Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:53, 28 May 2005

Welcome!

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

• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

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! -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:42, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

GG as head of state...

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. I note your interest in Australian constitutional issues, and thank you for your approach of asking on the discussion page before editing what has been a rather controversial topic in Government of Australia.

My detailed response to your comments about the head of state issue is on Talk:Government of Australia. I look forward to seeing your further comments.--Robert Merkel 00:26, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I apologise if i upset you - Wiki has been through a bad patch of POV pushers from the Left and Right and so people are a little twitchy. I only use my admin powers when requested after gertting involved in the whole German-Polish arguments over Danzig and Silesia articles. PMA 03:27, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing with me that magnificent picture of Dupont Circle. I've never been to Washington, I just liked the name Dupont Circle so chose it as Misplaced Pages username. Dupont Circle 08:15, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Governor-General of Australia

Hello,

Regarding your message, I have taken a look and don't believe User:Dlatimer broke the three revert rule. The three revert rule applies if there are more than three reverts, and here there were exactly three.

He reverted your change at 23:38, at 23:59, and at 03:07–03:09 (using UTC times). He made two consecutive edits at 03:07 and 03:09, but there were no other users' edits in between. Sometimes users use two or more edits to make a change: you yourself made two edits at 20:37–20:45 and three edits at 23:45–23:52.

Regarding the editing dispute, I don't really have an opinion, I'm not knowledgeable about fine points of constitutional law and historical precedent.

In general, you can report 3RR violations at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR.

-- Curps 06:36, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Archiving: I went control-A, control-X to pick up all the text, then typed ] on the blank page, then saved the page. I then opened the new page (Talk:Governor-General of Australia/Archive1) thus created, and went control-V to dump the old text into the new page, which I then saved. Adam 03:36, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Government of Australia

Really? Well, then you should state who those people. You did not, hence you got reverted. Incidently, it's highly dubious to say that we are a republic, and I am not part of the ALP, and not really all that supportive of the ARM (though I am currently toeing the status quo). I suggest if you want to argue this point, you provide specific sources for your edits and perhaps edit an Australian republicanism article to clarify this information and then wikilink to that article in your next edit. Until then, don't put it back or I'll lock the page. - Ta bu shi da yu 06:26, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

WP:AN/3RR formatting

I don't know what you are doing that keeps breaking /3RR by duplicating large chunks of text, but please avoid doing so! Until you have the problem figured out, after making a change please look at the history and do a "diff" to make sure that the change you actually made was the change you thought you made. (And I hope the same problem isn't happening with any articles you have worked on!) In fact, you might want to do that on all changes anyway - I always do, just to check. Noel (talk) 13:13, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

PS: I don't usually check other User_talk: pages (so that I don't have to monitor a whole long list of User_Talk: pages - one for each person with whom I am having a "conversation"), so please leave any messages for me on my talk page (above); if you leave a message for me here I probably will not see it. I know not everyone uses this style (they would rather keep all the text of a thread in one place), but I simply can't monitor all the User_talk: pages I leave messages on. Thanks!

Yeah, I didn't have anything obvious to suggest, or I would have done so previously. Interestingly, you're not the only person to be having problems with this (see for instance this edit), so maybe there is a bug with XP/IE6 and Misplaced Pages somehow. You might want to compare notes with User:Jdforrester and see if there's a common thread. I note that in his case too, it seems he made this edit, and then immediately made another edit, perhaps just by hitting the "back" button, which sounds similar to one of your problems. But with this edit of yours there was no preciding edit, so it's not that simple. All I can suggest is that you make sure to hit the "refresh" button before doing an edit, and also maybe you could do some testing on a Misplaced Pages:sub-page of your User: page to see if you can reproduce the problem in a simpler (and repeatable) way. Noel (talk) 13:49, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

3RR violation

Hi, you and your jousting partner have both been blocked for 24 hours for a WP:3RR violation on Government of Australia:

Skyring:

• 00:44, 3 Mar 2005
• 02:52, 3 Mar 2005
• 03:55, 3 Mar 2005
• 04:49, 3 Mar 2005

Adam Carr:

• 02:43, 3 Mar 2005
• 03:48, 3 Mar 2005
• 04:04, 3 Mar 2005
• 07:20, 3 Mar 2005

Please work this out on the talk page before getting into an edit war, or use Misplaced Pages's dispute resolution process to avoid an edit war. We really frown on edit wars. Noel (talk) 03:22, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Since User:Geni pulled the block on you, I have removed the block on Adam CArr too. I have simply locked the page instead. Work it out on the talk page, and then I'll unlock it. Noel (talk) 04:30, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your conduct and mine

It is very rare for me to use that kind of language at Misplaced Pages. I did so in your case not because I disagreed with your views, but because I finally had enough of your conceited, flippant, condescending and generally insufferable attitude. The straw that broke the camel's back was your stupid and insulting "Tibet" answer to a serious question. I won't be treated like that by anybody. You have not succeeded of persuading anyone of your views, so I suggest you go and do something else. (Don't reply to this message because I don't intend continuing to argue with you.) Adam 08:44, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Apparently incoming arbitration case

You should probably be informed that Ed Poor is bringing a request for arbitration against Adam Carr for this comment previously directed at you. It seems likely that you will want to comment on this request, and urge you to do so. -- Grunt 🇪🇺 20:12, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

A note

I have left you a note at Talk:Government of Australia and thought I would take the additional step of coming here to talk to you directly. Adam Carr is a very bright person and an excellent contributor here, but I know his temper is often quick. When he was angered by you initially, I was very willing to assume that he was at least partially at fault. Perhaps you knew this about Adam before your conflict with him started....I don't know. Anyway, Michael Snow and I are generally known (when we are known at all in this community) for being extraordinarily patient and compromising on virtually all issues -- we take great care with our words and actions here because it's important to us not to lose our tempers or say something unkind. When you have both of us saying you're going too far, that is a very good indication that you have, in fact, gone too far. I'm not saying this to be proud -- goodness knows I screw things up here on occasion. But you're an editor who I can tell has good things to offer, and you're wasting a lot of good will right now for no apparent reason, playing games with verb tenses. Exhausting Adam's patience happens -- he shouldn't be unkind, and when he is, people here talk to him about it, but if it happens now and then, people won't necessarily assume you're off-base. Exhausting the patience of normally very patient editors is another thing entirely, and you should take it as a red flag -- certainly I can think of many other editors who will. I hope you do also. If you're not clear about what I mean, leave me a note and I'll explain as best I can....but I think you do know what I mean, and I hope you'll do what you can to correct your approach here in the future. Jwrosenzweig 00:48, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A selection from your comments

Here are a few statements you've made at various points in the debate that illustrate the kind of problem I'm getting at:

I prove you wrong time and again, and you just pretend it didn't happen.

Stop making stuff up, Adam. It's not helping.

I suppose, following your reasoning, if I provided quotes from two different people showing contradictory views, you would either accuse me of holding both views at the same time, or whatever view best suited your purposes.

Continued dishonesty is likewise unattractive.

I am calling your bluff.

you display blatant hypocrisy

None of them were directed at me and I don't take personal offense at them, but I think it clear that this kind of comment is counterproductive. In general, your tone is frequently sarcastic and mocking - when you do this, it may feel like you are scoring points in the debate, but the practical effect is that it creates the impression you have nothing constructive to add, you're just interested in tearing down your opponents. I'm not saying this is true; it's just easy for people to develop that image of you.

Also, I'm not arguing that you're the only person at fault. Nor am I trying to single you out for criticism, except in the sense that you're showing a willingness to listen and act on it, which is what makes the effort of discussing the problem worthwhile. --Michael Snow 07:37, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I would second Michael's comments here. First, thanks for avoiding resorting to outright personal abuse, even when others have directed it at you. That's commendable, in my book. Also, thanks for your efforts to make peace ("...we're going to have to work together on this, Adam. I'm not really out to make your life a misery. As I've said a couple of times now, you're a better writer of this sort of stuff than I am, and you probably work best when you aren't under the pressure of a nit-picking old curmudgeon like me breathing down your neck..."). However, as Michael's list indicates, some of your comments are not particularly civil, that is, they are not conducive to an amicable editing environment; and some are personal attacks. I would add, "Adam's continued refusal to do so is indicative of a certain state of mind outside normal behaviour." to the above list. One tip is that, when you post, try to write only on the matters under debate, and avoid commenting negatively on the behaviour of other participants. — Matt Crypto 11:46, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Greetings Monsenior

How would you suggests I present my cases to Dr. Carr? I do not want conflict but the material is current and valid. Greco-Turkish relations. What do you think? --Cool Cat 01:52, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You happen to be a history person? --Cool Cat 01:52, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Queen and Governor-General

I am well aware of that. But legally and constitutionally the Governor-General is the representative of the Queen. It is by virtue of being the representative of the Queen that the drafters of the 1900 Act gave him those powers, not because of whom he is. Australia is a what is sometime called a nominal chief executive system, with the Queen as its nominal chief executive.

Our type of head of state, the Nominal Chief Executive, must be sharply distinguished from the other two types common in modern democracies. The Chief Executive such as the President of the United States, is head of government as well as head of state and acts in governing the country in a similar way to the way the Prime Minister does here. The Non Executive head of state, as in Ireland or Sweden, exercises relatively minor constitutional powers, most executive power being given directly to the government or parliament or its officers. It is important to note the basic difference because some publications state that both Australia and Ireland have Non Executive heads of state, thus masking the dependence of our system on the basic constitutional convention for its democracy.3

3 The three types of head of state are taken from Jim Duffy, 'Ireland', in Republic Advisory Committee, Report, vol. 2, pp. 154 - 5.

Maintaining Our Democracy in Monarchy or Republic
Paper presented to the Australian Institute of International Affairs
Dyason House, 124 Jolimont Toad, East Melbourne on 31 July 1997.
The Hon. Richard E. McGarvie AC

There are three distinct kinds of head of state in modern democracies.1 There is the Chief Executive, found in the United States where the head of state is also head of government and has and exercises extensive, important powers. That head of state should be elected. There is the Nominal Chief Executive, as in Australia, who has and exercises important powers which are not as extensive as those of the US President but which go to the heart of our system of government. The Constitution gives the Governor-General legal discretion to exercise them at choice or, in the case of powers of the Governor-General in Council which must be exercised only on Ministers’ advice, to decline to exercise them at choice. The glue that binds the Governor-General to the democratic process in exercising those powers and gives us responsible government is the basic constitutional convention. That convention binds the Governor-General to exercise the powers as advised by the Ministers of the government elected by the community in elections. A Nominal Chief Executive head of state should not be elected by either Parliament or the electorate. There is also the Non Executive head of state as in Ireland and Sweden who has under the Constitution only a few powers of relatively minor importance. It does not matter much whether the Non Executive head of state is elected or not. Ireland has an elected President. Sweden has a King.

RESPONSIBLE LAWYERS AND THE REPUBLIC DEBATE
Article published in Young Lawyers, June 1997, p.2
FearÉIREANNFile:Ireland flag large.png\ 01:08, 18 May 2005 (UTC)