User talk:Wikidea/Archive 07

5434:

market failure/government failure section is intended to be an introduction into the government rationale for involvement with the economy). My plan was to simplify everything by breaking it down into six sections: public goods; public choice theory; public production; cost-benefit analysis; taxation; fiscal federalism, and; deficit finance (most of the main areas in public economics). I was going to fill in those sections as I got together what I felt was the best information to do so. Beyond that I was hoping someone else would add in a discussion of macroeconomic stabilization and some discussion of externalities (undoubtedly a major area). While this page is still being constructed it should definitely have a list of suggested readings though (hence why I re-added it after you took it away) so that students initially being exposed to the field can just go to the wikipedia page and find good sources to read if they want to learn the field. This should be real sources though, not things like entries in encyclopedias etc... even Stiglitz's book (a great book... and I agree it should be the basis for some of the page being built up) I wouldn't include on that list. Stiglitz is a genius but his book is a school textbook, not a scholarly book or article, just something intended for beginners. Beyond that... I don't think that it needs a section with particular sectors because, for example, with healthcare, you have an entire separate field of health economics, and including that section is also just ripping off Stiglitz's book a little bit too much. At most, the page should contain a link to the health economics page etc... This page when finished should introduce people to the great thinkers in the field like Harold Hotelling, Wallace Oates, William Baumol, A.R. Prest, and James Andreoni etc... I totally understand your criticism and am not intending to fire back or anything like that. I will leave the page as it is (except for adding more good sources to the further reading section) unless or until I come up with a good draft to complete the page. At that point, you can look at it and decide whether you like it and want to build on what I made, or else just put it back to pretty much what it is right now (including the further readings if you wouldn't mind). Best wishes. (p.s. I think it is important that the page does service to what separates public economics from public finance, as public economics is a dignified field of its own... also I wouldn't get too heavy with welfare economics (i.e. social welfare functions) which has its own page... that will only serve to dampen the individual voice of public economics).

1228:

of fact. But findings of law are if fact precedents. Yes, I am saying that CLY if it publishes something has established notablity. Ok, maybe it's not notable on a galactic scale, but hey, that doesn't mean we need to delete it does it? Surely Wiki-hard-drives can cope? Let's be relaxed. And of course you're right about nothing being lower than a DCCJ - but that doesn't mean it's unimportant. The reason I put this up was: think about yourself getting photos developed. Do you want to know your rights? Of course you do! (I have other reasons - we prescribed it on our reading list, that's the main reason - please contact me directly and I'm more than happy to chat about it). And no, you're right only the CLY was the only reporter to report the case. But I can think of lots of cases that were the same. I think you're like me - we edit this encyclopedia because we want to expand knowledge, and I bet that one day there will be someone with a similar claim that may want to look this stuff up. Come on mate, let it be.

3080:, our behavioral guidelines rather require that we presume any copyright concerns we have are caused by misunderstanding, at least unless they become repetitive or are egregious from the start. (Egregious, for example, as in the users who sometimes upload images taken by others with a clear assertion that they are the photographers. No assuming misunderstanding there.) And it's not unreasonable to assume that a contributor to Knowledge (XXG) may not be familiar with our strict handling of non-free material. Plenty of very well educated contributors have, for instance, factored in Knowledge (XXG)'s non-profit nature in deciding whether use of material met their own interpretations of "fair use", while the WMF excludes that factor from consideration. It can sting to have your competency questioned, I know (happens to all of us at some point in our wiki careers), but please remember, ala AGF, that sometimes the questioning is done in service to the project. -- 2848:"probably". In America, the courts have said that their judgments are public property, and not copyrighted. For the EU courts it's the same. In the UK the question has never come to court. The IP texts all leave it as an open question, but if anybody WAS going to have copyright, it wouldn't be the Crown, or any other reporting company, but the judge himself/herself. Now, my opinion is that the UK probably wouldn't be different to the US or EU if it was litigated, and there would be a potential ECHR claim if a judge were trying to assert copyright. But I think most people these days would agree, that the law is public property. It's only the headnotes of reports or the formatting of a report that's under copyright. In any case, there are lots of good reasons on Knowledge (XXG) not to copy the whole of a judgment out, but copyright isn't one of them! 2569:"law students or lay readers shouldn't be able to use it". And no, I will not leave it; I have made good-faith contributions which you have seen fit to tear up. While it has taught me a basic rule for the future (draft things out and run them by you first) leaving the article in this state is not appropriate. You have contained absolutely no records of prior court action or decisions. You have contained no record of the dissenting judgment, which is essential for the "significance" section. You have not attributed your quote. You have absolutely shredded the facts section, which means that nothing else makes sense (there's no reference to the prior law on Hansard, or the actual law under dispute). Tell me; would you leave an article in such a state that it made no sense? 1755:; you should set out 1) who burrows is and 2) reference your work. The headnote gives a brief point of law, but proper secondary sources such as textbooks are always preferential. In regards to OSCOLA; I don't have to use it, and I won't - indeed, I would advise nobody to use it for academic articles. The referencing style (author name (year) page) is confusing, particularly since it's not immediately clear what the funny number at the end is for (obviously, it's a page number, but a simple p. makes that a lot easier). Academic sources are always preferential for points of law, because they show how the law has been applied since the case and give a clearer indication of what was meant than a brief, two-line summary written by a law reporter. 1275:"All English law decisions are precedents", are they really? Hmmm... Precedent means that lower courts are bound to follow a decision on a point of law by a higher court, whilst courts at the same level pay regard (sometimes great regard) to a decision on a point of law. A county court decision binds no-one, since there's nothing lower than the county court. It might theoretically be persuasive authority, but the Practice Direction on Citation of Authorities to which I referred you earlier makes it clear that I could not rely on this decision in another case, even if it established a new point of law, which it doesn't. I've had a search through Westlaw and cannot find any subsequent case that has referred to Wilkes v Jessop, unsurprisingly. 3377:. I'm sure that I've had this discussion with you somewhere before, but obviously you're having it with others too right now. While your user page states that you would like Knowledge (XXG) to be the primary reference for legal cases in future, good encyclopedia articles and good instructional documents on case law are, in my opinion, not going to be written in the same way; Knowledge (XXG) has specific rules regarding the use of primary sources which would strongly suggest that your favoured style (based heavily on direct extraction from court documents) is not the best way to present such cases on Knowledge (XXG). In fact, I'm considering a new cleanup tag / category specifically for this kind of article. 2516:? No. You've argued that we should be writing it like a case in a textbook; "Knowledge (XXG) is not a guide for law students – try Wikibooks if you want to write a textbook". You've argued we should simplify it and not include loads of analysis; when "Writing about particular cases, the legal details, for those who need to better understand the legal issues involved and how the court arrived at its decision." You've argued that this is too complex; "Provide some depth and detail worthy of an encyclopedia". I'm not talking about your "style" of editing (where to dot the Is and cross the Ts) I'm talking about what you consider should be included as compared to what the legal manual of style says should be. 3525:

whole fabric of society but rather society's responsibility to find a place for and to exploit, in a positive way...the best in each individual. Also, and I don't think I would be going too far out on a limb here by saying this, but virtually all of the anarchists I know hold that those at the so called top of the food chain by virtue of their opulent wealth are every bit as oppressed by "The System", and maybe on a karmic level even more so, than are those who have been legally impoverished by them...because in one way or another they got to write the laws.

3716:

fun too and in the UK the pub is a central focus for social life. So you've got to change the culture so people are more balanced - maybe we should learn to enjoy food and a good meal more, as I think people are doing. That said, I probably think that people use alcohol excessively because life can be otherwise pretty rotten in a lot of ways - jobs aren't secure, might be very low paid and non-fulfilling, children have less access to leisure and "clean" fun than they should - so alcohol is an escape. Why do you ask?

328:

architecture. One of the immediate problems is the shear breadth of the subject. How did you decide what to include or exclude? What was your process? As a start I've bunged a long list together to sift through and start deletion of subject headers, or at least amalgamation. The second problem is how to get a global perspective on both architectural thought and practice. Everyone will want their own country represented in some way. This seems to be have been dealt with simply at

4164:"To see the British Prime Minister watching the company, with six or seven senses not available to ordinary men, judging character, motive, and subconscious impulse, perceiving what each was thinking and even what each was going to say next, and compounding with telepathic instinct the argument or appeal best suited to the vanity, weakness, or self-interest of his immediate auditor, was to realize that the poor President would be playing blind man's buff in that party." 3483: 3632: 1727:, but you should, because the courts in this country do. The formatting you're following isn't one I've seen before, or used by anybody (like capitalising Section in the middle of a sentence). Secondly, perhaps you don't routinely look up case reports, but it is a secondary source, because the headnote will give you the points of law. That's why this is preferable to a book that fewer people will have access to. Please change 3090:

not a practitioner's text. It is a work for the laypeople, to explain as simply as possible (in this case) how the law works. That's what you should aspire to with your articles, and it's what I aspire to with mine. The layperson is more helped by third-party references and summaries than (to them) unintelligible case citations and full body quotations from judgments. While such quotations and citations have their place (

375:

about the core subjects, this is relatively easy, and I tried to point out some simple differences to non-common law countries (eg the absence of the doctrine of consideration in Germany/civil law). For the history/philosophy/legal system varieties, etc, it's really easy to be global, because these areas are global. With architecture, I suppose it could be hard to balance the general with the specific. I'd say,

4710: 3896: 352:"Architecture"? When I wrote it (and most law pages) nobody was doing anything, so that wasn't hard. What's hard is plodding through something, without a plan/final vision/time to push it through. Then every idiot who doesn't know anything will niggle (have a look at the FA and FAR to see what I mean). I also had a very good person who helped with the style and new quite a bit about law too to work with. 5294: 1074: 4938: 5025: 4500: 2259: 1378: 4638: 3246: 423:

art essentially. Education focuses on providing you with the notes and strategies to make later symphonies. It's been 20 years since I first sat down to a lecture about it, and I still can't really define the subject, it can be bent to encompass almost anything it seems - most architect's end up with their own 'manifestos' about what is important to them.

1261:, anyway, which renamed them) - it's either "Circuit Judges" (the part-timers being known as "Recorders") or "District Judges" (the part-timers being known as "Deputy District Judges"). "Deputy Circuit Judges", which is the closest title to your "Deputy County Court Judge", are retired Circuit Judges, helping out to supplement their meagre pensions. 3994: 4186: 5493:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 2922:, "Edicts of government, such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents are not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are Federal, State, or local as well as to those of foreign governments." and 206.03 390:(3) perhaps use a few key texts? This might be difficult. I happened to have done quite a bit of law, so could really choose from lots of places, but maybe it's easier to focus with the core works on any uni degree: actually that's important. You want this page to look like an overview of the content of a degree in the end. 4589:, but in this case I do. If a user who has been editing for over six years doesn't use edit summaries I think it's safe to say they just don't want to and a template explaining what an edit summary is is not going to change that. Despite how we sometimes act it is not actually required by any policy to use them. 4226:

remove content the user should have been warned that it is not acceptable; making comments such as "Would this dick calling itself Ganymede please piss off.", and simply undo the changes is not constructive. Please attempt to resolve the problem with the user asap in future, if after that, the use continues to

3089:

Thanks Moonriddengirl. Wikidea, I'm sure you're an excellent lawyer, and I admire your goal to turn Knowledge (XXG) into a superior reference work for law students - it's one I share, with one amendment. Knowledge (XXG) is not a legal resource for lawyers and law students. It is not a casebook. It is

1227:

I'm afraid I disagree. The doctrine of precedent is that, whether for better or worse, even a Deputy County Court judge establishes a precedent through her/his judgments. So all English law decisions are precedents. Exceptions are, for instance, in the case of tribunals which make findings on matters

1187:

Not everything that's reported is notable. Current Law prints hundreds of case digests every month. Are you seriously saying that all of them are notable? I've had twenty or so cases of mine published, simply because I've typed up a little case report and sent it in. Eventually it's published and

800:

reverted them. S/he has devoted an immense amount of hours to discussing and implementing the outline as it currently exists, so I'm fairly sympathetic to his/her decision to revert your edits. Nevertheless, I think your proposals are very legitimate and deserve consideration. I wonder whether you

417:

Very, but I'm nothing if not ambitious (ok I'm maybe also doomed to failure :-). The trouble with architectural education as a starting point, is it's unsurprisingly designed to equip people to be architects. Nothing wrong with that, but in terms of getting a subject overview, we zoomed through about

5526:

I'm not entirely sure what I'm meant to say, though. I'd really like to rework the page - I know a lot more than I did then, and do think it's really important to make it global - you're right it could be better. AJpearce is right, among a number of good points, about law and econ, for instance. But

5057:

from Knowledge (XXG). This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about

4426:

Hi, I don't think a wholesale revert of my edits was warranted. There was more than just some deletions of redlinks: I edited the lead, corrected redirects, removed double entries, etc. Many of the redlinks that I removed (and some were not even redlinked) are non-notable journals. Probably not all,

2504:

itself follows my style, because I follow it. I seem to remember Griffith's judgment came first, and summarised the others. Often one judge will give a very long piece of advice and another will give a summary. In any case, I think (as I've said - I don't know how carefully you're reading my points)

1750:

I apologise if I took a patronising tone; it was not my intent. Perhaps you would like to take a look at your own tone, particularly the implication that somebody "a few hundred miles ahead in their understanding of the law" is superior when it comes to discussing such things (particularly when that

986:

Hmmmm, you're right I suppose. But try to show some courtesy and do not revert my addition. I don't know if you were the one that deleted it before, but here is a case in which he acted, which is fully extracted in the article. That's useful. So I'm putting it back, again rephrased, and if you don't

717:

I'm afraid I'm not an American lawyer. But why not set up simply a Wikiproject called US law? I'm not sure I understand the point of this task force. You want to create a JD programme's worth of content - but on the normal Knowledge (XXG) pages or not? I reckon the best thing is simply to go for the

3715:

Almost certainly, of course! We probably drink too much as a country, but the really bad thing is the immature attitude toward alcohol, and binge drinking, as opposed to a country like France where people in my experience are more sensible. I'm not entirely sure what you do, because alcohol is good

3520:

That being said, I'd like to ask...do you feel as though only Lawyers should be allowed to add content to the page on Law in Wiki or do you feel the intellectual philosophy of anarchy specifically and the madness of the World going on around us which drives those to embrace that anti law philosophy

2688:

is named according to the standard of the Revised Oxford Translation. This is not perfect, but it is a good and consistent standard in English, and if we're going to scrap what now exists as a complete solution covering all the works, there should be some discussion (and I would support the status

2568:

You're right, it is more sophisticated - so why did you say that we should attempt to replicate such texts. It is a guide, yes, which means there can be common sense exceptions, but your exception would apply to every single case. I think you need to actually read the guideline if you think it says

1684:

Where a secondary source conflicts with another secondary source, it should be discussed. Where a secondary source conflicts with your personal opinion and interpretation, as a layman, of what happened in a case, the secondary source stands unless you can find other reliable sources to back you up.

422:

in 1919 and spent the next five years exploring developments since then. Also, much of the course is about practicalities of how to put a building together. Architecture however distinguishes itself from this 'construction' - it's supposed to be construction with the 'divine spark of inspiration' -

3524:

As an aside, I might add that while there are many different kinds of anarchists, as a "philosophy about law" and rightly or wrongly so, it has generally come to require the utmost faith in the inherent goodness of the individual and holds that it is not the true Self's requirement to fit into the

2977:

When I say "probably" I'm just hedging my bets a little, because there's always an outside chance that judges would win a case for royalties, etc. I doubt they'd try, and imagine what a ludicrous result it would be. But I would say it's really more like a 97% chance that there's no copyright on UK

2018:

Sorry for being so snappy and rude in my message above: it was unnecessary and unhelpful, and I'm grateful for your v friendly reply. I was feeling a bit tired and fed up after wading through so many uncategorised categories, and should have taken a break at the point I felt like snapping at you,

1998:

Hey, don't get upset! I was just trying to be helpful by replying at all - in the early hours of the morning after Christmas, I wasn't really doing more than flicking through a few things and answering messages. You're right, I should've added the category in the first place - thanks very much for

1822:

while accusing me of being childish? I've no problem with you including your summary of how the case went down in the article - the only reason I reverted your edit, as stated in my edit summary, is that it removed other things. I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you rolled your three previous

374:

So far as a global view goes, I reckon this could be harder in architecture. An advantage for writing in English about law, is the readers will predominantly be from English law based systems; and the six case examples given are one's common to the whole Commonwealth, plus America. So when talking

5433:

I agree with your point that page doesn't need to be cut down any more; my thinking was this though: As it stands the page is a jumbled mess. Public goods is included in two separate sections. I think I understand the rationale for that though (i.e. public goods is one of six market failures, the

4824:

I'm proposing a drive to complete decent quality articles for all, or at least a good proportion of these cases as soon as possible. If we can eliminate the backlog then a small group of editors might want to stick around to ensure articles are created relatively speedily for new cases. Since the

4225:

article. He has been attempting to remove content without discussing his reasons for 2 weeks now. These changes should be reverted as they have been; however after reverting changes, the user should be notified via their talk page that their edit has not been accepted, after the second attempt to

3586:

Hello. Could you please explain why you changed the numbers in the titles of these two articles from 81 and 82 respectively, while leaving the original numbers in place all the way through the text? As far as I can see, you did not explain the move at any point in edit summaries or on Talk pages.

3512:

But purely on moral grounds. For I KNOW the State can be wrong and when it is the citizen should not feel compelled to submit his or hers will to it...such as an innocent person happily going to the gallows for it. Nor do I feel as though the nebulous and ever unchanging "will" of the majority is

3846:

authors were just following an older corporate scholar, RC Clark, who listed those four core characteristics of public companies, minus shareholder ownership, in his 1986 book. So I took out the fifth as a characteristic (because it doesn't represent every company by a long shot) and changed the

2203:

I put it up there with an "expand" note precisely so someone who did know would expand it! The website for the OPC mentions the three, and that's in the external links. Please don't pester me with your nit-picking. Well done on your starred articles, but don't get a big head about it. This is an

3752:

is spelt thus, and not in any lesser-teed fashion. This is of course crucial leading-edge encyclopaediaism, and also as the Attlee Spelling Society is empowered to abseil down your front windows and throw stun grenades and stuff, which can be messy, I've corrected it (them, him?) for you. To be

1731:

if you think it could be better. I agree I haven't completed it, like an awful lot. My view is better something than nothing. But if you've never heard of Burrows, that just confirms you've got a bit to learn and you could learn something by taking advice instead of just objecting. Just because

1341:

Do you know another case about this point? Precedent doesn't just mean that lower courts follow a ratio, but also the same court must follow its own ratios unless it can distinguish. Still don't see what your problem with this article is. It's a precedent, and it was published in a report. It's

3698:

On your User page, you write that one of your main interests is beer. Do you think that there is a culture of alcohol in Britain that strongly influences British people, from a young age, to assume that drinking alcohol is expected of all adults? Are there many people in Britain who think that

2133:

is clear on this point; either system is appropriate, and when deciding between them one should use the system approved of by the page creator/significant contributor, unless this style is completely wacky. Considering the title of the reflist and references tag used to display what you called

854:

Hi there, good that someone else is interested! I've just been to India myself and brought back a bunch of books. Are you from India? Send me an email if you like. I would say that contract, tort, trusts, property, crime and public law are the most important, core subjects; I'm also personally

4546:

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new

4156:

and many other works by Keynes and his biographers, who have said Keynes was friendly with LG prior to and during Versailles, and for much of the later years. There was possibly some bitterness on LG's part about what Keynes wrote about him, but not on Keynes side. In the mans own words "the

2847:

My understanding is that the reports have copyright over the format. So if you wanted to cut and paste from the QB reports or something, or more importantly, copy the headnote, then that would fall under copyright. The judgment itself, however, is probably not subject to copyright. Now I say

351:

Wow, I don't deserve these compliments, but thankyou! It was just a "feel" really. In fact a year later a Hong Kong Professor wrote "A Very Short Introduction to Law" which is a bit longer but covered fundamentally the same stuff. Perhaps I could suggest looking at the equivalent one for

327:

is a very important article on WP. As far as I know, it's one of the few examples we have of a (subject) top level Featured article. It reads as an absolute masterpiece of concision. I'd like to try and get the architecture wikiproject or a few interested editors to do the same thing for

205:") which you reverted. If there is consensus that case names should be italicized (and it seems the four of us agree on it), then the italicization should really be coded into the infobox. The quotation marks that you have added to the articles you have worked on can be removed by bot or 4760:

Please delete the changes I made to the Postal services article if these diverge from your conception of the article. If they are OK, then I have further suggestions. I have non-frivolous reasons for exploring the treatemnt of this topic. You can let me know on my User page. Thanks.

2911:

Under U.S. law, laws themselves and legal rulings also form a special class. All current or formerly binding laws, codes, and regulations produced by government at any level, including other countries' governments, and the court opinions of any court case are in the public domain.

2226:. The expand tag is something completely different from what you were using it for; it means "this section is incomplete, please expand it" (which it is) but not "please reference it". If you have, as you said, found links to three of them, include those links as inline citations. 5545:

That's fair enough; rewriting an FA is a time-consuming thing, and people have careers. If you get some spare time and want to fill it with that, give me a poke; I've got quite a bit of journal/book access at the moment, so I can probably help deal with sourcing concerns. Cheers,

1823:

edits into one, which explains why your last reverted edit contained other things I'd disputed (such as the use of OSCOLA when my method passes the MoS). Lets not get petty here. Put your summary back in the article, on its own, without making wider changes that I've disputed.

3464:

It's interesting because the company based its survival on "Article 65" which gave bonus payment discretion to the directors as it had done since the 18th century. Modern contract law overrode this and also natural justice leading to the decision that the company was already

4967:

or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our

1278:

You and I just disagree on the notability-establishing potential of CLY. Someone I know had a decision on an application for an adjournment published in Current Law a few years ago - does that deserve an encyclopaedia article merely because CL published his note about the

1326:(a) cited in order to illustrate the conventional measure of damages in a personal injury case; or (b) cited in a County Court in order to demonstrate current authority at that level on an issue in respect of which no decision at a higher level of authority is available. 4405:; but I'm puzzled to see that the target has never existed. Were you planning to create it? If so, you will have to make your redirect again. Or was there perhaps some mis-spelling in the target's name? I have tried a few alternatives but not found anything. Regards, 5456:

Those categories were there just because they followed Stiglitz - why not just start with that template, or start writing first, and then delete later? You're obviously knowledgeable, so it'd be great to see you starting writing - with some good referencing. Cheers,

2328:

You accused me of 'deleting articles', and then gave a link to support you that showed that I HADN'T deleted anything. Seriously, LOOK AT THE EDIT; nothing has been deleted. Do not launch personal attacks against me and do not lie about the content of my edits.

2935:

Since under US law judgments are not copyrightable, regardless of country of origin, the use of the material here is not a problem for the project under copyright. We do have to consider the copyright status in country of origin in terms of reuse, as Jimbo noted

5085:

deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Knowledge (XXG) guidelines.

1773:

A note, by the way, that I'm neither trying to be petty nor "vandalise" by putting out false information on the law as you suggest - I've just yet to see any evidence that the reliable, respected textbooks I've been relying on are incorrect on this point.

1492:

It's just that the page already existed where I was moving it, so I didn't think that I could do it without cutting and pasting. I may be wrong of course - and please excuse me if I am. I understand that bots fix double redirects, so that's okay isn't it?

4733: 74:

Course of dealings I've looked at - damn, I knew I'd forgotten soemthing - incorporation through custom it is. I'll include interfolio after the section on the red hand rule, and try and find some sort of journal article on misrepresentation or similar.

3075:

and was a bit taken aback. The two of you have a history, based on notes further up the page, and I'm not reading back to see what it was. But Ironholds' note to me does not seem as "snarky" and "filthy" to me as it evidently has seemed to you. As per

1195: 4736:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

5220: 5193: 5169: 2129:; if you know the names, I assume you got them from somewhere reliable, so that should be used. Second, I have reverted your changes to the "references" and "bibliography" section (changing them to 'notes' and 'references' respectively). The 504:

No worries. For the names, I've only the two: thumperward, which is my user name, and Chris Cunningham, which is my real one. I feel odd signing into websites with my real name, while I likewise feel odd signing my comments with a pseudonym.

2903:. :) We have to be able to verify that content is free for our reuse before we can copy it or extensively quote it. But the good news is that while we do try to respect copyright of other nations, Knowledge (XXG) is governed by US law. As 3914:. 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. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see 4645:

to Knowledge (XXG). It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a

2926:"Works (other than edicts of government) prepared by officers or employees of any government (except the U.S. Government) including State, local, or foreign governments, are subject to registration if they are otherwise copyrightable." 1732:

Knowledge (XXG) lets anyone edit, doesn't mean you should cast off how you'd act in the real world. I'm helping you. Academic sources should not be used for points of law, because then the reader can look at the case/statute directly.

55:

when it comes to reasonable notice of onerous terms. There's also incorporation through custom, common understanding and course of dealings. And it might be interesting to look at the relationship with misrepresentation, for instance.

2659:

Post a play-by-play of the problems with my version and I'll try and work on them. I agree the judgment section could probably be tweaked, but "background" is necessary, and we must include the result of actions in the lower courts.

3049:

Unlike many websites, Knowledge (XXG) is conservative on the question of copyright. Our policies are not built on the likelihood of prosecution, but rather simply on staying well within copyright law. This is why, for instance, our

1233:

But on a simple level I would say, any reported case is ipso facto notable. There's loads of frivolous shit put up on Knowledge (XXG), but a legal case will never be one of them. Come help me and expand our collective knowledge.

4959:

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

3516:

You have indicated that you are a licensed Lawyer and which I understand requires a great deal of both intellectual and psychological investment...in written codes. I chose not to be the former...and do not have the latter.

426:

The idea might be useful though - structure the article to major on 'global architecture today' and then deal with the historical context of theory and practice in later sections.......Thanks for your thoughts. Kind regards

2944:

their copyright is unclear. (I am far more familiar with US law than other nations, though Knowledge (XXG) has certainly educated me a good deal about them!) As long as we retain the clear marking, we should be okay under

2915:

This applies even to the laws enacted in states and municipalities that ordinarily claim copyright over their work. The US Copyright Office has interpreted this as applying to all "edicts of government" both domestic and

5527:

I really don't know what to say to the idea that the page is "bad", because it was featured, then reviewed and kept as a feature. If I had more time, I'd start doing stuff now - I'd like to get round to it at some point.

2710:? Actually, it should really be in Greek, rather than Latin shouldn't it? The problem with translations is that they come out different: "at" is probably not the best, or at least only, way to translate "ad" here, is it? 1438:

Sorry, I didn't notice the links to other pages in other languages. As for the comment about possession being nine tenths of the law, I think this is just a well known phrase that the 'lay reader' would connect with, and

950:. After Knowledge (XXG) policies were explained to him by several editors and his edits had been reverted, he continued to insert them and similar edits, and misrepresented Knowledge (XXG) policy to defend his edits. 1203: 4740:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

1256:

Please get your terminology right. It was a decision by a Deputy District Judge, not a "Deputy County Court Judge", which is a non-existent title. There are no such creatures as "County Court Judges" (not since the

1199: 4607:

I don't really appreciate the snooty tone. I'm afraid my edit summaries will typically be the same, and pointless - but tell you what, I'll try to do a bit more when I edit pages that others are active with too.

3156:

states that it isn't, and because the citation preferences of Knowledge (XXG) infer that a casebook-style setup is not wanted? Because one of the five pillars that make up Knowledge (XXG) includes the point that

3602:

Oh, I just didn't bother doing it, it's one of those changes I make to do something rather than nothing. There's a new Treaty with new numbering - it was the Treaty of the European Communities, and now it's the

1179:

Not all English cases establish precedents. This is a simple application of existing law to a factual situation - no new law or refinement of existing law. It couldn't even be cited in another court case – see

3580: 3576: 5264:

saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Knowledge (XXG). Happy editing!

4812:

During that time, the court has handed down 87 judgements (82 of which were on substantive appeals). Knowledge (XXG) covers around 11 of these and rarely in any detail. Some very important cases (including

1591: 1586: 838:

be included? I've decided to start revamping it, beginning with a bit of legal history. I also have access to a lot of books and other literature, so any advice or directions would be appreciated. Regards,

4167:

Anyway, no objection to you changing the word friend to colleague, as they werent always the strongest of friends, but just wanting to reassure you that it wasnt as glaring a mistake as it might appear.

1751:

person claims that county courts set binding precedent, something a first-year law student knows is wrong). The fact that I don't know who Burrows is does not undermine the validity of my opinion. We are

1595: 758:

Hey, thanks for the feedback. I just have a hunch that this is the best way to do it -- i.e., my modus operandi is that the "portal" should appeal to American law students, since they're our prospective

3657:

to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

387:(2) where you're talking about a large issue, take a core example of that large issue to illustrate the subject matter (eg talk about the Houses of Parliament to illustrate neo-gothic revivalism, etc) 1578: 1818:, now, you're just being petty. What more do you want? I've admitted that you're right on the point of law, given you leave to input it and your reaction is to make petty little edits like this and 2684:, and I too will often refer to the "Rhetorica ad Alexandrum." However, the move creates the sole exception in Knowledge (XXG) to what is otherwise the case: that every article on a text in the 2273:. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also 2546:

First, that's a guide, not a rule; second, that point's not really discussed, and to the extent that it says law students or lay readers shouldn't be able to use it, I think it's wrong (what

1934: 2627:

The problem is that much of the academic analysis refers to the main judgment, not Griffiths; for obvious reasons, nobody interprets a side judgment. I'm not quite sure how to resolve this.

1728: 1700: 2899:

Hi. I do a lot of worth with Knowledge (XXG)'s copyright policies, and Ironholds had asked my opinion here. As a first point, when it comes to importing text, "probably" doesn't work under

1618: 5162:

a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Knowledge (XXG), then you should do one of the following:

2222:

I was simply using the articles to point out that this citation style has been considered acceptable in high-quality articles, and not commented upon, not to indicate a "big head"; please

1174:

Your edit summary was: "Clearly as an English case it does establish a precedent. It's reported in a journal. Therefore it's notable. Deputy County Court decisions can be very important."

5075:. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the 4669:

from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at

4028:

from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at

1282:

It's no personal criticism of you when I say that I don't think the article meets notability standards; later in the week, if time permits, I'll invite the community to take a look at

3258: 2284:

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to

877:

Yes, I'm from India. Thanks for the pointers - I'll get round to working on them shortly. Also, would an article in a peer-reviewed legal journal count as a reliable source? Regards,

1666:

Academic sources are perfectly qualified to discuss points of law. Simply pointing to a case and saying "X set the precedent that Y happened, look, I've got it in the transcript" is

2122: 4717: 4701: 834:

I stumbled upon this article today, and realised that there is much to be written about it. What would you suggest as the priorities for this article - i.e. information that

5224: 3872: 336:

of the world link - how much resistance to this approach did you receive? How did you overcome it? Any help or thoughts you could provide would be gratefully appreciated. --

3521:

should be censored from those pages which seek to have such thoughts "il-legalized" by written codes because such ideas are too dangerous for the majority to even know of?

4776:

Keep going! Keep the paragraphs together, and if you can incorporate the things in the bullet points, and use references, that would be great. Will look on with interest!

1093:

Not a notable case – does not establish a new principle or a precedent for future cases (county court decisions by deputy DJs are about as low on the scale as you can get)

4674: 4033: 1392: 3289: 2607:

It made sense before. Please just reintegrate your material into the "facts" and "judgment" sections, and leave out anything that isn't necessary. We can go from there.

5486: 1723:

Instead of taking a patronising tone with someone who you don't know, and is a few hundred miles ahead in their understanding of the law, listen. You don't have to use

5139:, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from 4005:

a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "

3416:

Umm, I'm not sure how to answer your question. I edit tonnes of articles without any particular focus on any one topic. I just happen to find it interesting, I guess.

5411: 3842:. There was a sentence following to qualify that shareholders do not always have exclusive control rights in corporations (employees often do). But then I found that 3513:

inviolate precisely because it can never be held accountable for the injustices done in its name by groups...or even an individual and alleged elected Head of State.

1395:. 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. 4518: 3604: 2872: 2337:

I'm really confused now, and I'm not sure what's going on... Oh I see you've moved them down - I honestly wasn't lying. Anyway, sorry to be a pain. But cheer up!

587: 2285: 4673:

to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at

4032:

to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at

3500: 3134:

I've got no idea why you keep saying "it's not a casebook". I don't see why not. Stop being a jerk. I'm not really interested in your views. It's not personal.

3054:

are built conservatively. We could probably get away with quite a bit more than we do, particularly in the "fair use" image department, but we don't push it. :)

5147:. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our 4912:

It was a very strange mistake though, I don't think anybody has ever used SCOTUK before that.. kinda has a nice ring to it though :) The temp. project page is

3166: 1703:

is a good example of what is wrong with your style of writing, when looked at in an encyclopaedic context. The bibliography is improperly formatted, there are

604:

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

5183: 4809:

has been hearing cases for about 18 months now, taking over from the House of Lords as the Court of Last Resort for most appeals within the United Kingdom.

4722: 3587:

This is very far from being my area of expertise, and I am not suggesting that you did this for anything but good reason, but it has seriously confused me.

2478:

Your current preferred format violates the law Manual of Style and is also inaccurate. You're using Lord Griffiths's judgment; why? It wasn't the main one.

1856:

Thanks for the redactions :). Is it worth getting a third opinion at the reliable sources noticeboard vis a vis the use of law textbooks for points of law?

3745: 2550:

we trying to do?). What we do here is far more sophisticated than a case book would be. Anyway, you need to settle down, and perhaps leave it for a while.

2125:. A number of points; firstly, and most importantly, the list of First Parliamentary Counsels you have given is unreferenced. It needs to be referenced to 201:

Wikidea, I think the solution may be to remove the '''' from the sample template that you have in your userspace and to reapply the edit that I made (see "

5235: 4973: 3918:

for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see

3249:

Welcome to Knowledge (XXG). Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Knowledge (XXG), at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to

1515:

The problem with a cut-and-paste move is that you lose the edit history. The correct way to move a page where the target already exists is to list it at

5209:

If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org

3374: 573:

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.

695:

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

3929:

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.

5490: 4402: 3795: 3758: 5357: 5054: 5014: 1149: 5072: 384:(1) have a good structure: each heading and sub-heading should link to a main article. The idea is really that you want the stuff underneath to grow 4654:, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Knowledge (XXG) has a feature that allows pages to be 4013:, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Knowledge (XXG) has a feature that allows pages to be 4272:

No worries. I've warned the Ganymede22 following his/her last edit removing content, if it happens again feel free to jump ahead and report it on

3919: 1307:

Well done for pointing out that you disagree with me. Unfortunately your web research shows I'm right. Did you see (b) in the practice direction?:

176:

Stephen's solution certainly isn't optimal. Fancy giving me a basic rundown on the problem here and I'll see if I can devise a more elegant one?

3462:

I wrote up some of the history and probably could do it -but your efforts would be much more authoritive and it is a potential featured article.

2959:

The UK law is indeed unclear; apparently (I understand this from a friend in the civil service) judges have began claiming they have copyright.

5077: 2380:, all have a dot after the the v ; so should we put a dot or not? 2) The dots in SR Bommai's initials, i placed them as it was the cognomen. 3367: 2034: 1976: 1949: 31: 2940:, so that these were clearly marked as quotes is a good idea, as that will enable their removal for skittish reusers in the UK or elsewhere 1890:. It's because of Mellinkoff that there is a really dramatic shift in the quality of published appellate opinions in the 1960s and 1970s. 3791: 3754: 3552: 5494: 5250: 3153: 5176:

and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name,

3838:

Yes, basically, because I wrote it there when I put a lot of stuff in the article before, and I was referring to a passage in this book,

4451: 1582: 1424: 202: 5441: 4250:

You're absolutely right, I was not being constructive in any way! I suppose I'm just not particularly patient. Thanks for helping. :)

4157:

difference between myself and some others is that I criticise Lloyd George when he's wrong and support him when he's right". Even in

3753:

honest I think I liked the one above, about beer, better. But hey. Have a nice Thursday, or other day(s) of your choice. Best wishes,

1272:. Do I want to know my rights? An irrelevant question. Would I trust Knowledge (XXG) to tell me what my rights are? Of course not. 5361: 4563: 2754:

The proper Greek title would be simply Τέχνη ῥητορική. I dug up Greek and English texts for you--see the article's external links.

2248: 1366: 1153: 644: 284: 5050: 5018: 1191:

Can you think of a level of case in the county court that's lower than one being tried by a deputy district judge? There isn't one.

482:

People have a habit of not replying if you request - but sorry Chris, I didn't realise it was you. You tend to use different names.

5144: 1574: 1566: 595:

Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.

245:

That's not the problem Jack. See above. We need a bot to fix the articles (of course I can change the template). Got a bot anyone?

210: 5090: 1886:. But it was Mellinkoff who persuasively made the case for plain English in a way that swept the profession. See Mellinkoff's 4913: 1878:

The leading pioneer of plain English in U.S. legal writing was Professor David Mellinkoff of UCLA School of Law, who published

805:, so that voices like yours (i.e. the transatlantic voices) aren't marginalized, etc. Per the thread I started at WP:Scotus. 5132: 5041: 4661:

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the

4507: 4020:

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the

2949:. The quotation marks alert that the content was not written here and is not necessarily available under CC-By-SA and GFDL. -- 1652:. Academic sources, textbooks - whatever. Not cases. Articles should be referenced with secondary documents, not primary ones. 34:. Feel free to tweak it how you wish. May I again request, by the way, that you use proper inline citations in your articles? 4391: 2365: 5349: 5305: 5283: 3669: 1141: 1085: 970:

Combining cites to make a point; i.e. "Reported cases show him acting predominantly for employers or wealthier clients" is

142:

But Stephen, that's not the problem. Maybe you can fix it with a bot or something, but there are a few hundred cases, like

5140: 4642: 4109: 3998: 3169:. I'm not trying to be a jerk; I'm trying to prevent an enthusiastic and knowledgeable editor doing things the wrong way. 1329: 1054:

to Good Article status (really looking to make it an FA, it's at FAC now) but I'm a bit stuck for sources on the Temples.

5353: 4089: 2266: 1617:

for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at

1320: 1145: 4806: 4766: 4152:

Hi Wikidea, I see you wasnt too impressed with the Keynes article. Despite appearances, its authors have read Keynes's

2075: 1670:

and the use of primary sources, both discouraged, particularly when secondary sources are available (as there are here).

5246: 5152: 4726: 4670: 4029: 3673: 3647: 1516: 1388: 206: 3959: 3907: 3889: 2377: 2087: 1923: 722:

better, so it serves as a portal for every other page. Then work on cases; lots of cases. If you can get people to do

5034: 4551: 3541:

section and why didn't you at least have the courtesy to tell me what it was...before you preemptively deleted them?

576:

It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or

5062:, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the 738:, then I'd be thrilled. I'm doing stuff every now and then on myself, and hope that contributing that way is okay! 671: 333: 150:

that now have funny apostrophes appearing. If you can fix all those, then definitely go ahead and make the change.

4964: 4828:

I'd like to ask you to help with this drive, and help make Knowledge (XXG) a credible source for UKSC case notes.

4446:

i believe you redlinked various notable employment cases such as "Majrowski v Guy's and St Thomas’s NHS Trust" in

4367:

Well done mate. Did you call your Mommy too? How about learning to control your own snarling, nasty manner first?

3654: 2904: 1887: 3741: 2030: 1990: 1972: 1945: 1391:. I do not think that this article satisfies Knowledge (XXG)'s criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at 955: 1673:

The main writer/expander/whatever of the page sets the reference style used, assuming it does not conflict with

4981: 4051: 3934: 3876: 3091: 1644:

learn how things work on Knowledge (XXG). Sorry to be blunt, but you've been here long enough that you should.

779:

So, I'll take a close look at it, and actually in all likelihood it will serve as the "portal" for our project.

533: 4972:

for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see

1473:

goes by, but cut-and-paste moves like you've done twice now are not the correct way to change the title. See

3537:

Honestly what was it about the two paragraphs that did not conform to what you feel should be allowed on the

1428: 5445: 4921: 4903: 4889: 4762: 3323:

Deal, you put the page for that radio station back how it was then, and I'll create the new link for WARNA.

2083: 2079: 432: 341: 5437: 5148: 5063: 4969: 4814: 4555: 2923: 2919: 2274: 4573: 4517: 4455: 4341:

Now that I know that it's intentional incivility rather than an unintentional oversight, I've taken it to

4193: 4173: 4139: 4121: 4081: 4066: 4041: 3349: 3311: 3269: 2706: 1122: 635: 129: 5365: 3643: 3158: 1157: 5419: 5392: 5373: 5270: 4917: 4899: 4885: 4524: 3566: 3382: 2505:

that it's fine to trim his extract - and the overviews you had of the other judges were generally good.

2330: 1470: 1290: 1217: 1164: 1016: 510: 473: 181: 5151:. Knowledge (XXG) takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be 4856:

Improve the coverage of cases we have articles on, including adding content, sourcing and fact-checking

4666: 4559: 4025: 2309:. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- 1265: 812: 706: 626: 606: 538: 522: 946:, and continually inserted negative material that did not fairly represent the sources given and were 4949: 4931: 4594: 4420: 4218: 4204: 4097: 3828: 3592: 2685: 2388: 2314: 2023: 1965: 1938: 1905: 1626: 1384: 1370: 1081: 951: 549:

to assimilate into Knowledge (XXG) all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing

147: 51: 4586: 3679:

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

3254: 2876: 468:, which supports a background colour option. This is far preferable to hacking up one's own tables. 5551: 5517: 5502: 5336: 5004: 4977: 4945: 4746: 4536: 3930: 3903: 3820: 3174: 3107: 3081: 3072: 3001: 2964: 2950: 2837: 2818: 2665: 2632: 2574: 2521: 2483: 2446: 2231: 2186: 2149: 2141: 1861: 1828: 1779: 1760: 1712: 1690: 1403: 1133: 1110: 1059: 462: 80: 39: 4818: 3699:

drinking alcohol is an unhealthy, destructive activity, one that often results in pain and misery?

3646:

on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a

3558:

So forsooth! Forsooth I say! Should poets also be banned by lawyers...from interpreting the Law?

2513: 793: 5110: 4688: 4662: 4447: 4021: 3915: 3704: 3684: 3460:

Hi Wikidea. I wonder if I could encourage you to expand the Law Lords decision on 'The Society'.

3044: 1524: 1482: 1474: 1441: 665: 428: 337: 143: 4665:

at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a

4454:. Any chance you may develop these cases as individual articles ? They could be included in the 4294: 4024:

at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a

3953: 2946: 2509: 2501: 971: 3284:

I notice you didn't bother to even let me respond before reverting. Odd. Anywho, WARN is the

2460:

and follow the simple format - with the detail in a 'significance' section. Life is too short!

5332: 4651: 4568: 4528: 4511: 4189: 4169: 4135: 4117: 4062: 4037: 4010: 3923: 3343: 3305: 3263: 2383:

This is the first time i am editing a law article, so i would be grateful for some pointers.--

1519:

under the "Uncontroversial requests" section so an administrator can perform a proper move. --

1118: 975: 931: 882: 844: 125: 17: 5384: 5245:

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow

5102: 5098: 3661: 3077: 2689:

quo). So I hope you will understand why I am moving this article back. Respectfully yours,

2681: 2372:

for wikipedia articles?. I have two specific doubts 1) Before moving, i checked some FA like

1882:

in 1963. There were a few talented judges before that point who wrote in plain English like

5415: 5388: 5369: 5266: 4540: 4463: 4432: 4427:

but those can easily be re-added once the appropriate articles have been created. Thanks. --

4410: 3562: 3378: 2295:

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the

1883: 1287: 1214: 1161: 1012: 855:

interested in labour and company law. Really it's a very big task! Start wherever you like!

731: 580: 506: 469: 177: 5319: 5094: 5059: 4898:

Yeah sorry about that, a result of copying from the US version. I'll change it right away.

4398: 4342: 4273: 3665: 3051: 2306: 2296: 2289: 2278: 2223: 2130: 1674: 1283: 1269: 1099: 943: 802: 5387:- this would help establish taht this person is "notable" in the Knowledge (XXG) sense. -- 5261: 5229: 5203: 5173: 4995:

Sections 1-7 were repealed in Schedule 2 of the 1979 Act; the rest of the legislation was

4590: 4281: 4240: 4002: 3956: 3911: 3824: 3631: 3588: 3421: 3094:, I feel, uses such case citations well, but I might be a teensy bit biased) they are the 2937: 2759: 2694: 2384: 2310: 1935:

Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion/Log/2009_December 25#Category:Lord_Lindley_cases

1901: 1894: 1677:. We are not a court, nor barristers preparing an opinion - there is no onus on us to use 1622: 1258: 727: 4734:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill

4493: 4227: 3871:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at

3162: 2913: 2126: 1667: 935: 927:

Below is a possible phrasing of the complaint for RfC/U based on my experience with VT:

5547: 5513: 5498: 5318:

While all contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, content or articles may be

5301: 5287: 5141:

http://www.law.ucla.edu/faculty/all-faculty-profiles/professors/Pages/lynn-a-stout.aspx

5000: 4742: 4630: 3749: 3489: 3482: 3472: 3170: 3103: 2997: 2960: 2833: 2814: 2661: 2628: 2570: 2517: 2479: 2442: 2422: 2407: 2227: 2182: 2145: 2138: 1857: 1824: 1775: 1756: 1708: 1686: 1655:

Cases on their own are not valid material as sourcing. Cases and their transcripts are

1399: 1098:

While all contributions to Knowledge (XXG) are appreciated, content or articles may be

1055: 797: 550: 76: 35: 5214: 3895: 2900: 2438: 2265:

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for

5404: 5106: 4680: 4647: 4350: 4309: 4006: 3700: 3680: 2299:

template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

1707:

inline citations and whoever "Andrew Burrows" is is not established, nor referenced.

1520: 1478: 806: 700: 5256:

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at

4953: 4104: 1073: 942:

article. He inserted material that was against policies for reliable sources for a

124:

change which should fix any problems by ensuring that the italics parse properly. --

5555: 5540: 5534: 5529: 5521: 5506: 5470: 5464: 5459: 5449: 5423: 5396: 5377: 5274: 5114: 5008: 4985: 4925: 4907: 4893: 4789: 4783: 4778: 4770: 4750: 4694: 4621: 4615: 4610: 4598: 4579: 4486: 4480: 4475: 4467: 4436: 4414: 4380: 4374: 4369: 4354: 4332: 4326: 4321: 4313: 4285: 4263: 4257: 4252: 4244: 4197: 4177: 4142: 4124: 4070: 4045: 3981: 3975: 3970: 3962: 3938: 3883: 3860: 3854: 3849: 3832: 3799: 3781: 3775: 3770: 3762: 3729: 3723: 3718: 3708: 3688: 3620: 3614: 3609: 3596: 3570: 3496: 3476: 3447: 3441: 3436: 3425: 3410: 3404: 3399: 3397:

What's your interest in this then? It's a useful new bit of legislation, isn't it?

3385: 3355: 3336: 3330: 3325: 3317: 3275: 3220: 3214: 3209: 3178: 3147: 3141: 3136: 3111: 3084: 3023: 3017: 3012: 3005: 2991: 2985: 2980: 2968: 2953: 2891: 2885: 2880: 2861: 2855: 2850: 2841: 2822: 2793: 2787: 2782: 2763: 2741: 2735: 2730: 2723: 2717: 2712: 2698: 2669: 2636: 2620: 2614: 2609: 2578: 2563: 2557: 2552: 2525: 2487: 2473: 2467: 2462: 2450: 2426: 2411: 2392: 2350: 2344: 2339: 2318: 2235: 2217: 2211: 2206: 2190: 2172: 2166: 2161: 2153: 2110: 2104: 2099: 2091: 2059: 2053: 2048: 2039: 2012: 2006: 2001: 1981: 1954: 1909: 1865: 1851: 1845: 1840: 1832: 1803: 1797: 1792: 1783: 1764: 1745: 1739: 1734: 1716: 1694: 1630: 1554: 1548: 1543: 1528: 1506: 1500: 1495: 1486: 1458: 1452: 1447: 1432: 1407: 1355: 1349: 1344: 1294: 1247: 1241: 1236: 1221: 1168: 1063: 1039: 1033: 1028: 1020: 1000: 994: 989: 980: 959: 939: 912: 906: 901: 886: 878: 868: 862: 857: 848: 840: 828: 817: 751: 745: 740: 735: 711: 513: 495: 489: 484: 476: 436: 412: 406: 401: 365: 359: 354: 345: 298: 288: 258: 252: 247: 224: 214: 184: 163: 157: 152: 133: 114: 108: 103: 84: 69: 63: 58: 43: 1612: 4057:

If it encourages someone to rewrite a copyright violation, then clearly it's not

3261:

to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

2135: 1181: 1051: 675:

about coordinating a chapter of "Student WP:Hornbook Editors" at your own school.

4459: 4428: 4406: 3816: 2373: 2270: 2252: 723: 684:

don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to

4825:

Court process, on average, one case a week this shouldn't be too great a task.

4499: 3668:, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see 2258: 1377: 5136: 5120: 4277: 4236: 3417: 2755: 2690: 1893:

The current leading proponent of plain English today in U.S. legal writing is

1213:

I am not deletion-happy. I just simply fail to see how this case is notable.

1128:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

5342:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

3748:. Given your editing interests I hope you will not mind my pointing out that 4532: 3468: 2918:

The Compendium of Copyright Office Practices (Compendium II) section 206.01

2418: 2403: 2368:, you had mentioned that dots should be avoided in titles. But do we follow 5512:

You may want to address the concerns given comments by Ajpearce and Sandy.

3548: 3285: 2996:"filthy"? The only "filthy" thing I see is you calling me a massive prick. 101:: to italicise case names in the infobox, just put in the two apostrophes. 5040:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

4838: 4346: 4305: 3875:

regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

2437:

I've posted a request for a third opinion/some form of general consensus

561: 3993: 3245: 4134:

You're just rolling back my changes, aren't you: how is that helpful? —

3391: 419: 4185: 3819:

article, without mentioning why: "Shared ownership by contributors of

3253:, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use 2810: 1541:

Oh, stupid me. I forgot about that. Will do it differently next time.

1268:

for people looking up their legal rights – even if you've put it on a

418:

5000 years of world architectural history in 2 months arriving at the

5313:

No claim of notability of this person; A7. No references in this BLP.

5168:

If you have permission from the author to release the text under the

3910:, and it appears to be very similar to another Knowledge (XXG) page: 2457: 2369: 2144:

using this, it seems to be considered an appropriate style. Regards,

1724: 1678: 773: 719: 3922:

and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an

3547:

Where as in the quid pro quo involving to wit this statement by the

3341:

Excellent! As such, I have recended the vandalism warning above. -

287:", which is faster than making a bot request. Try it out. — Cheers, 1398:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

5190:

If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted

3581:

Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

3577:

Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

3293: 2181:

be referenced, or it will be removed by me or any passing editor.

3660:

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious

2947:

Knowledge (XXG):Reuse#Fair use materials and special requirements

4878: 4875: 4872: 4796: 4403:

Phillips Products Ltd v Hyland & Hampstead Plant Hire Co Ltd

3300: 3250: 987:

like it, then change the sentence. Don't delete the case, okay?

4300:

You've previously been warned regarding your incivil behavior:

4001:

to Knowledge (XXG). It appears that you recently tried to give

2177:

Your choice to ignore the guidelines, then. Note that the list

5482: 4222: 4208: 4086: 2978:

judgments. Anyway, glad it doesn't matter on Knowledge (XXG).

1964:, but was very tempted to just post a stream of expletives. -- 1469:

I don't particularly care what title the article currently at

1413: 1317: 1206:. Surely a notable case would get more than a mention in CLY? 947: 447: 329: 324: 320: 4061:

unproductive. Thank you for rewriting it by the way. Cheers!

3847:

footnotes. Sorry that's a long explanation but there you go!

899:

Yes definitely; cases, articles, textbooks are all reliable.

801:

would support the creation of a "styleguide" taskforce under

5292: 5023: 4936: 4498: 3952:. I often don't notice these things unless I copy-edit xP -- 3894: 3630: 3503:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

3481: 2257: 2159:

For heaven's sake. Don't be such a haughty, obnoxious jerk.

1072: 657: 209:. By the way, shouldn't this discussion be taking place at " 5489:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 4458:

which currently is overburdened with catholic sex cases. --

4103:

works fine if you omit extraneous parameters: for example,

3672:). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found 49:

Good work. I think the leading case currently, however, is

5249:. For more information on Knowledge (XXG)'s policies, see 4952:, and it appears to include material copied directly from 4721:

is suitable for inclusion in Knowledge (XXG) according to

4452:

Protection_from_Harassment_Act_1997#Employers.27_liability

3607:(TFEU). Please do go ahead and change it in the article. 2728:

I've looked at that Aristotle page and see your point. :)

1729:

Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank plc

974:. You need a reliable cite that has already done this. -- 4879:

2011 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

4876:

2010 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

4873:

2009 Judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

3161:. While they're only essays, I'd advise taking a look at 612:

a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join

5135:! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as 5081:

to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for

3257:

for any test edits you would like to make, and read the

1194:

I can't find any mention of the case outside CLY - e.g.

1011:

I think you're just jealous. I bet you live in Archway.

5360:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

5257: 5071: 4715:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

4301: 3949: 3538: 1961: 1927: 1819: 1815: 1790:

I give up. Petty, small. Please don't bother me again.

1608: 1604: 1600: 1420: 458:, you could have pinged me and I'd have told you about 455: 121: 98: 5325:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

5172:(CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at 4948:. I have performed a web search with the contents of 2813:

discussion/comment request may interest you. Regards,

1663:

ones - we should, where available, use secondary ones.

1105:

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the

323:, and to pick your brains perhaps a little, if I may? 4866:

Improve the categorisation and listing of UKSC cases.

4802:

Hi! Thanks for taking the time to read this message.

4675:

Knowledge (XXG):Cut and paste move repair holding pen

4034:

Knowledge (XXG):Cut and paste move repair holding pen

3873:

Knowledge (XXG):Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

3653:

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not

1393:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Wilkes v Jessop

1050:

Heya, any chance you have sources on these? I've got

5064:

guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable

5058:

it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the

4846:

Complete that template and add it to existing cases.

4401:, because it was a redirect to a non-existent page, 4397:

Hi, I have just deleted this page you created under

4304:

are simply not acceptable Knowledge (XXG) behavior.

3555:: It is very well written, Tom. Why was it deleted? 2123:

Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (United Kingdom)

2117:

Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (United Kingdom)

1445:

is a good example that shows it is not really true!

283:

I've had prompt assistance from editors working at "

5412:

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/David Kershaw

5089:See the guidelines for specific types of articles: 4963:If substantial content is duplicated and it is not 4718:

Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill

4702:

Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill

4650:move", and it is undesirable because it splits the 4009:move", and it is undesirable because it splits the 2832:Are you saying that judgments are not copyrighted? 4566:or other wikieditors. Thanks and happy editing! — 3906:. I have performed a search with the contents of 525:-- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum 5145:violation of Knowledge (XXG)'s copyright policies 5069:If you can assert the notability of the subject, 4954:http://www.lawofcontract.co.uk/discharge/1029.php 4658:to a new title together with their edit history. 4161:Keynes included complimentary passages about LG: 4017:to a new title together with their edit history. 3290:Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act 2286:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Joanne Cash 1423:? I restored the removed interwiki links. Cheers 1182:the Practice Direction on Citation of Authorities 660:to your classmates, and tell them to do the same. 3167:Knowledge (XXG):Make articles useful for readers 2121:Thank you for your contributions to the article 5221:Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 5194:Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 5184:Knowledge (XXG):Requesting copyright permission 5170:Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 5031: 4821:UKSC 9 (extradition)) are not covered at all. 4319:Oh go away, will you, and do something useful. 3605:Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2909: 1999:doing it in the end. Ho ho ho, happy new year, 1960:I have remained as polite as I could manage in 1152:can result in deletion without discussion, and 5236:Knowledge (XXG):Donating copyrighted materials 4974:Knowledge (XXG):Donating copyrighted materials 4514:" under the main edit-box. It looks like this: 4473:Yes, it'll happen eventually, but definitely! 4183:thanks for the words of praise, appreciate it 3920:Knowledge (XXG):Copying within Knowledge (XXG) 3823:." Did you notice anything wrong with it? -- 2873:CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada 2932:(I've converted the footnote to small text.) 1575:Union Avoidance Consultants - The Burke Group 1567:Union Avoidance Consultants - The Burke Group 532:I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in 8: 4851:Improve formatting & prose. Copyediting. 4539:of users who are watching that article. See 3650:at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC). 1838:Well done for changing the page! Good work. 610:as our headquarters, we're hoping to create 5383:Could you have a look at the guidelines at 5206:with a link to where we can find that note. 3746:History of labour law in the United Kingdom 3159:Knowledge (XXG) is not a textbook or manual 2019:rather than biting and then taking a break. 1419:Hi, may I ask what was your intention with 399:Hard to be general. But it's great to try! 4841:based off the US Supreme Court equivalent. 4230:they should reported to an administrator. 3638:Hello. Your account has been granted the " 3488:Hello, Wikidea. You have new messages at 3288:for WARN 91.5 in Culpeper, Virginia. The 3152:Because encyclopedia != casebook, because 3071:One thing, though, I did notice your edit 5251:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 4723:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies and guidelines 4523:The text written here will appear on the 3815:I noticed you removed this line from the 2456:Just do a bit of compromise. Start using 2134:"notes", and considering that I have got 1991:User talk:BrownHairedGirl#Case_categories 772:That being said, I didn't even know that 4991:Supply of Goods (Implied Terms) Act 1973 4871:Improve the judgment listings articles: 5331:notice, but please explain why in your 5042:the guide to writing your first article 4107:gives you a perfectly acceptable link. 3790:You're very very welcome. Best wishes, 3551:I have for this conviction involving a 2305:This is an automatic notification by a 1117:notice, but please explain why in your 4585:I generally don't support the idea of 4543:for full information on this feature. 2870:This is a Canadian case on the issue: 4508:editing an article on Knowledge (XXG) 3368:Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company 3052:non-free content policy and guideline 645:Knowledge (XXG):Hornbook/participants 542:, the new "JD curriculum task force". 285:Knowledge (XXG):AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks 27:Incorporation of terms in English law 7: 5228:, and note that you have done so on 4554:is the best way to ensure that your 4080:Scragged from my response to you at 3456:The Equitable Life Assurance Society 1069:Proposed deletion of Wilkes v Jessop 792:Anyhow, I noticed your proposals at 319:Hi. I'm here to congratulate you on 5158:If you believe that the article is 5033:You may want to consider using the 2402:Was that some sort of Turing test? 1874:Plain English in U.S. legal writing 1387:, an article that you created, for 1184:, particularly para 6.1 and 6.2(b). 658:http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:Hornbook 203:Template:Infobox Court Case/sandbox 5320:deleted for any of several reasons 5308:because of the following concern: 4944:This is an automated message from 4861:Create new articles for UKSC cases 4154:Economic consequences of the peace 3902:This is an automated message from 2357:naming conventions for Court cases 1993:, to keep discussions in one place 1933:Your comments would be welcome at 1100:deleted for any of several reasons 1088:because of the following concern: 24: 5051:Investment Management Association 5019:Investment Management Association 4732:The article will be discussed at 4448:Workplace_bullying#United_Kingdom 3926:to preserve attribution history. 3670:Knowledge (XXG):Reviewing process 5143:, and therefore to constitute a 5078:the article's talk page directly 5070: 4708: 4636: 4516: 4510:there is a small field labeled " 4184: 3992: 3642:" userright, allowing you to to 3244: 1376: 1209:Why is this case very important? 211:Template talk:Infobox Court Case 97:Hello Stephen, if you want, use 5200:released into the public domain 4884:Thanks for reading!, Sincerely 3207:Will you just go away, please. 1517:Knowledge (XXG):Requested moves 972:original research and synthesis 5556:09:53, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5541:09:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC) 5522:20:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC) 5507:18:27, 13 September 2011 (UTC) 5247:Knowledge (XXG) article layout 5225:GNU Free Documentation License 4392:Phillips Products Ltd v Hyland 4046:11:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC) 3982:14:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC) 3963:13:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC) 3939:09:11, 14 September 2010 (UTC) 3379:Chris Cunningham (not at work) 2508:Then why did you revert them? 2366:S. R. Bommai v. Union of India 2333:14:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 1001:11:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC) 981:11:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC) 913:13:04, 10 September 2009 (UTC) 887:10:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC) 642:to your userpage, and ~~~~ to 507:Chris Cunningham (not at work) 470:Chris Cunningham (not at work) 178:Chris Cunningham (not at work) 1: 5127:Copyright problem: Lynn Stout 5037:to help you create articles. 4695:00:03, 21 February 2011 (UTC) 4622:09:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC) 4599:18:03, 10 February 2011 (UTC) 4580:17:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC) 4286:21:59, 19 November 2010 (UTC) 4264:17:48, 19 November 2010 (UTC) 4245:04:07, 19 November 2010 (UTC) 4198:17:20, 11 November 2010 (UTC) 4178:17:01, 11 November 2010 (UTC) 4143:23:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC) 4125:11:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC) 4093:I have just established that 2905:Knowledge (XXG):Public domain 2427:17:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC) 2412:17:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2393:14:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC) 2351:15:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2319:01:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC) 2111:22:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC) 2092:21:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC) 2060:22:46, 26 December 2009 (UTC) 2040:14:17, 26 December 2009 (UTC) 2022:Happy new year to you too! -- 2013:14:10, 26 December 2009 (UTC) 1982:01:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC) 1955:23:27, 25 December 2009 (UTC) 1910:19:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 1888:2000 obituary in the NYT here 1833:22:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1804:15:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1784:15:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1765:15:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1746:14:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1717:14:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1695:14:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1631:06:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC) 960:19:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC) 869:14:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC) 849:14:22, 9 September 2009 (UTC) 332:with a brief paragraph and a 5487:featured article review here 5060:criteria for speedy deletion 4839:Template:Infobox SCOTUK case 4807:United Kingdom Supreme Court 4487:07:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC) 4468:19:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC) 4437:08:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 4415:22:01, 2 February 2011 (UTC) 4071:14:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC) 3840:The Anatomy of Corporate Law 2676:Rhetorica ad Alexandrum move 2376:and high profile cases like 2236:16:58, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 2218:16:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 2191:16:43, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 2173:16:41, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 2154:16:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 2076:R(E) v Governing Body of JFS 2070:Hi Wikidea. Please check if 2066:R(E) v Governing Body of JFS 1866:14:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 1852:23:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC) 1555:12:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 1529:02:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC) 1507:23:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC) 1487:22:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC) 1459:19:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 1433:13:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 1408:14:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC) 1356:09:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 1295:00:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 1248:23:43, 18 October 2009 (UTC) 1222:15:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC) 1169:14:28, 18 October 2009 (UTC) 1064:08:07, 17 October 2009 (UTC) 651:2. If you're a law student, 534:United States legal articles 5471:07:03, 12 August 2011 (UTC) 5450:02:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC) 5424:16:51, 10 August 2011 (UTC) 5364:allows discussion to reach 5345:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 5328:{{proposed deletion/dated}} 4381:18:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 4355:18:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 4333:15:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 4314:14:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC) 3950:typo/grammatical correction 3908:Corporate group (sociology) 3890:Corporate group (sociology) 3884:02:37, 21 August 2010 (UTC) 2378:Brown v. Board of Education 2279:What Knowledge (XXG) is not 2269:. The nominated article is 1924:Category:Lord Lindley cases 1915:Category:Lord Lindley cases 1324:County Court cases, unless 1156:allows discussion to reach 1040:15:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC) 1021:10:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC) 5576: 5198:, or that the material is 5133:welcome to Knowledge (XXG) 4986:15:59, 11 April 2011 (UTC) 4926:10:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC) 4908:10:33, 29 March 2011 (UTC) 4894:23:27, 28 March 2011 (UTC) 4790:12:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC) 4771:20:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC) 4442:employment case articles ? 3861:19:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC) 3833:17:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC) 3800:16:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC) 3782:16:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC) 3763:14:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC) 3448:09:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC) 3426:08:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC) 3411:02:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC) 3279:21:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 3276:21:38, 31 March 2010 (UTC) 3221:13:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 3179:13:31, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 3148:13:23, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 3112:13:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 3085:12:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 3024:12:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 3006:12:24, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 2992:11:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 2969:11:34, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 2954:11:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 2892:10:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 2862:09:57, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 2842:23:48, 28 March 2010 (UTC) 2823:06:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC) 2794:19:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 2764:15:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 2742:15:20, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 2724:15:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 2699:14:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC) 2275:Knowledge (XXG):Notability 1266:WP is not a "how to" guide 818:06:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC) 752:05:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC) 334:Legal systems of the world 5491:featured article criteria 5350:proposed deletion process 5275:21:27, 28 June 2011 (UTC) 5049:A tag has been placed on 4751:20:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC) 4564:recent changes patrollers 4052:National Pension Service‎ 3768:Haha, stupid me. Thanks. 3742:United Kingdom labour law 3730:23:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC) 3709:12:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC) 3689:17:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC) 3644:review other users' edits 3508:I disagree with Socrates. 3386:23:46, 8 April 2010 (UTC) 3356:01:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 3337:01:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 3318:01:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC) 2670:18:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2637:16:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2621:16:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2579:16:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2564:16:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2526:16:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2488:15:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC) 2474:09:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 2451:00:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 2364:In your edit summary for 2292:with four tildes (~~~~). 1270:reading list for students 1188:I get £40 for my trouble. 1142:Proposed Deletion process 718:traditional method. Make 712:06:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC) 514:14:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC) 496:13:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC) 477:16:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 437:14:09, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 413:13:54, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 366:08:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 346:01:43, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 299:20:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 259:08:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 225:03:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC) 185:17:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC) 164:10:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC) 134:09:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC) 115:20:09, 18 July 2009 (UTC) 85:08:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC) 70:08:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC) 44:22:03, 12 July 2009 (UTC) 5410:You may want to look at 5397:19:42, 6 July 2011 (UTC) 5378:16:40, 6 July 2011 (UTC) 5213:a postal message to the 5115:09:31, 31 May 2011 (UTC) 5009:13:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC) 4725:or whether it should be 4302:edit summaries like this 3621:10:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC) 3597:23:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 3292:should be redirected at 2097:Danke sehr mein Freund! 1699:An additional note that 1477:for more information. -- 796:, and also noticed that 663:Contact me directly via 5337:the article's talk page 5196:(CC-BY-SA), version 3.0 4547:section's name instead. 4221:is edit warring on the 3571:19:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC) 3544:ADDENDUM TO PRIOR P.S. 3497:22:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC) 3477:07:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC) 2080:Race Relations Act 1976 2072:Race Relations Act 1975 1880:The Language of the Law 1150:Speedy Deletion process 1123:the article's talk page 529:Hi Wikidea/Archive 07, 5297: 5053:requesting that it be 5046: 5028: 4941: 4817:UKSC 42 (prenups) and 4641:Hi, and thank you for 4503: 3997:Hi, and thank you for 3899: 3635: 3627:You are now a Reviewer 3486: 2930: 2707:Rhetorica ad Herennium 2262: 1989:reply moved here from 1753:writing for lay people 1077: 93:Re: Infobox Court Case 5362:articles for deletion 5306:proposed for deletion 5296: 5027: 4940: 4837:Help me improve this 4815:Radmacher v Granatino 4805:As you may know, the 4529:page revision history 4502: 3898: 3634: 3485: 2297:articles for deletion 2261: 2204:online encyclopedia. 1471:Rule in Dearle v Hall 1367:Articles for deletion 1154:Articles for Deletion 1086:proposed for deletion 1076: 1026:Haha, very funny. :) 5429:Re: Public Economics 5215:Wikimedia Foundation 4976:for the procedure.) 4950:Ogilvy v Hope Davies 4932:Ogilvy v Hope Davies 4916:if your interested, 4456:abuse cases template 4421:List of law journals 3740:Hi - well done with 3553:Crime Against Nature 2686:Corpus Aristotelicum 2288:. Please be sure to 1900:Hope this helps. -- 619:What you can do now: 586:in Knowledge (XXG) ( 564:will have a subpage. 148:Donoghue v Stevenson 52:Interfoto v Stiletto 5258:this temporary page 4541:m:Help:Edit summary 3948:Thank you for this 2680:I approve of being 1619:the discussion page 1264:Next thing is that 630:to your watchlist, 5354:deletion processes 5298: 5260:. Leave a note at 5217:permitting re-use 5029: 4942: 4763:Michael P. Barnett 4643:your contributions 4504: 4130:Speaking of which… 3999:your contributions 3916:Help:Moving a page 3900: 3636: 3501:remove this notice 3487: 2290:sign your comments 2263: 1565:RfD nomination of 1475:Help:Moving a page 1442:Armory v Delamirie 1146:deletion processes 1078: 686:someone who might. 536:to take a look at 144:Armory v Delamirie 5481:I have nominated 5440:comment added by 5284:Proposed deletion 5238:for instructions. 5186:for instructions. 5180:, in your email. 4692: 4114: 4113: 3648:a two-month trial 3549:probation officer 3539:Philosophy of Law 3358: 3320: 3278: 3048: 2927: 2417:There is no bot. 2224:assume good faith 2084:Ausgangskontrolle 2038: 1980: 1953: 1922:I have nominated 1814:With things like 1572:I have nominated 1383:I have nominated 1334: 1333: 936:disruptive editor 932:User:Vision Thing 816: 710: 454:Rather than just 18:User talk:Wikidea 5567: 5537: 5532: 5467: 5462: 5452: 5347: 5346: 5330: 5329: 5295: 5202:leave a note at 5149:copyright policy 5074: 5055:speedily deleted 5026: 4970:copyright policy 4939: 4832:How you can help 4786: 4781: 4712: 4711: 4693: 4686: 4683: 4640: 4639: 4618: 4613: 4576: 4571: 4520: 4483: 4478: 4377: 4372: 4329: 4324: 4260: 4255: 4207:Edit warring on 4188: 4102: 4096: 4087: 4076:BAILII citations 3996: 3978: 3973: 3968:You're welcome! 3881: 3857: 3852: 3778: 3773: 3726: 3721: 3641: 3617: 3612: 3504: 3490:JRPG's talk page 3444: 3439: 3434:Fair enough. :) 3407: 3402: 3352: 3346: 3342: 3333: 3328: 3314: 3308: 3304: 3272: 3266: 3262: 3248: 3217: 3212: 3144: 3139: 3042: 3020: 3015: 2988: 2983: 2917: 2901:copyright policy 2888: 2883: 2858: 2853: 2790: 2785: 2738: 2733: 2720: 2715: 2617: 2612: 2560: 2555: 2470: 2465: 2347: 2342: 2214: 2209: 2169: 2164: 2127:reliable sources 2107: 2102: 2078:, as there is a 2056: 2051: 2029: 2026: 2009: 2004: 1971: 1968: 1944: 1941: 1930:, for deletion. 1884:Benjamin Cardozo 1848: 1843: 1800: 1795: 1742: 1737: 1640:Please, please, 1636:Trustee Act 2000 1616: 1598: 1551: 1546: 1503: 1498: 1455: 1450: 1380: 1352: 1347: 1318: 1244: 1239: 1139: 1138: 1132: 1116: 1115: 1109: 1036: 1031: 997: 992: 978: 909: 904: 865: 860: 809: 748: 743: 732:US corporate law 703: 640: 634: 585: 579: 492: 487: 467: 461: 456:reverting things 409: 404: 362: 357: 296: 291: 255: 250: 222: 217: 160: 155: 111: 106: 66: 61: 5575: 5574: 5570: 5569: 5568: 5566: 5565: 5564: 5535: 5530: 5479: 5465: 5460: 5435: 5431: 5408: 5358:speedy deletion 5344: 5343: 5327: 5326: 5293: 5291: 5262:Talk:Lynn Stout 5230:Talk:Lynn Stout 5204:Talk:Lynn Stout 5174:Talk:Lynn Stout 5155:from editing. 5129: 5124: 5047: 5024: 5022: 5015:Speedy deletion 4993: 4937: 4935: 4800: 4784: 4779: 4758: 4756:Postal services 4713: 4709: 4706: 4681: 4678: 4671:requested moves 4637: 4634: 4616: 4611: 4574: 4569: 4550:Using detailed 4506:Hi there. When 4497: 4481: 4476: 4444: 4424: 4395: 4375: 4370: 4327: 4322: 4298: 4258: 4253: 4219:User:Ganymede22 4212: 4205:User:Ganymede22 4150: 4132: 4100: 4094: 4078: 4055: 4030:requested moves 4003:Corporate group 3990: 3976: 3971: 3946: 3912:Corporate group 3893: 3879:Dawnseeker2000 3877: 3869: 3855: 3850: 3810: 3776: 3771: 3738: 3724: 3719: 3696: 3639: 3629: 3615: 3610: 3584: 3510: 3505: 3494: 3458: 3442: 3437: 3405: 3400: 3395: 3373:I've responded 3371: 3350: 3344: 3331: 3326: 3312: 3306: 3270: 3264: 3241: 3215: 3210: 3142: 3137: 3018: 3013: 2986: 2981: 2886: 2881: 2856: 2851: 2830: 2808: 2788: 2783: 2736: 2731: 2718: 2713: 2704:What about the 2678: 2615: 2610: 2558: 2553: 2468: 2463: 2435: 2400: 2359: 2345: 2340: 2326: 2256: 2212: 2207: 2167: 2162: 2131:Manual of Style 2119: 2105: 2100: 2068: 2054: 2049: 2024: 2007: 2002: 1966: 1962:my reply to you 1939: 1917: 1895:Bryan A. Garner 1876: 1846: 1841: 1812: 1798: 1793: 1740: 1735: 1659:documents, not 1648:References are 1638: 1589: 1573: 1570: 1549: 1544: 1501: 1496: 1467: 1453: 1448: 1417: 1385:Wilkes v Jessop 1381: 1374: 1371:Wilkes v Jessop 1350: 1345: 1259:Courts Act 1971 1242: 1237: 1136: 1130: 1129: 1113: 1107: 1106: 1082:Wilkes v Jessop 1071: 1048: 1034: 1029: 1009: 995: 990: 976: 968: 952:The Four Deuces 925: 907: 902: 863: 858: 832: 815: 746: 741: 728:US contract law 709: 638: 632: 583: 577: 547:Our mission is 527: 490: 485: 465: 459: 452: 407: 402: 360: 355: 317: 292: 289: 253: 248: 218: 215: 158: 153: 109: 104: 95: 64: 59: 29: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5573: 5571: 5563: 5562: 5561: 5560: 5559: 5558: 5478: 5475: 5474: 5473: 5430: 5427: 5407: 5401: 5400: 5399: 5368:for deletion. 5348:will stop the 5316: 5315: 5302:Peer Zumbansen 5290: 5288:Peer Zumbansen 5281: 5279: 5243: 5242: 5241: 5240: 5207: 5188: 5128: 5125: 5123: 5118: 5035:Article Wizard 5030: 5021: 5017:nomination of 5012: 4992: 4989: 4978:CorenSearchBot 4946:CorenSearchBot 4934: 4929: 4882: 4881: 4868: 4867: 4863: 4862: 4858: 4857: 4853: 4852: 4848: 4847: 4843: 4842: 4799: 4794: 4793: 4792: 4757: 4754: 4707: 4705: 4700:Nomination of 4698: 4677:. Thank you. 4633: 4631:Employment Act 4628: 4627: 4626: 4625: 4624: 4602: 4601: 4558:edits are not 4552:edit summaries 4525:Recent changes 4515: 4496: 4494:Edit Summaries 4491: 4490: 4489: 4443: 4440: 4423: 4418: 4394: 4389: 4388: 4387: 4386: 4385: 4384: 4383: 4360: 4359: 4358: 4357: 4336: 4335: 4297: 4292: 4291: 4290: 4289: 4288: 4267: 4266: 4211: 4202: 4201: 4200: 4149: 4146: 4131: 4128: 4112: 4111: 4108: 4091: 4077: 4074: 4054: 4049: 4036:. Thank you. 3989: 3986: 3985: 3984: 3945: 3942: 3931:CorenSearchBot 3904:CorenSearchBot 3892: 3887: 3868: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3809: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3803: 3802: 3785: 3784: 3750:Clement Attlee 3737: 3734: 3733: 3732: 3695: 3692: 3666:BLP violations 3628: 3625: 3624: 3623: 3583: 3574: 3509: 3506: 3495:Message added 3493: 3480: 3466: 3463: 3461: 3457: 3454: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3429: 3428: 3394: 3389: 3370: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3240: 3237: 3236: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3231: 3230: 3229: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3192: 3191: 3190: 3189: 3188: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3183: 3182: 3181: 3123: 3122: 3121: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3115: 3114: 3082:Moonriddengirl 3062: 3061: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3029: 3028: 3027: 3026: 2972: 2971: 2951:Moonriddengirl 2897: 2896: 2895: 2894: 2865: 2864: 2829: 2826: 2807: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2797: 2796: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2767: 2766: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2744: 2677: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2656: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2641: 2640: 2639: 2592: 2591: 2590: 2589: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2584: 2583: 2582: 2581: 2535: 2534: 2533: 2532: 2531: 2530: 2529: 2528: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2434: 2431: 2430: 2429: 2399: 2396: 2358: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2325: 2322: 2255: 2251:nomination of 2246: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2241: 2240: 2239: 2238: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2118: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2074:is correct in 2067: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2043: 2042: 2020: 1996: 1995: 1985: 1984: 1916: 1913: 1875: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1811: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1787: 1786: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1767: 1720: 1719: 1697: 1682: 1671: 1664: 1653: 1637: 1634: 1569: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1510: 1509: 1466: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1416: 1411: 1375: 1373: 1369:nomination of 1364: 1363: 1362: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1332: 1331: 1328: 1322: 1315: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1280: 1276: 1273: 1262: 1251: 1250: 1230: 1229: 1211: 1210: 1207: 1192: 1189: 1185: 1176: 1175: 1160:for deletion. 1140:will stop the 1096: 1095: 1070: 1067: 1047: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1008: 1005: 1004: 1003: 967: 964: 963: 962: 924: 923:Proposed RfC/U 921: 920: 919: 918: 917: 916: 915: 892: 891: 890: 889: 872: 871: 831: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 820: 811: 807:Andrew Gradman 798:User:MZMcBride 785: 784: 783: 782: 781: 780: 765: 764: 763: 762: 761: 760: 705: 701:Andrew Gradman 697: 696: 693: 692: 691: 690: 689: 677: 676: 661: 649: 616: 615: 601: 600: 599: 598: 597: 596: 593: 574: 566: 565: 543: 526: 520: 519: 518: 517: 516: 499: 498: 451: 445: 444: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 424: 394: 393: 392: 391: 388: 385: 379: 378: 377: 376: 369: 368: 316: 313: 312: 311: 310: 309: 308: 307: 306: 305: 304: 303: 302: 301: 270: 269: 268: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 262: 261: 234: 233: 232: 231: 230: 229: 228: 227: 192: 191: 190: 189: 188: 187: 169: 168: 167: 166: 137: 136: 94: 91: 90: 89: 88: 87: 28: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5572: 5557: 5553: 5549: 5544: 5543: 5542: 5539: 5538: 5533: 5525: 5524: 5523: 5519: 5515: 5511: 5510: 5509: 5508: 5504: 5500: 5496: 5492: 5488: 5484: 5476: 5472: 5469: 5468: 5463: 5455: 5454: 5453: 5451: 5447: 5443: 5439: 5428: 5426: 5425: 5421: 5417: 5413: 5406: 5405:David Kershaw 5402: 5398: 5394: 5390: 5386: 5382: 5381: 5380: 5379: 5375: 5371: 5367: 5363: 5359: 5355: 5351: 5340: 5338: 5334: 5323: 5321: 5314: 5311: 5310: 5309: 5307: 5303: 5289: 5285: 5282: 5280: 5277: 5276: 5272: 5268: 5263: 5259: 5254: 5252: 5248: 5239: 5237: 5231: 5227: 5226: 5222: 5216: 5212: 5208: 5205: 5201: 5197: 5195: 5189: 5187: 5185: 5179: 5175: 5171: 5167: 5166: 5165: 5164: 5163: 5161: 5156: 5154: 5150: 5146: 5142: 5138: 5134: 5126: 5122: 5119: 5117: 5116: 5112: 5108: 5104: 5100: 5096: 5092: 5087: 5084: 5080: 5079: 5073: 5067: 5065: 5061: 5056: 5052: 5045: 5043: 5038: 5036: 5020: 5016: 5013: 5011: 5010: 5006: 5002: 4998: 4990: 4988: 4987: 4983: 4979: 4975: 4971: 4966: 4965:public domain 4961: 4957: 4955: 4951: 4947: 4933: 4930: 4928: 4927: 4923: 4919: 4918:Bob House 884 4915: 4910: 4909: 4905: 4901: 4900:Bob House 884 4896: 4895: 4891: 4887: 4886:Bob House 884 4880: 4877: 4874: 4870: 4869: 4865: 4864: 4860: 4859: 4855: 4854: 4850: 4849: 4845: 4844: 4840: 4836: 4835: 4834: 4833: 4829: 4826: 4822: 4820: 4816: 4810: 4808: 4803: 4798: 4795: 4791: 4788: 4787: 4782: 4775: 4774: 4773: 4772: 4768: 4764: 4755: 4753: 4752: 4748: 4744: 4738: 4735: 4730: 4728: 4724: 4720: 4719: 4703: 4699: 4697: 4696: 4690: 4685: 4684: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4659: 4657: 4653: 4649: 4648:cut and paste 4644: 4632: 4629: 4623: 4620: 4619: 4614: 4606: 4605: 4604: 4603: 4600: 4596: 4592: 4588: 4584: 4583: 4582: 4581: 4578: 4577: 4572: 4565: 4561: 4557: 4553: 4548: 4544: 4542: 4538: 4535:, and in the 4534: 4530: 4527:page, in the 4526: 4521: 4519: 4513: 4509: 4501: 4495: 4492: 4488: 4485: 4484: 4479: 4472: 4471: 4470: 4469: 4465: 4461: 4457: 4453: 4449: 4441: 4439: 4438: 4434: 4430: 4422: 4419: 4417: 4416: 4412: 4408: 4404: 4400: 4393: 4390: 4382: 4379: 4378: 4373: 4366: 4365: 4364: 4363: 4362: 4361: 4356: 4352: 4348: 4344: 4340: 4339: 4338: 4337: 4334: 4331: 4330: 4325: 4318: 4317: 4316: 4315: 4311: 4307: 4303: 4296: 4293: 4287: 4283: 4279: 4275: 4271: 4270: 4269: 4268: 4265: 4262: 4261: 4256: 4249: 4248: 4247: 4246: 4242: 4238: 4234: 4231: 4229: 4224: 4220: 4215: 4210: 4206: 4203: 4199: 4195: 4191: 4187: 4182: 4181: 4180: 4179: 4175: 4171: 4165: 4162: 4160: 4155: 4147: 4145: 4144: 4141: 4137: 4129: 4127: 4126: 4123: 4119: 4106: 4099: 4092: 4088: 4085: 4083: 4075: 4073: 4072: 4068: 4064: 4060: 4053: 4050: 4048: 4047: 4043: 4039: 4035: 4031: 4027: 4023: 4018: 4016: 4012: 4008: 4007:cut and paste 4004: 4000: 3995: 3987: 3983: 3980: 3979: 3974: 3967: 3966: 3965: 3964: 3961: 3958: 3955: 3951: 3943: 3941: 3940: 3936: 3932: 3927: 3925: 3921: 3917: 3913: 3909: 3905: 3897: 3891: 3888: 3886: 3885: 3882: 3880: 3874: 3866: 3862: 3859: 3858: 3853: 3845: 3841: 3837: 3836: 3835: 3834: 3830: 3826: 3822: 3818: 3813: 3807: 3801: 3797: 3793: 3789: 3788: 3787: 3786: 3783: 3780: 3779: 3774: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3764: 3760: 3756: 3751: 3747: 3743: 3735: 3731: 3728: 3727: 3722: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3710: 3706: 3702: 3693: 3691: 3690: 3686: 3682: 3677: 3675: 3671: 3667: 3663: 3658: 3656: 3655:autoconfirmed 3651: 3649: 3645: 3633: 3626: 3622: 3619: 3618: 3613: 3606: 3601: 3600: 3599: 3598: 3594: 3590: 3582: 3578: 3575: 3573: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3559: 3556: 3554: 3550: 3545: 3542: 3540: 3535: 3532: 3529: 3526: 3522: 3518: 3514: 3507: 3502: 3498: 3491: 3484: 3479: 3478: 3474: 3470: 3455: 3449: 3446: 3445: 3440: 3433: 3432: 3431: 3430: 3427: 3423: 3419: 3415: 3414: 3413: 3412: 3409: 3408: 3403: 3393: 3390: 3388: 3387: 3384: 3380: 3376: 3369: 3366: 3357: 3353: 3347: 3340: 3339: 3338: 3335: 3334: 3329: 3322: 3321: 3319: 3315: 3309: 3302: 3299: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3283: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3277: 3273: 3267: 3260: 3256: 3252: 3247: 3238: 3222: 3219: 3218: 3213: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3200: 3199: 3198: 3197: 3196: 3195: 3194: 3193: 3180: 3176: 3172: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3155: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3146: 3145: 3140: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3130: 3129: 3128: 3127: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3113: 3109: 3105: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3088: 3087: 3086: 3083: 3079: 3074: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3053: 3046: 3045:edit conflict 3041: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3025: 3022: 3021: 3016: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3003: 2999: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2990: 2989: 2984: 2976: 2975: 2974: 2973: 2970: 2966: 2962: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2952: 2948: 2943: 2939: 2933: 2929: 2925: 2921: 2914: 2908: 2906: 2902: 2893: 2890: 2889: 2884: 2878: 2875: 2874: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2863: 2860: 2859: 2854: 2846: 2845: 2844: 2843: 2839: 2835: 2827: 2825: 2824: 2820: 2816: 2812: 2806:Pepper v Hart 2805: 2795: 2792: 2791: 2786: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2773: 2772: 2765: 2761: 2757: 2753: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2743: 2740: 2739: 2734: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2722: 2721: 2716: 2709: 2708: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2696: 2692: 2687: 2683: 2675: 2671: 2667: 2663: 2658: 2657: 2638: 2634: 2630: 2626: 2625: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2619: 2618: 2613: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2599: 2598: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2580: 2576: 2572: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2562: 2561: 2556: 2549: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2527: 2523: 2519: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2506: 2503: 2500:No it's not, 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2489: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2472: 2471: 2466: 2459: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2433:Pepper v Hart 2432: 2428: 2424: 2420: 2416: 2415: 2414: 2413: 2409: 2405: 2397: 2395: 2394: 2390: 2386: 2381: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2367: 2362: 2356: 2352: 2349: 2348: 2343: 2336: 2335: 2334: 2332: 2323: 2321: 2320: 2316: 2312: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2298: 2293: 2291: 2287: 2282: 2280: 2276: 2272: 2268: 2260: 2254: 2250: 2247: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2220: 2219: 2216: 2215: 2210: 2202: 2201: 2200: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2171: 2170: 2165: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2143: 2140: 2137: 2132: 2128: 2124: 2116: 2112: 2109: 2108: 2103: 2096: 2095: 2094: 2093: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2077: 2073: 2065: 2061: 2058: 2057: 2052: 2045: 2044: 2041: 2036: 2032: 2028: 2021: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2011: 2010: 2005: 1994: 1992: 1987: 1986: 1983: 1978: 1974: 1970: 1963: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1951: 1947: 1943: 1936: 1931: 1929: 1925: 1920: 1914: 1912: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1898: 1896: 1891: 1889: 1885: 1881: 1873: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1850: 1849: 1844: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1830: 1826: 1821: 1817: 1809: 1805: 1802: 1801: 1796: 1789: 1788: 1785: 1781: 1777: 1772: 1771: 1766: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1744: 1743: 1738: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1721: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1696: 1692: 1688: 1683: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1669: 1665: 1662: 1658: 1654: 1651: 1647: 1646: 1645: 1643: 1635: 1633: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1621:. Thank you. 1620: 1614: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1597: 1593: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1568: 1564: 1556: 1553: 1552: 1547: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1513: 1512: 1511: 1508: 1505: 1504: 1499: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1484: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1464: 1460: 1457: 1456: 1451: 1444: 1443: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1430: 1426: 1425:79.178.137.83 1422: 1415: 1412: 1410: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1396: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1379: 1372: 1368: 1365: 1357: 1354: 1353: 1348: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1327: 1323: 1319: 1316: 1306: 1305: 1304: 1303: 1302: 1301: 1296: 1293: 1292: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1274: 1271: 1267: 1263: 1260: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1249: 1246: 1245: 1240: 1232: 1231: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1223: 1220: 1219: 1216: 1208: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1190: 1186: 1183: 1178: 1177: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1167: 1166: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1135: 1126: 1124: 1120: 1112: 1103: 1101: 1094: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1087: 1083: 1075: 1068: 1066: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1046:Inns of Court 1045: 1041: 1038: 1037: 1032: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1006: 1002: 999: 998: 993: 985: 984: 983: 982: 979: 973: 965: 961: 957: 953: 949: 945: 941: 937: 933: 930: 929: 928: 922: 914: 911: 910: 905: 898: 897: 896: 895: 894: 893: 888: 884: 880: 876: 875: 874: 873: 870: 867: 866: 861: 853: 852: 851: 850: 846: 842: 837: 830: 827: 819: 814: 808: 804: 799: 795: 791: 790: 789: 788: 787: 786: 778: 775: 771: 770: 769: 768: 767: 766: 757: 756: 755: 754: 753: 750: 749: 744: 737: 733: 729: 725: 721: 716: 715: 714: 713: 708: 702: 694: 687: 683: 679: 678: 674: 673: 668: 667: 662: 659: 655: 654: 653: 652: 650: 647: 646: 641: 637: 636:User Hornbook 629: 628: 623: 622: 621: 620: 613: 609: 608: 603: 602: 594: 591: 590: 582: 575: 572: 571: 570: 569: 568: 567: 563: 559: 558: 557: 556: 554: 552: 544: 541: 540: 535: 530: 524: 521: 515: 512: 508: 503: 502: 501: 500: 497: 494: 493: 488: 481: 480: 479: 478: 475: 471: 464: 457: 449: 446: 438: 434: 430: 429:Joopercoopers 425: 421: 416: 415: 414: 411: 410: 405: 398: 397: 396: 395: 389: 386: 383: 382: 381: 380: 373: 372: 371: 370: 367: 364: 363: 358: 350: 349: 348: 347: 343: 339: 338:Joopercoopers 335: 331: 326: 322: 314: 300: 297: 295: 286: 282: 281: 280: 279: 278: 277: 276: 275: 274: 273: 272: 271: 260: 257: 256: 251: 244: 243: 242: 241: 240: 239: 238: 237: 236: 235: 226: 223: 221: 213:"? — Cheers, 212: 208: 204: 200: 199: 198: 197: 196: 195: 194: 193: 186: 183: 179: 175: 174: 173: 172: 171: 170: 165: 162: 161: 156: 149: 145: 141: 140: 139: 138: 135: 131: 127: 123: 119: 118: 117: 116: 113: 112: 107: 100: 92: 86: 82: 78: 73: 72: 71: 68: 67: 62: 54: 53: 48: 47: 46: 45: 41: 37: 33: 26: 19: 5528: 5480: 5458: 5442:75.49.220.62 5436:— Preceding 5432: 5409: 5352:, but other 5341: 5333:edit summary 5324: 5317: 5312: 5300:The article 5299: 5278: 5255: 5244: 5233: 5218: 5210: 5199: 5191: 5181: 5177: 5159: 5157: 5130: 5088: 5082: 5076: 5068: 5048: 5039: 5032: 4996: 4994: 4962: 4958: 4943: 4911: 4897: 4883: 4831: 4830: 4827: 4823: 4819:Norris v USA 4811: 4804: 4801: 4777: 4759: 4739: 4731: 4716: 4714: 4704:for deletion 4679: 4660: 4655: 4652:page history 4635: 4609: 4567: 4549: 4545: 4522: 4512:Edit summary 4505: 4474: 4445: 4425: 4396: 4368: 4320: 4299: 4251: 4235: 4232: 4216: 4213: 4190:FeydHuxtable 4170:FeydHuxtable 4166: 4163: 4159:consequences 4158: 4153: 4151: 4133: 4115: 4082:my talk page 4079: 4063:VernoWhitney 4058: 4056: 4038:VernoWhitney 4019: 4014: 4011:page history 3991: 3969: 3947: 3928: 3924:edit summary 3901: 3878: 3870: 3848: 3843: 3839: 3814: 3812:Hi Wikidea, 3811: 3769: 3739: 3717: 3697: 3678: 3659: 3652: 3637: 3608: 3585: 3560: 3557: 3546: 3543: 3536: 3533: 3530: 3527: 3523: 3519: 3515: 3511: 3459: 3435: 3398: 3396: 3372: 3345:NeutralHomer 3324: 3307:NeutralHomer 3297: 3265:NeutralHomer 3259:welcome page 3243: 3242: 3208: 3135: 3099: 3095: 3011: 3010:Yeah, well. 2979: 2941: 2934: 2931: 2910: 2898: 2879: 2871: 2849: 2831: 2809: 2781: 2729: 2711: 2705: 2679: 2608: 2551: 2547: 2461: 2436: 2401: 2382: 2363: 2360: 2338: 2327: 2303:Please note: 2302: 2301: 2294: 2283: 2264: 2205: 2178: 2160: 2120: 2098: 2071: 2069: 2047: 2046:No worries! 2000: 1997: 1988: 1932: 1921: 1918: 1899: 1892: 1879: 1877: 1839: 1813: 1791: 1752: 1733: 1704: 1660: 1656: 1649: 1641: 1639: 1571: 1542: 1494: 1468: 1446: 1440: 1418: 1397: 1382: 1343: 1325: 1314: 1291: 1286:. Regards, 1235: 1218: 1212: 1165: 1148:exist. The 1144:, but other 1127: 1119:edit summary 1104: 1097: 1092: 1080:The article 1079: 1049: 1027: 1010: 988: 977:Escape Orbit 969: 940:Paul Krugman 926: 900: 856: 835: 833: 829:Law of India 776: 739: 736:US labor law 698: 685: 681: 670: 664: 643: 631: 625: 618: 617: 611: 605: 588: 553:to footnotes 548: 546: 545: 537: 531: 528: 483: 453: 400: 353: 318: 293: 246: 219: 151: 102: 96: 57: 50: 30: 5416:Wtshymanski 5389:Wtshymanski 5370:Wtshymanski 5356:exist. The 5267:Wtshymanski 5192:"under the 5131:Hello, and 5091:biographies 4098:cite BAILII 3844:The Anatomy 3817:Corporation 3808:Corporation 3563:Zenbuddha77 3255:the sandbox 2374:Roe v. Wade 2324:Joanne Cash 2271:Joanne Cash 2253:Joanne Cash 1928:you created 1919:Hi Wikidea 1810:Oh, come on 1288:Bencherlite 1215:Bencherlite 1204:this search 1200:this search 1196:this search 1162:Bencherlite 1013:ElectricRay 813:WP:Hornbook 724:US tort law 707:WP:Hornbook 627:WP:Hornbook 607:WP:Hornbook 539:WP:Hornbook 523:WP:Hornbook 99:my template 5219:under the 5178:Lynn Stout 5137:Lynn Stout 5121:Lynn Stout 4663:"Move" tab 4591:Beeblebrox 4587:WP:TEMPLAR 4556:good faith 4537:watchlists 4217:I noticed 4116:HTH HAND — 4022:"Move" tab 3825:Jonovision 3589:Loganberry 3499:. You can 3465:insolvent. 3239:March 2010 3098:, not the 2441:. Thanks, 2385:Sodabottle 2311:Erwin85Bot 2027:HairedGirl 1969:HairedGirl 1942:HairedGirl 1902:Coolcaesar 1650:references 1623:SchuminWeb 1465:Page moves 1134:dated prod 1111:dated prod 1052:Gray's Inn 966:Tony Blair 463:quote box2 5548:Ironholds 5514:Ironholds 5499:Ironholds 5366:consensus 5304:has been 5103:companies 5001:Ironholds 4743:Ironholds 4533:diff page 4531:, on the 4399:WP:CSD#G8 4233:Regards, 3944:Thank you 3711:Lestrade 3662:vandalism 3528:Be well, 3467:Regards 3286:call sign 3171:Ironholds 3104:Ironholds 2998:Ironholds 2961:Ironholds 2924:clarifies 2916:foreign.( 2877:1 SCR 339 2834:Ironholds 2828:Copyright 2815:Ironholds 2662:Ironholds 2629:Ironholds 2571:Ironholds 2518:Ironholds 2514:WP:MOSLAW 2480:Ironholds 2443:Ironholds 2228:Ironholds 2183:Ironholds 2146:Ironholds 1858:Ironholds 1825:Ironholds 1776:Ironholds 1757:Ironholds 1709:Ironholds 1687:Ironholds 1661:secondary 1421:this edit 1400:Ironholds 1342:notable. 1158:consensus 1084:has been 1056:Ironholds 794:WP:SCOTUS 699:Regards, 666:talk page 551:hornbooks 77:Ironholds 36:Ironholds 5438:unsigned 5107:Mrmatiko 5095:websites 4682:howcheng 4667:redirect 4560:reverted 4295:WP:CIVIL 4228:edit war 4026:redirect 3701:Lestrade 3681:Karanacs 3640:reviewer 2780:Thanks! 2510:WP:STYLE 2502:WP:STYLE 2267:deletion 2139:articles 2035:contribs 1977:contribs 1950:contribs 1926:, which 1521:Carnildo 1479:Carnildo 1389:deletion 1007:pompous? 777:existed! 759:editors. 562:casebook 5385:WP:PROF 5153:blocked 4727:deleted 4575:Toronto 4105:UKHL 48 3821:capital 3392:EA 2010 3078:WP:AGFC 2907:notes: 2682:WP:BOLD 2512:, yes; 2136:several 1657:primary 1592:protect 1587:history 938:in the 879:SBC-YPR 841:SBC-YPR 624:1. Add 589:example 581:anchors 420:Bauhaus 120:I made 5485:for a 5335:or on 5083:speedy 4460:Penbat 4429:Crusio 4407:JohnCD 4343:WP:ANI 4274:WP:ANI 4148:Keynes 4059:wholly 3736:Attlee 3154:MOSLAW 3096:obiter 2920:states 2458:OSCOLA 2370:OSCOLA 2331:Bastin 2031:(talk) 1973:(talk) 1946:(talk) 1725:OSCOLA 1679:OSCOLA 1675:WP:MOS 1642:please 1596:delete 1284:WP:AFD 1121:or on 944:WP:BLP 803:WP:LAW 774:US law 720:US law 656:Email 450:quotes 126:bainer 5101:, or 5099:bands 4656:moved 4570:Spike 4278:Aeonx 4237:Aeonx 4015:moved 3418:Gabbe 3294:WARNA 3163:WP:RF 3100:ratio 2756:Wareh 2691:Wareh 2398:Reply 2361:Hi, 2277:and " 2142:to FA 2025:Brown 1967:Brown 1940:Brown 1668:WP:OR 1613:views 1605:watch 1601:links 1279:case? 934:is a 672:email 560:Each 16:< 5552:talk 5536:idea 5518:talk 5503:talk 5495:here 5466:idea 5446:talk 5420:talk 5414:. -- 5403:AfD 5393:talk 5374:talk 5271:talk 5234:See 5223:and 5182:See 5111:talk 5005:talk 4982:talk 4956:. 4922:talk 4914:here 4904:talk 4890:talk 4797:UKSC 4785:idea 4767:talk 4747:talk 4689:chat 4617:idea 4595:talk 4482:idea 4464:talk 4450:and 4433:talk 4411:talk 4376:idea 4351:talk 4328:idea 4310:talk 4282:talk 4259:idea 4241:talk 4214:Hi, 4194:talk 4174:talk 4140:Talk 4136:Phil 4122:Talk 4118:Phil 4067:talk 4042:talk 3977:idea 3935:talk 3867:AN/I 3856:idea 3829:talk 3796:talk 3792:DBaK 3777:idea 3759:talk 3755:DBaK 3744:and 3725:idea 3705:talk 3694:Beer 3685:talk 3674:here 3616:idea 3593:Talk 3579:and 3567:talk 3534:PS. 3531:Tom 3473:talk 3469:JRPG 3443:idea 3422:talk 3406:idea 3383:talk 3375:here 3351:Talk 3332:idea 3313:Talk 3303:. - 3301:WARN 3296:and 3271:Talk 3251:WARN 3216:idea 3175:talk 3165:and 3143:idea 3108:talk 3092:this 3073:here 3019:idea 3002:talk 2987:idea 2965:talk 2938:here 2887:idea 2857:idea 2838:talk 2819:talk 2811:this 2789:idea 2760:talk 2737:idea 2719:idea 2695:talk 2666:talk 2633:talk 2616:idea 2575:talk 2559:idea 2522:talk 2484:talk 2469:idea 2447:talk 2439:here 2423:talk 2419:Tim! 2408:talk 2404:Tim! 2389:talk 2346:idea 2315:talk 2281:"). 2232:talk 2213:idea 2187:talk 2179:must 2168:idea 2150:talk 2106:idea 2088:talk 2082:. -- 2055:idea 2008:idea 1937:. -- 1906:talk 1862:talk 1847:idea 1829:talk 1820:that 1816:this 1799:idea 1780:talk 1761:talk 1741:idea 1713:talk 1701:this 1691:talk 1627:Talk 1609:logs 1583:talk 1579:edit 1550:idea 1525:talk 1502:idea 1483:talk 1454:idea 1429:talk 1404:talk 1351:idea 1243:idea 1060:talk 1035:idea 1017:talk 996:idea 956:talk 908:idea 883:talk 864:idea 845:talk 836:must 747:idea 734:and 511:talk 491:idea 474:talk 433:talk 408:idea 361:idea 342:talk 290:Jack 254:idea 216:Jack 182:talk 159:idea 130:talk 122:this 110:idea 81:talk 65:idea 40:talk 32:done 5531:Wik 5483:Law 5477:FAR 5461:Wik 5286:of 5253:. 5160:not 5105:. 4997:not 4780:Wik 4612:Wik 4562:by 4477:Wik 4371:Wik 4347:THF 4323:Wik 4306:THF 4254:Wik 4223:Law 4209:Law 3988:FYI 3972:Wik 3960:何献龙 3851:Wik 3772:Wik 3720:Wik 3664:or 3611:Wik 3438:Wik 3401:Wik 3327:Wik 3298:not 3211:Wik 3138:Wik 3014:Wik 2982:Wik 2882:Wik 2852:Wik 2784:Wik 2732:Wik 2714:Wik 2611:Wik 2554:Wik 2548:are 2464:Wik 2341:Wik 2307:bot 2249:AfD 2208:Wik 2163:Wik 2101:Wik 2050:Wik 2033:• ( 2003:Wik 1975:• ( 1948:• ( 1897:. 1842:Wik 1794:Wik 1736:Wik 1545:Wik 1497:Wik 1449:Wik 1414:Law 1346:Wik 1238:Wik 1030:Wik 991:Wik 948:POV 903:Wik 859:Wik 742:Wik 682:You 669:or 486:Wik 448:Law 403:Wik 356:Wik 330:Law 325:Law 321:Law 315:Law 294:Lee 249:Wik 220:Lee 207:AWB 154:Wik 146:or 105:Wik 60:Wik 5554:) 5520:) 5505:) 5497:. 5448:) 5422:) 5395:) 5376:) 5339:. 5322:. 5273:) 5232:. 5211:or 5113:) 5097:, 5093:, 5066:. 5044:. 5007:) 4999:. 4984:) 4924:) 4906:) 4892:) 4769:) 4749:) 4729:. 4597:) 4466:) 4435:) 4413:) 4353:) 4345:. 4312:) 4284:) 4276:. 4243:) 4196:) 4176:) 4138:| 4120:| 4110:” 4101:}} 4095:{{ 4090:“ 4084:: 4069:) 4044:) 3957:XL 3937:) 3831:) 3798:) 3761:) 3707:) 3687:) 3676:. 3595:) 3569:) 3561:-- 3475:) 3424:) 3381:- 3354:• 3348:• 3316:• 3310:• 3274:• 3268:• 3177:) 3110:) 3102:. 3004:) 2967:) 2942:if 2840:) 2821:) 2762:) 2697:) 2668:) 2635:) 2577:) 2524:) 2486:) 2449:) 2425:) 2410:) 2391:) 2317:) 2234:) 2189:) 2152:) 2090:) 1908:) 1864:) 1831:) 1782:) 1763:) 1715:) 1705:no 1693:) 1629:) 1611:| 1607:| 1603:| 1599:| 1594:| 1590:| 1585:| 1581:| 1527:) 1485:) 1431:) 1406:) 1330:” 1321:“ 1202:, 1198:, 1137:}} 1131:{{ 1125:. 1114:}} 1108:{{ 1102:. 1062:) 1019:) 958:) 885:) 847:) 730:, 726:, 639:}} 633:{{ 592:). 584:}} 578:{{ 509:- 472:- 466:}} 460:{{ 435:) 427:-- 344:) 180:- 132:) 83:) 42:) 5550:( 5516:( 5501:( 5444:( 5418:( 5391:( 5372:( 5269:( 5109:( 5003:( 4980:( 4920:( 4902:( 4888:( 4765:( 4745:( 4691:} 4687:{ 4646:" 4593:( 4462:( 4431:( 4409:( 4349:( 4308:( 4280:( 4239:( 4192:( 4172:( 4065:( 4040:( 3954:H 3933:( 3827:( 3794:( 3757:( 3703:( 3683:( 3591:( 3565:( 3492:. 3471:( 3420:( 3173:( 3106:( 3047:) 3043:( 3000:( 2963:( 2928:) 2836:( 2817:( 2758:( 2693:( 2664:( 2631:( 2573:( 2520:( 2482:( 2445:( 2421:( 2406:( 2387:( 2313:( 2230:( 2185:( 2148:( 2086:( 2037:) 1979:) 1952:) 1904:( 1860:( 1827:( 1778:( 1759:( 1711:( 1689:( 1681:. 1625:( 1615:) 1577:( 1523:( 1481:( 1427:( 1402:( 1058:( 1015:( 954:( 881:( 843:( 810:/ 704:/ 688:) 680:( 648:. 614:. 555:. 431:( 340:( 128:( 79:( 38:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index