User talk:Coolcaesar/Archive3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive of User talk:Coolcaesar for 3 March 2008-20 December 2009:

Contents

your picture of Marina del Rey[edit]

Coolcaesar,

I just wanted to thank you for your nice picture of Marina del Rey on its wikipedia page. I appreciate you taking your time to post it.

Sincerely,

Mike Upton —Preceding unsigned comment added by MikeUpton (talkcontribs) 12:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

your picture of the Ziggurat in West Sacramento[edit]

Hi Coolceasar,

I was just wondering if I could use it for a short piece on MIMOA[1]. I can credit you with your name and/or website. I'd love to hear from you at robinberghuys at gmail dot com. Sincerely,

Robin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.160.86.234 (talk) 21:41, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of shopping malls in the United States[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

An editor has nominated List of shopping malls in the United States, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shopping malls in the United States (3rd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

California Highway Patrol[edit]

Please do not delete credible, sourced, and encyclopedically significant material to intentionally bias an article with a particular point of view. Thank you. Adraeus (talk) 06:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I have the right person. Since you think you are not, however, you are likely to have unintentionally deleted my contribution when you reverted the other user's deletions. See the section Incidents of corruption? If that is the case, my apologies for coming on strong. Adraeus (talk) 07:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply[edit]

I know :P I was parodying Carl Rogers from the newsgroup misc.transport.road. seicer | talk | contribs 05:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Ciscosystemsheadquarters.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

A tag has been placed on Image:Ciscosystemsheadquarters.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Ciscosystemsheadquarters.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Gary King (talk) 03:25, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Talk:Facebook[edit]

Just wanted to tip you off, there's been a reply on Talk:Facebook about your question regarding your image showing the Facebook headquarters. You've clearly been putting the hard yards in. Thanks. John Nevard (talk) 15:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Courts of the United States[edit]

Greetings, friend!! Thanks for backing me up on Law clerk. Would you be interested in helping me round out Courts of the United States? I'm looking to add links (red or not) for every level or type of court in every state, with external links if possible to back them up. Should make for a good linkfarm for people looking to grow articles on those courts. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi - last thing, I'd like to add an external link for each U.S. District Court. Please feel free to throw some in. Cheers! bd2412 T 05:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

WMF Image deletion[edit]

RE: Closed deletion review discussion - You could have asked me, being the one who deleted it. I did try to email you when I deleted the image, but your email is not enabled. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It would help to have your e-mail enabled. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 23:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
If you choose not to enable your e-mail, then please e-mail me through my enabled link. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 01:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I would likewise email you, but here is fine; I'm not posting as a representative of the foundation in any form, but just as one Wikipedian to another. This is a bit odd, and possibly alarming for you, but I hope you don't get discouraged by this. Whatever's driving this, I'm sure it's not spite. Given a particular sort of mindset, you might even find it amusing, in a way. Anyhow, just checking in on you. If you're feeling bummed, feel free to leave me a note. – Luna Santin (talk) 13:35, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, would love to hear from you myself. :) May I email you? --Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
How come I don't get messages like that Face-grin.svg -- Avi (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Email[edit]

Understood. However, you can use an anonymous gmail address, and you can encrypt any communication if you are worried about being identified. As for "out in the open conversation", in general I completely agree with you. However, there are times when the safety and privacy of people require that certain communication not be publicized. This is one of them. If you are willing to take our word for it, fine. If not, I would counsel contacting myself or User:Rjd0060 who may be able to explain a bit more. Thankfully, your comments about why you do not have e-mail enabled indicate that you do understand that there are exogenous privacy and safety issues that need to be addressed, which we in m:OTRS do on a daily basis. Thank you for responding. -- Avi (talk) 14:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Certainly, I'd like to correspond with the founder of Wikipedia[edit]

I am certainly interested in discussing with you via email the reasons for the office action removing the photograph I uploaded, but I will have to look into getting an anonymous email account established on Gmail first. Several friends and relatives have been encouraging me to set up a Gmail account for over a year. But I am very busy with work and with personal matters at the moment, so it will take several days before I put aside a few hours to sign up for Gmail and figure out how it works. Anyway, I suppose you and the Board are presently busy with Wikimania in Alexandria. I will let you know when the account is established.--Coolcaesar (talk) 05:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you simply use your normal email account, the one you used to vote in the board election?--Jimbo Wales (talk) 04:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lexisnexisacademicuniversescreen.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Lexisnexisacademicuniversescreen.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 17:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:Starbucksbofacombodrivethru.jpg[edit]

Image:Starbucksbofacombodrivethru.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Starbucks and Bank of America Drive Through.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Starbucks and Bank of America Drive Through.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Starbucksbofacombodrivethru.jpg is now available as Commons:Image:Starbucks and Bank of America Drive Through.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
File:Amrambulance.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Amrambulance.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:03, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
File:Blockbustervideostore.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Blockbustervideostore.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:38, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
File:Pilottravelcenter.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Pilottravelcenter.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 04:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
File:Brownofficebuilding.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Brownofficebuilding (1).jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Caltranstruck.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Caltranstruck.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 09:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Cityofglendale.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Cityofglendale.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Endfreewaysign.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Endfreewaysign.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 09:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Espressodrivethru.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Espressodrivethru.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 09:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Safewaysupermarketolderdesign.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Safewaysupermarketolderdesign.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Safewaystore.jpg is now available as Commons:File:21st century Safeway store.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Safewayheadquarters.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Safewayheadquarters.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Travelocityonlocation.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Travelocityonlocation.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 14:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Eastlosangeleswelcomesign.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Eastlosangeleswelcomesign.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 19:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
File:Wienerschnitzelrestaurant.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Wienerschnitzelrestaurant.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 03:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
File:Arcostation.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Arcostation, LA.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 03:41, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
File:Paloaltoveteransaffairshospital.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Paloaltoveteransaffairshospital.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:53, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
File:Redwoodcitypanorama.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Redwoodcitypanorama.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
File:Newchevrongasstation.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Newchevrongasstation.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
File:Stanleymosklibraryandcourtsbldg.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Stanleymosklibraryandcourtsbldg.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Departmentstoreinterior.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Interior of a typical Macy's department store.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Paradisevillagegatedcommunity.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Paradisevillagegatedcommunity.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Usmailcontractor.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Usmailcontractor.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Usmailcontractor.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Usmailcontractor.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Venturacityhall.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Venturacityhall.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Staplescenter2.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Staplescenter2.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Thrutrafficmergeleft.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Thrutrafficmergeleft.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Westwoodskyline.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Westwoodskyline.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Caltrainterminal.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Caltrainterminal.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 18:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Massachusettsmedicalsocietyheadquarters.jpg is now available as Commons:File:Massachusettsmedicalsocietyheadquarters.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Curious as to why you seem to be underutilizing your Commons account[edit]

Since uploading your images here qualifies them for migration there anyway, why not upload more there or only there directly anyway and cut the uploading process down to just 1 step instead of creating 2 (here, then a migration)? --BrokenSphereMsg me 06:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I have to say that as much as I like Commons, continuous changes to the uploading interface especially may make it troublesome for certain users. As for tracking image vandalism, I just watchlist all my uploads.
Just wondering, are you in a firm or in-house? You seem to be doing a fair amount of traveling. BrokenSphereMsg me 14:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
I see. I'm a paralegal myself at a firm in Palo Alto. Actually I would like to contact you outside of Wikipedia channels if this is OK with you since I am looking to switch jobs. You don't have an email enabled, but I have, so if it's easier for you, feel free to drop me a line via that method, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrokenSphere (talkcontribs) 21:28, September 13, 2008
Thanks anyways, it was worth asking. I'll check back in with you down the road depending on what my situation happens to be. Cheers. BrokenSphereMsg me 14:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

north baltimore Aquatic Club photo[edit]

I was planning on stopping by and taking this, so thanks! you helped me avoid a noticeable detour dm (talk) 03:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Your recent comments[edit]

Hi Coolcaesar. I've seen you around various articles I've worked on, so I know you're not a new user and don't need instruction on Wikipedia policy. However, I hope you're kidding when you say that User:Remember the dot and others are guilty of vandalism/trolling and deserve to be banned from the project. You say, "The original discussion should have been raised on the talk page for the city naming guideline to begin with and should have been moved there immediately after it was started". The guideline itself calls for using WP:RQM, so he can't be blamed if you don't like where he started the discussion. Regardless, starting a discussion in the wrong place is nowhere near a bannable offense. As for the larger issue of U.S. city conventions, I think it's a matter on which reasonable people can disagree. I gather that you think any page move from "City, State" to "City" constitutes vandalism and is a bannable offense. Could you point me to the policy or guideline that supports this view? szyslak (t) 11:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I think you should get with it[edit]

"Get with the 21st century and buy a computer with a Pentium. And get a DSL, cable or satellite connection" is totally uncalled for. I think you should get with the 21st century, open your eyes, and look around. Not everyone can afford these things. I though UCLA law school graduates were somewhat intelligent. On the other hand, maybe I'm being too naive, and I shouldn't believe everyone's user page claims. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

Please do not conflate a legitimate user name change with sockpuppetry. Thanks. --Serge (talk) 20:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the Expressway article removal of content[edit]

It was probably justified for you to remove the section that was left unreferenced for a long time, and it was also probably justified to classify it as a false friend, but I did not appreciate your insult. As I've seen you take a distinct stance toward mentions of road transportation in Europe, I'm warning you to discuss on talk page before removing referenced sections (this one was not) and to stay away from personal insults and "rumors" about school system. We've got our own jokes about Americans here in Croatia and I doubt you'd want to hear them. Admiral Norton (talk) 15:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


Hail Caeser's pier photos[edit]

Hello. I was wondering if your Manhattan Beach Pier and Hermosa Beach Pier photos would be good to put on those articles? I know they are already used on other articles. Do you have other photographs of these sights? Just wondering, I'm inexperienced with photos on Wikipedia so I'm tentative to try anything myself.ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

On the Community college article[edit]

I responded here. --Toussaint (talk) 22:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Date[edit]

Regarding the edit I made back in January on Westwood, Los Angeles, California, I only made edited that because I thought it was the correct date, the same time the crime happened in that area almost 21 years ago. Agtax 23:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Please refrain from making personal attacks[edit]

You wrote: "It's pretty clear that you haven't traveled enough or haven't extensively used map software like Microsoft Streets & Trips (I assume probably because you can't afford either) to understand the magnitude of the problem." [1].

Wikipedia:No personal attacks says: "Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor."

Never mind that you totally missed the point (hint: PMAnderson got it), I consider your comment a personal attack and do not appreciate it. Statements about what software one hasn't used, how rarely one has traveled, or what one can afford are all comments about the contributor, not the content of what has been written. --Born2cycle (talk) 04:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Law of the United States[edit]

Did you remove the section on Further Readings from this article? I suggest you review WP:Civility, especially the parts concerning:

  • Rudeness
  • Insults and name-calling
  • Judgmental tone in edit summaries (e.g. "snipped rambling crap") or talk-page posts ("that is the stupidest thing I have ever seen")"

"These behaviors can all contribute to an uncivil environment." Then I request you put back the list of sources you removed and review the article guidelines for sections on "Further reading" at WP:Layout. Failure to comply with this request will result in further action. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 03:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I see your previous edits at Talk:Law of the United States have been cleaned up a bit to remove references to "most of that garbage" and "dumb edits" from your message of 12 December at 17:55, reminiscent of (and about as effective as) the old Perry Mason admonition that "the jury will disregard that statement." However, your manner remains extremely condescending, offensive, and your argument inconsistent at best.
It was certainly a thrill to see the works of some of the best legal minds in the law of the United States denigrated as "garbage" (Benjamin Cardozo, H.L.A. Hart, Thurgood Marshall, Roscoe Pound, Warren Burger, K. Llewellyn). One may only presume that your own publications (contributions to Wikipedia?) are far superior to theirs. Yet at the same time you decry the lack of references for the lay person, apparently ignoring those by Griswold, Dees, Lewis, Stone, and Nizer, all of which are quite accessible to the lay reader. Quixotic, or merely arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion? Perhaps consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds?
It took considerable effort to compile and annotate all those references, only to see you trash them. I request you take a step back and ask yourself whether this article exists merely for you to express your preferences, or if it really is an attempt to compile an encyclopedia. And consider please, what portion of your efforts would you like to see destroyed in such a manner?
Having written many encyclopedia articles for general audiences (as well as several books and a few articles in American law journals), I can fairly say that, based on my experience, they generally include a list of references for further reading. This article does not.
Your single-minded adherence to a single author, Friedman, doesn't serve the reader well (or your advocacy position). If you wish to have a discussion about which titles should be retained, and which might be more appropriate elsewhere, we can do that after you restore the references. But arbitrarily deleting the entire section without discussion is a bit severe and unwarranted. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
The question's been raised at Talk:Law of the United States#Further reading, and I've commented in a #Responses subsection. . . dave souza, talk 10:31, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Civility in edit summaries[edit]

Coolcaesar, I was somewhat surprised to see the confrontational tone in this edit summary.[2] From what I've seen, you're normally a very productive editor. Could you please try to adopt a more professional tone in comments and edit summaries? The caps really aren't necessary. Thanks, --Elonka 05:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Coolceaser, I find your most recent statement on Talk:Law of the United States not only uncivil but personally insulting. Enough with the rudeness and personal attacks, already. I don't understand why you only appear here to vent. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 19:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Diff, please, Mervyn. If it's the edit I looked at, it seemed a reasonable attempt to answer your tendentious refusal to contemplate using your favorite books as references for specific points in the article, or failing that to focus on a very short list that you wish to advocate as essential reading for newcomers to US law. . dave souza, talk 19:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Law of the US[edit]

Looking around, I just noticed some terse exchanges about the further reading list, which I'd pasted in there. FYI, this was pasted onto the law page, and I just wanted to put it somewhere more appropriate. Also, I created a few pages about American law: US tort law, US contract law and US corporate law, and collected bits and pieces and tried to organise them. Do you feel like having a go at writing something on one of those? What areas do you practice in? Wikidea 15:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Los Altos Photo Usage[edit]

Hello Coolcaesar, I am redesigning the Los Altos Village Association web site. While searching for images of downtown Los Altos I came across a great photo you posted on Wikipedia. It is titled "Mainstreetlosaltos.jpg" and was shot August 17, 2005.

May the Los Altos Village Association have permission to use it or a portion of it as part of the street scenes which will head each page of the new web site?

I would be happy to include photo credit as you wish. Please let me know if this is acceptable.

Rhull2 (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhull2 (talkcontribs) 21:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposal to delete[edit]

Please give us a thumbs up or down whether we should delete Global city in Talk:Global_city#Proposal_to_delete_references_to_.22Global_City.22_in_city_articles Kransky (talk) 14:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Personal attacks[edit]

I respectully request you review WP:Personal attacks, and especially the lead paragraph that says:

"Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks will not help you make a point; they hurt the Wikipedia community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about another contributor may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to blocks."

It is always disappointing to see such a cramped and narrow view of the content and practice of the law, especially in a profession where reasoning by analogy is essential to success. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 18:43, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

---

As an A student at a 1st Tier law school I would urge you, Coolcaesar, to consider removing a portion of your comments in the Hearsay talk. Your comment about 4the Tier law students is unprofessional and unbecoming anyone educated at UCLA, Harvard or Hamline. --Geofferic (talk) 01:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Photos on Uniform Commercial Code[edit]

Hi, I like the photos you put on the UCC article. Honestly, I never even would have thought to add pictures to that article. --Eastlaw talk ⁄ contribs 07:46, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

JD article mediation[edit]

Mediation for changes proposed by Wikiant to the JD article has been initiated Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/juris_doctor. Since you have been a frequent contributor to the discussion page, I thought I would let you know. Mediation is open to participation by all interested editors. Zoticogrillo (talk) 10:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Photo of YouTube headquarters[edit]

A while back, some concerns were expressed about whether this picture was an up to date version of YouTube's headquarters. It shows 1000 Cherry Avenue, and the current address of YouTube's headquarters is given as 901 Cherry Avenue.[3][4]. Please could you clarify the situation if you are familiar with YouTube's San Bruno headquarters.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 09:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Bill of Attainder[edit]

Thanks for restoring Bill of Attainder. I didn't even notice the earlier vandalism! Reydeyo (talk) 04:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Very sorry[edit]

Hello Coolcaesar

I am very sorry for the inconvenience of adding Salt Lake City as an alternative headquarters for eBay. I was mistaken. Thank you for removing it.


Sha721 (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

trademark use[edit]

I see you are a lawyer. I put an (R) mark after a copyrighted name, Goldfish (snack). Someone took it down and said not to put it back.

What is your opinion about the (R) mark. I think if you don't put it, you are legally wrong. I'm not so interested in it that I'll fight for it but I just wanted to know.

Thank you. Contino (talk) 01:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

POV, COI, and deletion of sourced quote[edit]

Could you please not delete relevant and sourced material from an article, as you did in Lawyer at least twice[5][6] already? Ambrose Bierce's The Devil's Dictionary is a cultural classic, this short sourced quote is quasi universal and perfectly relevant in the context of a section entitled "Cultural perception of lawyers". Calling such quote in such place "POV" and "original research" and "systemic bias" is thrice inappropriate and has the appearance of wikilawyering, especially when using overly formal summaries such as "Countermand POV and original research which also violates the systemic bias guideline" that reek with false authority. Actually, as a lawyer yourself, your POV-pushin may be seen as a Wikipedia:Conflict of interest when trying to suppress such cultural quote even in a minor section of this article.

...Continued with positive suggestions at Talk:Lawyer  The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 15:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: Also a separate thread at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard  The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 19:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Parkingticketcontract.jpg[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Parkingticketcontract.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 23:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Now Commons[edit]

File:Wd40headquarters.jpg, an image uploaded to Wikipedia from this account in April 2008 (log), was transferred to Commons with the new filename File:WD-40 Headquarters.jpg (Commons:File:WD-40 Headquarters.jpg) by GeorgHH. — Athaenara 23:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Catch-22[edit]

Hi, civility issues aside, I'm somewhat amused by our debate over "Catch-22" at Legal aid in the United States. Anyway, a Catch-22 is circular logic in the book; and in general loose usage, it's at least a No-win situation, which doesn't apply since the two things described aren't choices. (One doesn't choose to be too rich to qualify for legal aid, nor does one choose to be too poor to pay an attorney in private practice.) Finally, it's not circular logic since with legal aid set at an appropriate level anyone too poor to pay an attorney will get legal aid. I'm not bothered about the idiom, but please don't re-add Catch-22, because it doesn't apply. Rd232 talk 04:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD[edit]

Since you are interested in Pomona College you might want to check out this AfD of a professor's bio: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick Sontag. Borock (talk) 20:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

United States[edit]

Hey Julius (Caesar)! The reason I am writing is to let you know that there will be no more United States edits from me!!
Thanks for the entertainment, pal. I will now try to find something else to do. Have you any positive suggestions? B. Fairbairn  Talk  20:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

titles section of lawyer article[edit]

I have respectfully respondend to the issues you raised concerning the titles secton of the Lawyer article. I hope that I have done so reasonably and in an unoffensive manner. Zoticogrillo (talk) 09:50, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

I wanted your opinion on a few edits of mine. I edited a bit of Transportation in the United States, cleaned up the article a bit, and standarised a few refs and also put repeated refs under one name. Just tell me your thoughts on them please. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

personal attacks[edit]

Hi, I am the individual to whom you have directed your personal attacks on the J.D. talk page. I am a real person. I have tried very hard to treat you with respect, which is why I made sure that my comments on the Lawyer talk page re titles were cogent and complete. Despite your assertions of superiority, I have avoided your personal comments and have addressed only the ideas presented. It is possible that you are unaware of the effect of your comments--many editors hastily submit comments in this informal venue without complete consideration, as have I. I believe that you have stated that you are a practicing attorney. I have enjoyed learning from many mentors the advantages that careful professional conduct can have in the practice of law. Some attorneys believe that personally attacking their adversaries is the most effective mode of advocacy, but I have observed that they usually encounter considerable complications in their professional life. Perhaps you are one of those kind of lawyers, or perhaps you are not (yet?) a lawyer at all. I don't know. But I am grateful for the skills I have learned to ignore such tactics, and recommend to you a different strategy.

Of course everyone has the physical ability to go to the library, and only the mentally challenged lack the mental ability to do it. I have enjoyed immensely using the library, and particularly treasure my experiences researching at the British Library during a number of my projects. I continually use the excellent libraries I now have access to, even for my wiki research. If you review the history of the J.D. article, you will find that on [25, 2008] I submitted substantial changes to the J.D. article, basically re-creating the article entirely, as a result of my extensive research on the topic. You will see that I introduced numerous citations which I found in the library. It appears they are all the the sources in print on the topic.

I have already addressed the issues of primary/secondary sources, and you will remind yourself on review that I never stated that the added citations are not primary sources. I've said all I wish to that topic on the lawyer talk page.

You may of course continue to under-estimate me, insult me in public, and assert your own superiority--there's certainly nothing I can (or want) to do about it. But I'd prefer to work with you cooperatively on wikipedia, because I believe we both have valuable contributions to make. Zoticogrillo (talk) 06:58, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

personal attacks on my talkpage[edit]

i dont appreciate being described as ingnorant. the reason i did revert that addition wasnt because idisagreed with it but because i didnt think that it had a source. it had been up for many months and for some reason there is no source. its not my responsibility to find a osurce for everything everyone else writes; i am sorry if i offended you earlier but please understand that i only want to follow the rules of WP:V -- aka, sources for every encyclopedic statement fo fact. i hope my position is clearer and i hope that you undestand that i am not trying to be mean, and i hope in the future that You can look past my mistakes and treat me nicer in the future. Smith Jones (talk) 15:49, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Personal Attacks on my Expressway article edit...[edit]

I do not appreciate your personal attack on my edits for the Expressway article. Each edit I have made to the article was researched and cited, and I do believe that CIA world fact book is a good source. Your reason given for reverting my edits are not good enough and constitute personal attacks. I suggest that we work out the differences in the article talk page. However, if you insist on personal attacks, I will report you to the admin. By78 (talk) 22:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

No personal attacks[edit]

Coolcaesar, I'm not terribly impressed with your recent personal attacks in edit summaries and on talk pages. You might want to dial it back a bit before you get civility-blocked. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you need to watch your tone. Your edit summary for HTML "No one caught this for over six weeks. IS ANYONE PAYING ATTENTION to the vandals?" was not appropriate. The "vandal" added a single hyphen to the entry which no one caught. This is huge problem? Wperdue (talk) 17:15, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

State Bar of California[edit]

Easy, friend. I'm familiar with the attorney discipline process, and Rose. I agree that no attorney subject to a disciplinary order by the State Bar Court has a "right to review" that would compel the CA Supreme Court to conduct a full hearing on the merits. Such an attorney does, however, have a right to seek such independent review; per Rose, such review (when granted) is done based on a standard of "independent review."

I made edits to remove ambiguity, and an implication that I felt was in the article as it had previously read, that the CA Supreme Court simply follows orders made by the State Bar Court. The State Bar, of course, per Rose, does not have plenary authority; nor does the Supreme Court merely "rubber stamp" the State Bar opinions (at least according to the sources). That is what I was trying to fix.

As the edit you made today makes clear, the CA SC conducts independent review, and "routinely" it is asked to do so. Sometimes (as Rose makes clear), the Court disagrees, and does independently review on the merits. However, most often, or "typically" (as I think we agree), when it receives a request, it chooses not to review. I made two edits before your note, perhaps the first (before the one you reverted) is better? Steveozone (talk) 05:56, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

PS-I hope this isn't one of those UCLA-USC things; I'm pretty sure that between those distant campuses we studied from the same body of law, after all (although unfortunately I can't claim to be "young" anymore ;) Steveozone (talk) 06:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 = photography use on bloomingdale's = 

Hi, my name is Noa and I am currently writing New York Guide. I came up with your photograph on Bloomingdale's and wonder if I could use your image for the book. Please let me know through email. Thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bloomingdalesnewyork.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noabaak (talkcontribs) 02:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad[edit]

Well done! (Not a simple task ... ) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Disclosure of private information[edit]

Coolcaesar, looking back at some edits / comments I made to the Hastings section of the UC page a couple of years ago, I just found out you felt it necessary to look up my IP address and disclose to the entire community my place of work along with hints for personally identifying me. I'm pretty sure this is a violation of Wikipedia policy, plus an ad hominem that is entirely irrelevent to the issue being discussed. Please refrain from this behavior, as I have every right to not create a user ID (just too lazy). I appreciate your obvious commitment to the Wiki community, but also hope that I can participate without fear that my personal information will be researched and proliferated. Of course I realize that allowing my work IP address to be posted makes this information vulnerable, but I assumed that Wiki editors would not exploit it. It also appears we're both attorneys, so we have certain ethical obligations as well, not to mention expectations of professional civility. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.38.135.218 (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

NB: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OUTING#Posting_of_personal_information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.38.135.218 (talk) 23:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Please be more civil in your comments[edit]

Please tone down your aggressive language and refrain from unwarranted assumptions on the Law of the United States article. There is no requirement that anyone be an attorney, a law student, or even particularly interested in the law for them to edit this article, or any other in Wikipedia. It is not your property.

You have a morel obligation to help those less informed than yourself to understand the law, and to refrain from putting them down every time they attempt an edit. If you do otherwise, you do a great disservice to the profession.

And you know this, having been warned several times previously. Your behavior is way over the top. Chill. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 00:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Special education[edit]

Your comments were inappropriate, as talk pages are not chat rooms to discuss whether or not you think that special education is a good idea or what you think is the future for special needs students, but I'm sorry to see that you are so uninformed about the subject.

Many students are "special education students" despite average or above-average intelligence. In fact, under US rules, having normal or high intelligence is required for a diagnosis of any specific learning disability (such as dyslexia). For example, the CEO of Cisco Systems, who is a billionaire, has dyslexia; if he were in elementary school today, he would be classified as a "special education student". The same is true for every student with diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, leukemia, and so forth -- even though these children are frequently quite smart. "Special education" deals with a territory that is vastly larger than severe mental retardation. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Law of the United States[edit]

Stare decisis is a legal principle that applies to the people who adopt it. It is not the law. It cannot create law. It cannot enable others to create law. --Russell Savage (talk) 14:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Personal Attacks and Insults - How Many Warnings Do You Need?[edit]

I have no idea why you feel such a need to make personal threats with every post... Please stop with the threats and accusations, there is no need for them, as well as being against wiki etiquette and policy, which has been pointed out to you many times by others. [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]
Thank you.
Howaboutyouthinkaboutit
(talk) 09:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I removed your personal attacks and threats of Wikipunishment from my profile discussion page as well. --Russell Savage (talk) 13:56, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved to AN/I[edit]

Hi. The Village Pump doesn't really handle user issues at all, but AN/I is set up to handle pretty much all instances such as the one you posted about. Therefore, I've moved your recent post no Village Pump (miscellaneous) to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Banned user User:Zephram Stark is trying to start an edit war on Law of the United States, both directly and through friends
V = I * R (talk to Ω) 02:23, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Product placement in Up in the Air (film)[edit]

I've been considering adding a section on product placement in Up in the Air (film). Based upon a number of interviews with Jason Reitman and press releases from American Airlines, Hertz, and Hilton Hotels the film could not have been made without their active involvement. I wish to thank you for getting this aspect of the article started. --Dan Dassow (talk) 20:22, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Plain language in the law[edit]

Hi Coolcaeser, I wanted to ask you, I seem to remember you mentioning one day a while back something about how there was a group of scholars in the States who (around the early 20th century?) promoted clearer expression, and abandoning legal gobbledegook, sentences as long as paragraphs, etc, etc. Was that you? If so, I'd really appreciate it if you could tell me the authors/books, etc where it began! I can't seem to find the previous discussion. Best, Wikidea 19:00, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Cheers mate! That's really useful! Wikidea 20:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

December 2009[edit]

Stop hand nuvola.svg This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
If you continue to make personal attacks on other people as you did at Talk:United States#Requested Move, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. It's apparent from the archive of comments on your talk page above that personal attacks are a recurring habit for you (if not an addiction). If an admin happens by this page, I would suggest seriously considering a block of this user, as he is the worst chronic offender of WP:NPA that I've ever run into. SnottyWong talk 13:07, 20 December 2009 (UTC)