| Revision as of 11:23, 23 February 2009 editAlexTiefling (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,225 edits →Civility and consensus: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:35, 23 February 2009 edit undoIronman1104 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,767 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| This mysterious Bogdanor; The doesn't mention him. So can you provide a cite that does? Thanks. --] | ] 16:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | This mysterious Bogdanor; The doesn't mention him. So can you provide a cite that does? Thanks. --] | ] 16:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
| == Civility and consensus == | |||
| Please remain ] in your activities and interactions here on Misplaced Pages. You've now accused me twice of being illiterate; you deleted my attempt to discuss usage with you here, without comment or response. I would urge you to try and seek consensus regarding changes, rather than unilaterally making them. This is especially important when changes may be controversial. Your two attempts to amend the article about the Icelandic prime minister explicitly went against the consensus arrived at on that article's talk page, for example. Please engage in discussion. Being bold is all very well, but when accompanied by ''ad hominem'' remarks and a disregard for process, it does you little credit. ] (]) 11:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:35, 23 February 2009
Barry George
Can you explain the difference between "scientific" and "forensic" for me? I don't understand why you've changed it. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 16:00, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
"Forensic" means "to do with the courts". "Scientific" has its usual meaning. Forensic science is science in the service of the courts. In one sense, all evidence, scientific or not, is "forensic evidence". Ironman1104 12:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- I understand this; I see your point and don't see much to be gained in arguing over it, however; but as a criminologist by qualification and research, we do usually talk about "forensic evidence" when we mean "scientific evidence". Just laxity of language, I suppose --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 12:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
- What was pointless about my change of heading? I have chosen to start a section on the talk page about this. Philip Cross (talk) 10:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Links to the name Pierre
I can give 20ish references to the name Pierre from the Da Vinci Code synopsis! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.3.142 (talk) 11:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
So what? Ironman1104 (talk) 12:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Exactly, you know nothing but judge anyway and call it speculation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.3.142 (talk) 06:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Ken Macdonald
Spent or not the conviction has been widely reported in recent years, and was one of the major issues brought up when he was appointed. As someone working the legal system, he's probably in an exempt profession anyway, so I still think it is not unreasonable to mention the matter in the article. I think we need wider input on this, so I'll take the issue to Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. David Underdown (talk) 11:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Robert Carnwath
I noticed that you moved Robert Carnwath to Robert Carnwath (judge) and I was minded to move it back. There's not usually any need to disambiguate when there is only one Robert Carnwath. Don't want to start a WP:Edit war so please comment.Cutler (talk) 00:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Saw it as description rather than disambiguation, but feel free.Ironman1104 (talk) 16:52, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Friendly fire table
del meaningless and unsourced assertion about 'figures have run'
I agree the phrase is vague - not my line, I just reverted to a previous line - but rather than remove just one reference, perhaps ALL the unsourced estimates should be removed. They all relate back to the line about Pentagon estimates at the top of the table. I forgave the dodgyness of the stats because I thought there ought to be some indicator of numbers of friendly fire deaths through recent history, and researchers need time to find good sources. I'll have a bit of a look myself and if I cant find anything by Monday I'll clean up the table myself - fair enough? Mdw0 (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Fine. Very sensible. Ironman1104 (talk) 08:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Damian Green
This mysterious Bogdanor; The URL cited doesn't mention him. So can you provide a cite that does? Thanks. --Blowdart | 16:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)