User talk:Jimbobjoe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Welcome!

Hello, Jimbobjoe, 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, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! EdwinHJ | Talk 23:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Age of consent

Hi and welcome, thank you for your edit of age of consent the opinion of the US courts is a interesting sidenote. However the phrase "but often inaccurately" may be leaning toward a point of view WP:NPOV. The term "Statutory rape" is used in many places in this way, no matter how harsh or unfair the lable may be in some cases. Perhaps you could reconsider this? Thanks :) Monotonehell 12:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

The text you left on my talk page helps me understand your edit. But as you stated "...it doesn't explain things..." as it stands. I think the best idea (since we're trying to both reduce the size of the AoC article and improve it) would be to add a side note that there's some contraversy over the term and link to the Statutory rape page since it goes into the matter in depth and duplicating text on WP is kinda redundant with this new fangled hypertext idea ;). What do you think? Monotonehell 18:33, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm having troubles putting the link in briefly without creating a POV. I guess the harsh fact is that it is considered rape because the minor is not able _under law_ to give consent. The key here is to introduce the debate while staying neutral on the topic. How about something like..?
Sexual relations with a person under a juristriction's age of consent is in general a criminal offense, with punishments ranging from token fines to life imprisonment. The legal term also varies with region. Terms include unlawful carnal knowledge, (possibly stick more terms here) and Statutory rape. A debate exists in some quarters over the use of the term Statutory rape in certain cases (see that page for more detail).
Monotonehell 08:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes in some regions the law gives different terminology for different situations. But I think the fact remains that there is a term Statutory rape and in some juristrictions that label is applied where the AoC is (in some people's opinion) quite high. I don't like the term myself at all. I'm of the opinion that consentual sexual contact between two persons should never be called rape as it dilutes the term rape which is a personal assult. BUT that's the point I guess - it's an opinion POV doesn't belong in academic writing, except where an opinion is being critiqued.
I think I've forgotten what it was we were trying to do. XD Maybe that would actualy help the process; actually setting out what it is we are trying to achieve with this edit. Are we trying to point out that there is debate over the use of the term? Monotonehell 00:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Pchst I put my reply to you on my talk page -- Monotonehell 16:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ohio

Actually, I didn't "remove" the Economist quote - but I did move it into the main text. The reason is that the lead should not contain material that is not in the main text. I liked the quote as well, I just felt it belonged in the main text instead. About the Native Americans, I felt that it should continue its place in the lead, both to reference the materials that do exist, and perhaps to encourage further development of the topic. You up for adding more there? Tidying_Up t 04:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)