User talk:BballJones

Condoleezza Rice

Nice work on balancing the criticism section. I think enough progress has been made to lift the POV tag. What do you think? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:20, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that none of us are being paid very well by our bosses in the Bush administration. :) --ElKevbo 16:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! -- --BballJones 20:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Law

That would depend on your experience - are you involved in the law? If you're a lawyer, the best place to start is looking at articles relating to year area of specialization. There are also missing legal terms and wanted law articles. Also, at Portal:Law, we are always looking for good suggestions for featured articles, biographies, cases, and images to rotate in. There are a number of other law-related lists on my user page that need filling out, so please have at them! bd2412 T 02:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial Edits

Hello, BballJones. I do not feel that trying to get rid of material that is conducive to non-neutral POV, or getting rid of material inserted in an attempt to add commentary or analysis (read as original research) should necessarily be something that merits discussion. However, if both disagreeing parties insist on their material, that would be an appropriate time to go to the discussion page. --64.132.163.178 12:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed those edits of that other editor and they were legitimate, appropriate edits. --BballJones 22:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/BballJones for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Deet 00:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stem Cell Debate - you may like Debatepedia

Noticed your many contributions and interest in the stem cell controversy article. Just thought I would point you to the Debatepedia (wiki debate encyclopedia) article on stem cell research. [1] You may find this a better forum for presenting the different, third-party points of views in these debates. Loudsirens 23:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Hornbook -- a new law-related task force for the J.D. curriculum

Hi BballJones,

I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".

Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.

Each casebook will have a subpage.

Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.

I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.

What you can do now:

1. Add WP:Hornbook to your watchlist, {{User Hornbook}} to your userpage, and ~~~~ to Wikipedia:Hornbook/participants.

2. If you're a law student,

Email http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Hornbook to your classmates, and tell them to do the same.
Contact me directly via talk page or email about coordinating a chapter of "Student WP:Hornbook Editors" at your own school.

(You don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to someone who might.)

3. Introduce yourself to me. Law editors on Wikipedia are a scarce commodity. Do knock on my talk page if there's an article you'd like help on.

Regards, Andrew Gradman ^talk/_WP:Hornbook 03:44, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment of Condoleezza Rice

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. You are being notified as you have made a number of contributions to the article. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Condoleezza Rice/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:12, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]