first gay SCOTUS justice. I doubt you could find any mention of this in reference sources, so I doubt that it warrants any inclusion in the article (i.e. it wasn't like the situation with J. Edgar Hoover, where persistent rumors surrounded him his whole career). --Eastlaw (talk) 23:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I just noticed that User:MZMcBride has been removing links to this list from case articles. He's done it to like a hundred articles. Did I miss something? I left a message on his talk page but haven't heard from him. In any case, I could use a third opinion. It's been my impression that the links were ok because they were thought to be useful but before I revert his edits maybe we should talk about it and get a general consensus.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 17:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
"Law Review" vs. "Law Journal" Title[edit]Hi, I appreciate you getting me on the right track as a new editor! I have posted a detailed rationale for why I wanted to move the Law Review page to Law Journal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Law_review Thanks, Brewsky83 (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC) The NLJ 250[edit]Hello again, BD2412. I have created this table based on the National Law Journal's rankings of the 250 largest law firms in the USA by headcount. I was wondering if you think such a thing would be a valuable addition to Wikipedia (we already have a listing of the largest UK and EU firms, by revenue). Also, if you do want me to make this an article, let me know if I should delete the salary information, as I am unsure if such data is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Eastlaw (talk) 08:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, I already made the page: List of largest U.S. law firms by number of lawyers. I didn't think that listing the same number that NLJ did would be a copyright problem. As far as the numbers becoming outdated, I'm not sure how much of a problem that is. I know the other lists of law firms are already outdated, since they use revenue figures from 2006 and 2007. Several of the firms on my list have already merged (which I've noted at the bottom). By the way, if you feel more comfortable responding on your own talk page, that's fine with me. --Eastlaw (talk) 06:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikiproject Correction and Detention Facilities[edit]Thanks for your expression of interest in Wikipedia Prisons, otherwise known as Wikiproject Correction and Detention Facilities. Seven people have now indicated here that they would like to help out so I am now assuming that this project will actually happen. I suppose we need to take care of a few preliminaries: getting through the proposal stage, and creating a wikiproject page, page tag, and maybe an infobox. Thanks again for your interest. --Cdogsimmons (talk) 00:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC) As you can see, this project has now taken off. Thanks for your support!--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC) Fair use question[edit]Hi, me again with another IP law question for you. I have a bad feeling that a lot of what we claim as fair use here on WP is actually not. After reading [5] I'm concerned that our overuse of non-free photos of deceased individuals doesn't come close to being fair use: Edward Boyd (one article that I worked on a bit), for example. Although WP may be non-profit, I think we might fail the first factor in that the use is not transformative, and being in the top 10 sites on the Internet means a small copyright infringement is visible by a large number of people kind of makes the non-profit aspect moot. Anyway, I'd like to get your thoughts on it when you have time. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 16:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Fair use comment and request for advice[edit]Hi there. I was reading an old discussion and noticed this comment. Would you be able to advise here. In particular, there was an old discussion for best practice for NFC images. See here. Would you have opinions on those images and their uses? Also, I wrote part of the comment at point 6 here: "A photo from a press agency (e.g. AP), unless the photo itself is the subject of sourced commentary in the article. This applies mostly to contemporary press photos and not necessarily to historical archives of press photos (some of which are later donated into the public domain: example)." - does that sound OK? Sorry to pile all those questions on, but getting some knowledgeable opinion really helps in such discussions! Carcharoth (talk) 17:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC) BD - I see you were over at the Pro Se article doing a little cleanup. Have you taken in what's going on over there? Any opinion?? Non Curat Lex (talk) 07:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
WP Law assessment[edit]Hello BD2412, since you are a participant in WP Law can you help in a WP Law dispute? Several months ago a non-participant in WP Law removed the links to WP Law's assessment department and essentially squatted it: the editor did not make enough changes to return the link to the assessment department on WP Law's project page, refused to let others make necessary changes (and said the status quo would last a year longer), and adding content from WP India that specificially linked to WP India assessment department links (rather than WP Law). In the past week or so I have reopened the Assessment department after cleaning it up and reduced the number of unassessed articles by about a third (+3000 unassessed articles to about 2300 unassessed articles). Now the editor who squatted the assessment department is lashing out in two ways: (1) reverting the article assessment's I've made that assessed articles as a C class. The editor's argument is that WP Law has not adopted the C class. However, the assessment bigwigs of Wikipedia stated that the C class is a default opt-in and a consensus opt-out. Two WP Law participants (including myself) support the C class and the editor with whom I am in this disupte is the only editor against it, and so there is no consensus to opt-out. (2) the editor in disupte is reverting the changes I've made to the assessment department to return it to the defunct state. Could you please just state some of the rules, reiterate that the C class is an automatic opt-in, and suggest a possible mediation? Thanks. EECavazos (talk) 20:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Are you sure it wasn't Ted White?[edit]Hey BD. I have come to chide you about an amusing edit you made to Seminole Tribe v. Florida. Ed White (11/3/1845-5/19/1921) took no part in the consideration of Union Gas Company. I have fixed it - but not before having a good laugh. It was brought to my attention by User:Mind the gap. Non Curat Lex (talk) 09:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
BD: I put this proposal on the talk page the other day intending to be a request for urgent action, but no one seems to have noticed. Feel free to leave any thoughts you might have - if you feel like it. Non Curat Lex (talk) 07:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC) A little help when you come back?[edit]United State congressional apportionment. An editor ran his own numbers and for some reason thinks his numbers are not original research and that the link cited for the article is. World's gone topsy turvy... Foofighter20x (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
The Violin Diary[edit]Thanks for flagging my article on The Violin Diary, although it may be published through a vanity-press, doesn't mean it's not notable. It's perfectly notable. So BRING IT ON. Amelia Nymph (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Howdy thar, pardner[edit]Hey, pardner, just thought I'd say howdy. I still watch the tax articles (and in particular the tax protester-related articles) like a hawk; things have been fairly quiet for many months -- but you know how that goes, things can change at a moment's notice. For about a year and a half, I have also been posting at the tax protester forum at www.quatloos.com. Very interesting forum. I hope the LL.M. program is suitin' you fine. Yours, Famspear (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of List of law clerks of the Supreme Court of the United States, Chief Justice, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: List of law clerks of the Supreme Court of the United States (Chief Justice). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 06:02, 25 November 2008 (UTC) I just altered the brackets around one of John Roberts' clerks on the transcluded list, but the edit did not show up in the main article. Is there a delay between the two lists or another way of editing the two lists I don't know about? Thanks, BoBo (talk) 14:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you were the main contributor to the article and I wanted to thank you. I used it for a paper I wrote. Great job! --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 18:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC) DYK for Gerald Ford Supreme Court candidates[edit]
You have recently deleted an article - Dinesh Kumar Mishra. I believe you are not aware of him. Dr. Dinesh Kumar Mishra is a famous personality. He has been working at grass root level for more then 20 to 30 years in flood prone northern Bihar in India and is considered to be an expert on floods in the region. He has also written a few books related to the topic. http://in.news.yahoo.com/32/20080914/1056/tnl-the-man-who-told-the-kosi-sutra_1.html http://www.ashoka.org/node/3565 http://www.downtoearth.org.in/full6.asp?foldername=20081231&filename=news&sec_id=15&sid=29 Google search http://www.google.co.in/search?sa=N&tab=nw&q=Dinesh%20Kumar%20Mishra I believe based on wikipedia policy - WP:NOTE, the article has a place here. Manoj nav (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks![edit]Thanks for the sorely-needed article United States magistrate judge article. I was wondering when someone would write it. Well done! Neutralitytalk 02:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Samuel Lincoln[edit]It is in fact acceptable practice to begin a sentence with 'so,' in the sense that the word is used as a synonym for 'consequently,' or 'hence,' or 'thus.' It is less formal usage than those words, but is, nevertheless, acceptable. [6] Regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me, but why did you restore the deleted history of Medieval Greek? I deleted it quite deliberately, because the substance of the article, from its very first edits to the last, was a copyvio. The fresh stub I wrote in October was truly new, no need to have it linked to the earlier copyvio history. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
So far there's only two hold outs for this to a featured article, and with Feb 5 fast approaching, I'm hoping you might be able to help put to an end the few minor points these guys are making; especially about what one calls "peacock words" which make the article "unencyclopedic." Discussion is here. I can't think of how to tackle the "peacock word" problem as the four books I read on the topic right before writing the article all called it those things. Foofighter20x (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC) Sorry for taking so long to get back to you. I am currently trying to get some outside help for this project; specifically, I have asked the Quadell to come out of retirement and use his mighty Polbot to help us out with this. I cannot promise you anything, but hopefully we can make this happen. --Eastlaw talk ⁄ contribs 11:46, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
political candidate speech in public domain[edit]Hi I notice that you said "speeches of political candidates for federal office made in their official capacity are government works in the public domain" in this article http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Talk:Remarks_of_Senator_Barack_Obama_on_New_Hampshire_Primary_Night I adapted a Barack Obama speech into a song. Could you tell me how I can prove to naysayers that the speech is Public Domain. Daviddii (talk) 20:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC) Federal judge articles[edit]Hi. I haven't forgotten about this issue, but I'm also having some trouble. What I've got so far is at User:R'n'B/Federal judge project. It includes a list of all the federal judges who have ever served with a link to their FJC biography. The next column is an attempt to guess the title of the Wikipedia article about that person; as you can see, this is very hit-or-miss. I think the next step will have to be a manual review to confirm the valid pages and try to replace the invalid ones or create stub articles. Then we can determine which articles need succession boxes. Any suggestions? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 02:34, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Judge Kent[edit]Regarding your edits in the Judge Kent article, re: Article III, my understanding is that, although he's retired from the bench, he is still entitled to federal payroll as well as retirement/pension package unless he is impeached by congress. --Nsaum75 (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Since I have you guys here, I'm planning to propose splitting off a Wikiproject for U.S. courts and judges (separate from U.S. law, which has plenty to cover with just statutes and doctrinal stuff). Would you be interested in participating? bd2412 T 00:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Copyright Question[edit]ShakespeareFan00 has tagged some images with a new copyright tag he has created, {{Non-free data overlay}}. It is to be used when a PD image has a copyrighted image, he says. Now, my understanding is that the images he tagged File:Highhalden-jul45.jpg, File:Staplehurst-21may1944.jpg, and File:Ashford-11may44.jpg (which are all PD), have overlays that can not possibly meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright, as the overlays are simply black boxes with simple typefaces. He claims that under UK law these are copyrighted. In your professional opinion (both legally, and in terms of the policy): 1) does UK copyright law apply? 2) Can those overlays be copyrighted in the US? in the UK? Is there any situation where that template could be used? Thanks for your help, Prodego talk 17:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: Howell Cobb[edit]It does seem likely that the late Judge Cobb was related to the Cobb family, judging by the name, the fact that they both were in high-profile political positions, and that they both had origins in the state of Georgia, however I haven't found anything to confirm this. If you want to look this up further and find anything that confirms our suspicions, feel free to make the proper additions to the Cobb family section. Packerfansam 25 February 2009 Stay of execution[edit]There's no reason you should remember me, but you were the one who welcomed me to Wikipedia nearly three years ago. I know you do a lot of work on legal articles, and I wanted to call your attention to the article Stay of execution. It seems like a very scanty and somewhat misleading article. The phrase is, of course, known commonly, almost exclusively, in the context of capital cases, so it has come to be synonymous with "a halt to the carrying out of a death sentence". But I know that "execution" in this phrase means, in its most general sense, "the carrying out of", and it can apply not just to the death penalty but to any court judgment, law, regulation, or other government-issued edict. I really don't know the law very well, and I don't have the resources to consult. If you could find the time to clarify Stay of execution just a little, that would be great. Regards, --ShelfSkewed Talk 16:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC) Requested review[edit]bd2412, would you consider looking over my contributions (usually Sup Ct case reports) and making specific suggestions as to how to improve the article? If so thanks. Start, perhaps, with Quanta v. LGE, where I am having a vandal problem. PraeceptorIP (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Income Tax facts which you are deleting[edit]User BD2412, Before you just start deleting items from Wiki entries you should consider doing some fact checking. You may find this very interesting, here are the results of computer data mining federal tax code: http://whatistaxed.com Evidently, tax professionals (and Wiki editors) have chosen to remain ignorant of the legal definition written for "Exempt income". Here is the actual page from Income tax law: http://whatistaxed.com/26cfr1.861-8T.pdf Be sure to verify facts & accuracy of this using the following examples: (and notice section 861, the so-called Frivolous 861 Argument) - excluded income - eliminated income - eliminated items - specific sources - specific guidance - deductions to gross income - deductions to excluded income - income that is exempt or excluded - how to determine taxable income - the sources of income for purposes of the income tax - etc, there's more Source: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov See more examples at: http://whatistaxed.com You can see section 861 is not frivolous at all, but this Color of Law tax scam needs to stop. Making great-grandchildren pay unlawful tax bills because of our ignorance (or greed) is disgusting, pathetic, & weak. So, BD2412, Be sure to tell your cohorts that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." 75.161.89.118 (talk) 19:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
|
