User talk:Arllaw

Major Problems with the Emotional Support Animal Entry

This page has significant problems as it does not comport with the law. I am trying to add in the legal sources so that someone can decide for themselves whether the other cited sources are reliable. I am using verified sources and citing everything when making my edits. The vast majority of articles that are cited USE AN INCORRECT LEGAL STANDARD. This is causing rampant confusion and adding to the problem. Please stop removing my edits. AbbyNormal17 (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)AbbyNormal17

Accusations from Skythrops

Please be advised that I am posting a formal notice regarding what I believe to be ongoing edit warring conduct by you. I've twice raised concerns about what appear to be breaches by you of the 3RR rule on one page and your closing down of discussion on the associated Talk page makes it difficult to collaborate properly and reach consensus. I hope you may be open to some discussion regarding editorial conduct as well as regarding the content of pages with which we're both involved. Thank you.Skythrops (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

You appear intent upon trying to shout down, shut down and exclude any editor who doesn't share your personal bias on the subject of parental alienation. That's a shame. Arllaw (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.Skythrops (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Probate

In the edit you made to probate, you refer to the "state of domicile". Could you clarify please whether this means US state or sovereign state (country). If you meant the latter, "country" would be better as it is (almost) unambiguous. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:48, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

citation for definition of commutation

In this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commutation_%28law%29&type=revision&diff=921490173&oldid=921488984 , you reinstated a citation for the definition of commutation. The source is not freely available online, and while that fact is not cause for avoiding its use as a citation, I am curious as to the thinking behind using this source given that suitable definitions are freely available online. Fabrickator (talk) 05:57, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

I did find the source online, but it's listed here with a DOI number instead of a URL. I have no interest in the source, beyond its being an appropriate source when listed correctly as opposed to with a sneaky spam link. If you have identified an alternative source, by all means exercise your discretion. Arllaw (talk) 12:34, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@Arllaw: I've boldly changed it to just wikify the term to Wiktionary. Bolder still would have been to drop it altogether ... though I don't know whether there's a policy for which such "common knowledge" is exempt from requiring a citation. I have a couple of comments:

* a "doi" link does not seem very helpful as compared to a live link, this being the more so, given the trivial nature of what the citation is supposed to support.

* given that that it involves a malicious edit/malicious actor, we should not be obliged to attempt to rescue potentially beneficial edits or portions thereof.

Sorry if I seem to be dragging this on, getting clarification can hopefully make me a better editor. Fabrickator (talk) 19:42, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

No problem. I agree on both counts, and for a point that simple a good live link should be available, and I didn't mean to create confusion given the history of that particular addition. But part of the DOI problem is Wikipedia's preference not to include both a DOI and a link to the article, as the DOI often links to a paywalled version even if a free version is available elsewhere. (But I digress.) Arllaw (talk) 21:16, 19 October 2019 (UTC)