User talk:JSIN

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk 23:45, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] JRAHS

Hey James, I'm Daniel. I am from the glorious class of 2003 :)

I don't know Kieren personally but I know of him. My MSN is excusez_moi@hotmail.com Kewpid 12:32, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charles III

I am a 2nd year law dropout, but I have a PhD in Australian history and have read a fair amount of constitutional history. This question of whether the Act of Succession is valid Australian law, and if it isn't what law governs the succession to the position of King/Queen of Australia, is a very interesting one. Do you have any thoughts on it? Adam 07:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Queen of Australia

You asked what non-justiciable means.

It means that a court will say that it is not for it to decide. It is a political question that is inapropriate for a court to decide on (or the like). Xtra 11:05, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Master and Servant Act

Hey James, rather than revert my brief entry on the Australian industrial relations legislation, 2005 with regard to comparisons made with the nineteenth century Master and Servant Act, all you had to do was follow the link to find a reference (Ian West in the NSW Legislative Council). I have since added further references on both articles to justify the comment that comparisons have been made. You may disagree with the comparison, but it has been made in a variety of public forums. Maybe just do a little research before reverting next time. All the best. --Takver 10:27, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

The reference was initially on the Master and Servant Act page. All you needed to do was to follow the link to that article to see the initial reference. I felt I did not need to reference the link on the Australian industrial relations legislation, 2005 article as people could follow the wikilink and find the reference there. But no bother, putting the references on both pages makes for more rigorous referencing which is good for wikipedia. Cheers --Takver 11:11, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely because it has edited from, or was created from, the IP address 216.255.176.250, which has been identified as a probable compromised webhost or open proxy. If you believe this decision to be in error, please contact us at info-en@wikipedia.org and we can discuss releasing this block.

Sincerely, Kelly Martin (talk) 22:16, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, this is in error. I have written to that email address and do look forward to a prompt response and resolution.JSIN 10:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rowdy MPs

I was there and I can assure you they were as rowdy as they could be. Adam 07:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] James Ruse School

I put it there, as you said on the talk page, that the vandalism was particulary from IP addresses, and it really didn't belong in Geography. Jareand 05:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Note

You did not use the correct warning process. Also the page was in edit. Also I put most of the stuff there in the fist place. Skull 'n' Femurs 01:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compliments on your contributions

I have searched through many wikipedia edits. From some of your edits, it appears that you are one of the least biased wikipedia users. I thank you for helping out wikipedia. Words are cheap though. I want to reward you, not with money or material things, but with useful knowledge that very few people have. If interested, email me at " inspector (at) fbi.zzn.com ", and identify yourself. I'll give you a unique verification code that you can post here to verify your email address. An Inspector 04:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

4490. JSIN 01:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Royal Assent

Perhaps the Royal Assent article needs fixing too then? I don't think http://www.opc.gov.au/faq/ is very definitive at all: one of the questions says "What is the process for a Bill to get Royal Assent?" without the "the". enochlau (talk) 09:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, at least I now know that "the" may be found before "Royal Assent", so I won't revert you... in any case I'm not in a rush to get into WP:LAME :P enochlau (talk) 09:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userboxes

I suggest you comment on Wikipedia:Deletion review/Userbox debates. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 11:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment Regarding Fake titles of nobility

You blanked the page in opposition of the redirect to Prescriptive Barony. However, please be more careful next time, as the page had been restored, and then vandalised again to point to Prescriptive Barony. You can see the changes here. Keep in mind that the correct course of action may be to keep it as a redirect. I've reverted back to the version with content, as it was the safest thing to do. Kareeser|Talk! 05:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

(Replied on user talk page.) JSIN 05:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, JSIN. Looking over the history and talk page once more, it seems to be that the correct course of action would have been to restore the page to the redirect, as that seems to be the discussion's proposed solution. Kareeser|Talk! 05:19, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
(Replied on user talk page.) JSIN 05:45, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi again, JSIN. I myself have not read the discussion that pertained to the redirect, therefore, I can't say for sure whether Fake titles of nobility should be redirected to [Prescriptive Barony]]. On the other hand, pehaps you can direct your discussion to Millennium Sentinel, who redirected the article in the first place, or sjorford, who prompted the discussion on the article's Talk:Fake titles of nobility. Kareeser|Talk! 13:55, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Toyota Aurion

Why did you remove the cleanup tag from the Toyota Aurion page? No cleanup work has been done yet, and you did not explain why you removed it. Please avoid doing this in the future, please. --ApolloBoy 02:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

My reason for removal was in the edit summary. JSIN 05:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

If you noticed the main cleanup page, you'll notice I've listed the Aurion page there and offered a rationale. If you don't see a rationale on the talk page, then it's probably on the cleanup page. Next time, don't remove the cleanup tag without searching the cleanup page first. --ApolloBoy 08:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Vaile

We remove the styles from the page title and heading, leave the styles in the photos. Xtra 07:17, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It is just common use on wikipedia. See John Howard, Kim Beazley, Tony Blair. Xtra 07:23, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

That is just the way all commonwealth ministers are done. It is a kind of convention. I don't know of an excact rule, but it is the norm. Xtra 07:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please explain...

this edit... KI 16:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm similarly curious about that revert. I see no need to let that kind of thing linger. Mackensen (talk) 17:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

(Replied on both user talk pages.) JSIN 21:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

There's been something of a consensus just to let his pages be. He's gone and he won't be responding. Naturally that could change, but there's no reason to allow personal attacks to pile up there. Revert (or not) as you see fit. Best, Mackensen (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

(Replied on user talk page.) JSIN 22:37, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Completely. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 22:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australian Mathematics Competition

Hello. I'm writing up this article and thought a JR person could help me (high probability of being mathematically oriented). Do you know what the markscheme for 2003-04 was? I know what it was changed to in 2002, and it was changed to the current version in 2005, but I can't remember if they tweaked it in 2003-04. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:16, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hmmmm

Silly of you to revert my userpage when these morons are around. Xtra 09:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use of rollback

The rationale for the reversion was explained on the category talk page. Please refrain from politicizing non-political articles in the future and resorting to strawman arguments. -Loren 19:17, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Whether or not the edit had merit is beside the point. Rollback should only be used in reverting clear-cut vandalism, and an explanation on the talk page does not make it alright to use it for something that is not vandalism. It is not about politicising non-political articles, but it is about correctness and NPOV. Please explain how my rationale is a strawman argument. I find it offensive that you say so. JSIN 06:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
The strawman argument is that you are focusing on the use of the reversion itself rather then the rationale for using it in this case. Reverts are commonly used in undoing POV edits on multiple articles [1][2] or in fact, any situation where moving the the previous version of an article is warrented [3]. Rather then focusing on the method of the reversion, perhaps you should focus on why it was made. Per guidelines, the reasoning for the reversion was left on the article talk page. -Loren 12:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
My edit was definitely not a blatant violation of NPOV. Taiwan, Province of China is used in a number of contexts and is not saying whether the ROC is illegitimate, etc., or touches on any of that. There is a Taiwan Province of the ROC. There is a Taiwan Province of the PRC (claimed). Thus, Taiwan, Province of China is a perfectly correct and descriptive term. Given the complexities of this issue, it is not easy to label something as deliberately introducing POV. JSIN 13:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Good, we're finally getting somewhere with this discussion. Referring to Taiwan as a province (whether under the ROC or PRC) is in itself a point of view that is not universally shared. Neutrality dictates that we use the broadest applicable term, in this case, the Taiwan article which refers to the geographical region. The issue of political status is covered under that article. This is a sensitive issue, and you may wish to refer to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Political NPOV: The term "province of Taiwan" can be offensive and should only be used when attributed to its source or referring specifically to the existing division under the ROC (for example, "James Soong was the only popularly elected governor of Taiwan Province"). -Loren 17:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Turns out I was right, if a little slow

Remembering asking me to revert this edit of mine? Well, see this. Aumakua 03:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too much stuff on JRAHS page

Why don't you check the other pages for high schools out James? Alphabeta777 08:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ejaculation

Video of an ejaculation

The file you added back (again) does not exist, and has not for some time. Please don't add it back to the article until that issue is fixed.

Also, we appreciate your addition of another ejaculation image. However, we are discussing which image, or if there are other images that better add to the quality of the article. Please see the discussion page, where your image and another are two under consideration. Please add your feedback to help us gain consensus in that discussion. Thanks! Atom 13:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] potatoes play a part...

Nitpicky, I know, but they don't form a part of the culture (since tubers don't in themselves do anything in a cultural sense), but they do play a role in the culture (in the sense of a prop).

Now that I'm thinking of it, they actually are just important to, since I suppose they don't really play either, so I'll move it to that. (In one of my odd grammatical moods this morning, had popped by the page to look for vandalism). --SB_Johnny|talk|books 12:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see (oops!). --SB_Johnny|talk|books 13:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Westfield Eastgardens

This article, along with a whole bunch of others, was merged in contravention of a recent discussion that established that there was absolutely no consensus to do so. The articles that they were merged to now redirect to The Westfield Group, as having demerged, they served no useful purpose whatsoever. Rebecca 10:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hey :-)

--dionyziz 09:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC).

i am a Chinese and i saw what you talked in this website,i really like what you said about Taiwan Province,so i want to make frinds with you ! can you add me ?my MSN is Blue_icy_summer@hotmail.com i love Jay very much !i can give you a lot of information include photos of him to you !

[edit] Ejaculation image delete debate

You may be interested in participating in the Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2007_January_28#Image:Ejaculation_sample.jpg discussion. Atom 21:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/s/i/User_talk%7EJSIN_e20b.html"