|
User talk:Stuartyeates/Archive 5
A kitten for you!_by_Ron.jpg) For continuing to update the GLAM newsletter with news from New Zealand. :D And offering to set the world in the correct orientation map wise. We know which countries are on top. ;) LauraHale (talk) 21:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Warning usersHi, thank you for your vigilance. However, warnings such as this need to go on the user talk page rather than at WP:AIV. I have warned the IP. TerriersFan (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I'd rather not...I would rather NOT have to revert your revert (see WP:BRD) on the list of ubiquitous whatever, then lock the article down. So, I'll give you the opportunity to self-revert, and help in the process of WP:SOFIXIT. Cheers. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:52, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notificationHi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notificationHi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC) Igloo (New Zealand)I have added several refs from news websites to the Igloo article. Igloo has plenty of information on other sites. One of the refs I added was new info from this month. I have also removed most of the information about Igloo from the Sky page so the info doesn't exist on any other page. Igloo article shouldn't be deleted because it is a seperate provider even though it is a joint venture between TVNZ and SKY. Socks 01 21:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC) DYK for Owen Wilkes
The DYK project (nominate) 09:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC) Australian dictionary articlesI think you need to change your template for the articles. You are putting "They were born" on individual people. Charles Henry Zercho is an example. I've also cleaned up several more... Their first names start with the letters A-I. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Not sure where to place this up above, so I'll do it at the end. I'm not trying to criticize you in anyway. I know how hard it is to script this type of stuff up and it is not easy or just plain impossible. I saw you earlier creating an article for almost every dead New Zealander and it looks like Australia's source isn't as nice. You aren't adding a parameter to the talk pages which causes the article to go onto a tracking category. Part of my daily routine is to clear out the category. You are not putting extra work in my basket. So, I add what is needed to the talk pages. No need to change what you are doing there. I've got some tools that make quick work of it. It also gives me a chance to give a quick look in case something is wrong. Please don't create an article for every dead Australian and if you start on China or India, lets just say it will be painful :) Bgwhite (talk) 06:29, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
New Page Triage engagement strategy releasedHey guys! I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyes It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:37, 3 March 2012 (UTC) New articles
noticeHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Calendar2 (talk) 11:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for March 5Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 5 March 2012 (UTC) Crimes ActHi, I see that you've put two notices on the Crimes Act article --- I definitely agree with the second one, and as to the first one, while I'm slightly curious as to who you think has a conflict of interest with the Crimes Act (of all things!) is there a particular pov you think is being adopted that is problematic? Am quite happy to take a stab at improving this article soonish. Cheers, Pho-logic (talk) 11:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC) FYI. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 00:45, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Procedural de-prodHi, I de-prodded Virginity (EP) because it had been proposed for deletion once already. You can take it to AfD instead. Camerafiend (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2012 (UTC) Thank youRe: top ban proposal. [1] I appreciate all your time on this article and taking the time to comment on the ban. It is nice that as far as pyramid schemes, there is at least one thing all wikpedians can agree on. Have a really great weekend! Calendar2 (talk) 18:21, 10 March 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for March 12Hi. When you recently edited Sensible Sentencing Trust, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria University (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC) Edited your short peice on the above, fixed spelling of Ballindooley. Not sure why she is notable, however, so perhaps more information would be useful. Fergananim (talk) 06:24, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Is there anything that makes her notable? NealeFamily (talk) 09:31, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for March 19Hi. When you recently edited Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak (New Zealand), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 19 March 2012 (UTC) Apart from being a pretty obnoxious character, is there anything that gives Wilson notability? NealeFamily (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC) NZHPT Category I listingsAs you know, I'm an admirer of your ability to take a database, write some clever script, and then add a lot of patience and hard work to turn out stubs that pretty much cover a topic area. I'm guessing that you are still going strong with Australian biographies. This will come to an end at some point and I wonder whether you are open to suggestions? One topic area with 100% notability would be structures listed as Category I with the New Zealand Historic Places Trust. I once gave the area some structure on Wikipedia as well as on Commons, and I have written many an article on Christchurch listings, but that latter activity proofed too distressing and depressing to carry on with. A somewhat more positive pitch would be to get the Category I listings up nationwide. Would that be something you could be interested in? Schwede66 08:28, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Format for quotationsHi Stuart. I've noticed in some of your recent work that you are using italics for what I perceive to be quotations. If they are quotations, then double quotation marks (straight not curly) should be used rather than italics. Double quotation marks are usually made with the Shift key plus the apostrophe/quotation mark key. Perhaps you are mistakenly thinking that pressing the apostrophe key twice (unshifted) makes double quotation marks. See Manual of Style#Quotation marks and other sections of MOS. Please excuse me if I am misinterpreting or "teaching my grandmother to suck eggs". Keep up the good work. cheers. Nurg (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Stuart - I managed to do some research over lunchtime and found that this is likely to be notable in its own right. The vehicle would be one of the first NZ electric cars (if the first) in the Solar Challenge and is one of only two vehicles that have reached prototype stage with the aim of becoming a production version. It has links to the University of Queensland, which I still need to research more thoroughly and is possibly the basis for the current Waikato University solar electric car. The electric motors powering it may also be unique. I have improved the references and tidied up some of the information. Still a way to go though. Thanks for spotting the article, as I have been working on the Automotive industry in New Zealand and this car is significant in relation to its development. It could be the basis of a whole new trend. NealeFamily (talk) 02:27, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
A kitten for you!WIKIPEDIA IS KITTENS! Pppowercurve (talk) 04:22, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Formal mediation has been requestedThe Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Department of Corrections (New Zealand)". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 14 April 2012. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you. Bloomberg Markets Follow-UpHi-there. Last week we discussed edits to the Bloomberg Markets article. I know you may be busy and it fell of your radar, but how do you think it would be best to proceed with these edits? Thanks.--RivBitz (talk) 14:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis MorrisseauYou haven't gotten it wrong. Morrisseau is a gadfly with no accomplishments to speak of in this area, the mostly rural state of Vermont. I suppose every neighborhood has one but they usually don't find their way into Wikipedia, I hope. Vttor (talk) 15:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Article for RJ WilliamsApology for my last deletion to RJ Williams it wasn't meant as vandalism I just noticed several edits were made since that tag was placed--- apparently those changes werent enough so I just went ahead and made several fixes today including adding numerous citations and removing several statements that did not have citations to back it up. I intend to do some more tonight. Please review the page, as I feel most of the issues have been addressed to remove the 2 tags on the page--- if you feel otherwise please go in and make edits you see necessary to remove them as there have been quite a few edits made to the page in the last couple months since the tags. i'm a bit new to wiki so still learning how things work and just trying to understand how/when something meets the requirements of removing a tag. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.231.172.2 (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2012 (UTC) Request for mediation acceptedThe request for formal mediation of the dispute concerning Department of Corrections (New Zealand), in which you were listed as a party, has been accepted by the Mediation Committee. The case will be assigned to an active mediator within two weeks, and mediation proceedings should begin shortly thereafter. Proceedings will begin at the case information page, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Department of Corrections (New Zealand), so please add this to your watchlist. Formal mediation is governed by the Mediation Committee and its Policy. The Policy, and especially the first two sections of the "Mediation" section, should be read if you have never participated in formal mediation. For a short guide to accepted cases, see the "Accepted requests" section of the Guide to formal mediation. You may also want to familiarise yourself with the internal Procedures of the Committee. As mediation proceedings begin, be aware that formal mediation can only be successful if every participant approaches discussion in a professional and civil way, and is completely prepared to compromise. Please contact the Committee if anything is unclear. For the Mediation Committee, WGFinley (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC) Dimensional models of personality disorders AfDHi Stuartyeates. I've responded to your post at the AfD for Dimensional models of personality disorders. You said to ping you if references were found and added to the page (which has happened). I also invite you to see the sources that Robertekraut provided on the AfD page, as they also seem relevant. Thanks, Gobōnobo + c 09:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC) I've moved your investigation request here, since the user had the other name first, it appears we are supposed to add new requests under the old name. I've asked Moonriddengirl if there is some better way to do this. You'll see there is already an open CU request that includes TechnicsSL1200 that has been there a week and was summarized and endorsed yesterday. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 14:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC) Jeff Gold deletionJeff Gold deletion. Hello, I am Jeff Gold aka Jeffrey Gold. Forgive me if this isn't a properly formatted contribution, as I am not wiki literate. It seems you led the charge for the deletion of my article, and so I wanted to clarify a few things. First, Jeff and Jeffrey are both me. Second, as with film or record production, art direction can be a collaborative process and there is often more than a single person involved and credited, thus a shared award. However, I was awarded a Grammy of my own. Third, as you probably noticed, the Grammy website does not archive any nominations beyond the past year. As far as I can tell, there are no sites listing past nominees anywhere except for the Wikipedia page for best recording package, which lists all the past nominations for this award, and on which all of my nominations can be found. I am a frequent Wikipedia user, but had never heard of a sock puppet before this controversy arose, and I'm not sure I understand it fully now. But I can assure you that Jeff and Jeffrey are both me, and that all of the information in that article pertains to me. With all due respect, I hope this clarifies everything, and perhaps you'll rethink your objections in light of this new information. I invite you to contact me with any questions. Recordmecca (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)Recordmecca Sorry, this has been previously de-PRODded, you will have to take it to AfD. 19:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC) New Zealand's Easter gamesCan you create/improve New Zealand's Easter games and add information about it to College athletics? --LauraHale (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC) Jeff Gold againHello and thanks for the tips. I'm wondering if you had a response to my initial message and, if you still have doubts about my career, if there is some way I can clear them up for you. Kind thanks again.Recordmecca (talk) 15:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC) DNZB templateHi Stuart. Thanks for the comment on my page. I have made a comment at Template talk:DNZB which may be of interest to you. cheers. Nurg (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC) DOC mediationI've added an opening comment. If you have any suggestions on changes (now or later in the process) to what I have written please email or edit my talk page. - SimonLyall (talk) 10:44, 22 April 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 23Hi. When you recently edited St. Patrick's College, Silverstream, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Te Heuheu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC) No problem!I felt a bit bored so I thought I give it a quick clean. :)Calaka (talk) 13:18, 25 April 2012 (UTC) PromoJamAlthough I have something against COI/Spam/ad/SPAs, I deprodded PromoJam after improving the article and left a "great" notice at User:PromoJam... mabdul 08:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC) Your contributed article, Oliver Holmes Woodward
Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Oliver Holmes Woodward. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Oliver Woodward. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Oliver Woodward - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page. If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk | Sign 16:13, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Merge of various articles with GAMESS in the titleWhen you propose a merge, it is normal to explain your reasons on the talk page of the target article, thus starting the discussion that the mergeto and mergefrom headers point to. Could you please do so? I do not want to start the discussion myself, as I see no reason to merge these articles, which are now about totally different programs. I await your reasons, before I add to the discussion. --Bduke (Discussion) 06:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC) FormattingAt Wikipedia_talk:Education_Working_Group#Success_metrics I changed your : to a * to get parallel formatting and clarity. If you don't like it you can revert me. Pine(talk) 23:14, 29 April 2012 (UTC) Article about Shampoo (Italian Beatles parody/tribute band)Hello Stuart. Could you please remove the "notability" tag from my article about Shampoo, the band from Naples who parodied the Beatles? Unfortunately I do not have any sources which are more reliable than the ones I used, and the ones I have are all in Italian. I think the page is useful to Beatles fans, who may be interested to find out that not only a tribute band existed in Italy in the early Eighties, but they were very accurate, even if they used parody lyrics. Ugo1970 (talk) 13:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Note on your involvement in the mediationOffender9000's participation is contingent on the discussion happening between me, him, and SimonLyall. You make good points, and I'd prefer if you used Simon as your proxy as you've stated. Xavexgoem (talk) 19:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Dispute resolutionHello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "David E. Henderson, Kit Bigelow". Thank you.
Help with a newbie?Hiya! I've run across you a few times on the AfD board, I believe, and I'm coming to you to ask for your help with an article that's currently up for deletion. I didn't write it, a new user did, and there's been some confusion as to what are considered reliable sources and whether or not an award is considered to be notable per Wikipedia's standards. I'm trying to find people that participate in the computer Wikiproject and while you're not a part of this group, I did notice that you do take part in computer articles and appear to be knowledgable. Can you help the new users at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharepointboost? I will warn you, the discussion did end up running sort of hot and I've walked away from the AfD due to the user berating me for a perceived lack of awareness of SharePoint and the SP community. (Which I will admit is not my strong point, but I'm not entirely unaware of the computing world.) I'm not trying to make the other person look bad, just warning you that you will have to be diplomatic going into this as tempers might already be a little high. Despite sort of getting my hand bitten, I do actually want to help the article itself out in case it is notable. I'm running some of the sources (CMS Wire) through the RS noticeboard and I've asked another user to come in and help out with the article, but they weren't sure if they would have the time, so I'm going around to ask some of the more currently active users out there to come and help.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 10:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Nomination of Elizabeth Mackay for deletion A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Mackay is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Mackay 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 high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. 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. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:48, 17 May 2012 (UTC) St. Patrick's College SilverstreamHi there, Stuartyeates why have you deleted some of the school's most famous Old Boys from the article?? Are you an Old Boy of the school? You labelled as 'not notable' a number of multi-millionaire businessmen, High Court judges, District Court judges, men who have reached the top of New Zealand government and businerss in New Zealand and around the world. Unless you are an expert in the school, it's traditions and Old Boys, please refrain from wholesale deletion of important New Zealanders from the Old Boys lists. Thank you. Nepialegs (talk) 11:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)Nepialegs
Bruce Clark (legal scholar)Re: Coatrack. I have revised the lead first paragraph to account for this understandable mistake. As for editorial COIs, the constitutional question of constitutionalism vs. imperialism is rather like abortion in that it is hard not to have a bias, perhaps virtually impossible. Folks who intuitively feel loyalty to the principle of empire (e.g., the United Empire Loyalists in Canada) are more at ease being pejorative whereas those who favor constitutional restrictions on government power tend to back off saying anything, for fear of their own bias. Maybe so?--Evarose3 (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear Stuart: I have re-written and re-titled the article "Constitutional question of constitutionalism vs. imperialism and the lawyer Bruce Clark, Ph.D." Please be so kind as to review it. It is in my Sandbox. I do not know how to change the title officially or how to get it out of the Sandbox and established the candidate article. Thank you.--Evarose3 (talk) 17:49, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
The ratio decidendi is:—the constitutional question of the paramountcy over a Canadian Crown Government’s and Court’s jurisdiction of an Indian Tribe’s territorial sovereignty pending proof of a surrender, by treaty, is a legitimate and outstanding constitutional question that this Court has never decided, since it has never been tried. Aside from that, the Court expressly and explicitly avowed it decided nothing of precedent value regarding the alleged Indian constitutional interest. Clark was convicted and disbarred for raising the same issue three days later on the ground that the Supreme Court of Canada along with every other of the other some forty courts before which the issue was raised supposedly had tried and decided it. Even so the world still revolves around the sun and, correspondingly the issue is not tried and decided:—the Provincial Court judge on a first appearance on 15 September 1995 could not and did not overrule the Supreme Court of Canada on the same point of law on 12 September 1995. The only standing ratio decidendi is that of the leading case of Delgamuukw v. AGBC, an express and explicit acknowledgment and recognition that Clark’s constitutional question is legitimate and outstanding. Not that it is ever likely to be raised again as an issue given the example established by the conviction and disbarment of Clark for having done so. That presumably was the practical objective of the RCMP’s smear and disinformation. In consequence of it there was no evidence of public pressure to let justice be seen to be done so successfully had Clark been smeared. RCMP Superintendent Len Olfert said, “Kill this Clark, smear the prick and everyone with him.” The smear succeeded so well that for all practical purposes Clark and the issue he identified and defined are both dead. That ain’t no way to treat a legitimate and outstanding constitutional question of jurisdictional law alone, of which the Convention of the Law Society of Upper Canada held in a decision rendered in one of the disbarment attempts against Clark, dated 19 June 1996:
For a period of seven years Mr Clark lived on a native reserve. He is the author of two academic texts on the subject of the rights of the indigenous people of Canada. Although space does not permit a complete summary of Mr Clark’s argument, it is based upon the proposition that certain native lands (or “hunting grounds”) have never been properly surrendered to the Crown. … Finally, Mr Clark argues, by usurping jurisdiction over the indigenous people living on unceded hunting grounds, the Canadian government, the legal establishment and domestic courts are contributing to and are complicit in the genocide of indigenous people. … [I]t is this argument that is at the root of the complaint of professional misconduct that the panel were called upon to deal with. … Mr Clark is remarkably knowledgeable in the area of native rights, and the views that he espouses are honestly and sincerely held. It is accepted also that he believes that his comments as particularized in the complaint were intended to advance the cause of justice and the rule of law. … all of the members of the panel were impressed with [his] presentation, his thoughtful remarks to us, his commitment to his cause, and the obvious sincerity of his beliefs. It is acknowledged that Mr Clark has made very significant family and financial sacrifices in pursuit of his quest for justice for his clients.…[He] has much to offer the legal profession… Mr Clark’s argument is anything but frivolous. It is the product of intensive study, and reflects a belief that Mr Clark sincerely holds. It would be difficult to disagree with Mr Clark’s assertion that the issue that his argument raises is “constitutionally critical”… The “genocide” of which Mr Clark speaks is real, and has very nearly succeeded in destroying the Native Canadian community that flourished here when European settlers arrived. No one who have seen many of our modern First Nation communities can remain untouched by this reality. Mr Clark is not making the kind of argument that fall to most of us daily in our courts; much of the ordinary work of lawyers relates to the interpretation of a will, the proper understanding of a contract, the ownership of a piece of land, or individual culpability for crime. The issue Mr Clark raises is one of great significance for the entire people—and for all of us. … The nature of Mr Clark’s argument is such that the persistent refusal of the courts—he states, without contradiction, that he has attempted to raise this argument on some forty-one times—itself in part engenders his fixed and firm conviction that his argument is correct. The issue itself has not been determined by any Court. We also note that the advocacy in question here took place in the context of a serious issue of public importance. … We do not find his letters abusive or offensive. Nor do we find his statements intemperate or unsupported by the facts used to sustain the argument. Indeed, throughout he has begged to be allowed to develop facts to sustain the argument. It is impossible to say there was no reasonable basis in evidence for the legal positions he asserted; he has always been prepared to make a thorough and comprehensive argument in each case. … Indeed, each of the statements alleged to be intemperate and unjustified flow logically and properly from the submissions he was making respecting jurisdiction. … … In our view, the Law Society has come quite close to asking Mr Clark to refrain from making an argument that he believes to be both well founded in law and in the interest of his clients. … [He] will not give up his argument at least until some court has ruled on it.[1][2] And it does indeed seem he has not given up, as witness W’Lawpsh (i.e., Clark), “Might Is Not Right,” A case study ongoing of Rick Vanguilder of the Mahican Tribe and Gary Metallic of the Mi’maq Tribe v. Canada, France, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Russia, United Kingdom and United States.[3]
"With regard to Bruce Clark’s client’s preliminary objection to the Court’s jurisdiction on the constitutional ground of the Indian Tribes’ territorial sovereignty pending proof of a surrender of it by treaty the Court held, “If you had decided to initiate or if you decide tomorrow morning to initiate in the Supreme Court of British Columbia an action for declaratory relief saying that the British Columbia courts have no jurisdiction, that is a different matter and you could be arguing to the judge that, well, this is an issue that has never been tried.… There is no doubt that it is a constitutional issue. … Is that all you have to say on the constitutional question?”[4]" Maybe it is only machine?--Evarose3 (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
As I said above, what is needed is "independent secondary sources which cover it in plain english (not legalese)." As far as I can see none of the above meets that. I suggest that you re-read what I said above about using a research library to find sources. Your missing paragraph was most likely related to a malformed reference which I just fixed. Please don't send me anything. An unpublished legal analysis is of no use and Justice in Paradise is not independent (sending me scans would probably also be copyright infringement). Stuartyeates (talk) 04:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
|
