User talk:LSD

SUL

Confirmation!

 Done, as far as fr: is concerned. Cheers, Popo le Chien ^{throw a bone} 07:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Sweeping changes to monopoly and related articles

I reverted your redirection of Monopolization, because I think it is separate enough of a concept to warrant its own page (it is a legal claim which is distinct from the concept of monopoly). I haven't reverted any of your other changes yet, but I don't know why you made such broad changes without at least starting a talk-page discussion first. --Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 06:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Seems more appropriate as a part of the monopoly page, rather than as an article describing a particular US law. There's already a law section on the monopoly page (albeit a very rudimentary one). Maybe it could be merged there?

As for the changes to the actual monopoly page, they weren't actually that broad. I moved the history section down and reorganized the economics section, but I didn't actually add or delete any information. The page still needs a lot of work!

LSD (talk) 21:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, in looking over the two pages, I think you may be right. Monopolization as a specific legal charge does deserve a separate article from laws on monopolies in general. Right now, though, it's a very US-centric page. Do you know if monopolization exists as such as a criminal offense in other jurisdictions, and if so, whether it is defined similarly / differently to the US version? In any case, good call on the revert. LSD (talk) 23:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Different countries use different terminology and often different economic concepts in their competition laws. I'm not sure if any other countries specifically consider "monopolization" or "attempted monopolization" offenses; likewise, the same offense may be defined differently or called by another name outside the U.S. So I can't really answer that question. I suppose if there are any foreign lawyers on this site, they can add this information. --Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 01:56, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Market dominance

Sorry to bother you, but you merged the Market dominance exactly the opposite way as was tagged (Dominance (economics) into Market dominance and not Market dominance into Dominance (economics)). I think Dominance (economics) would be actually a better name for the new only article.--Kozuch (talk) 19:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. LSD (talk) 21:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Sino-Tibetan

Hi,

Could you add your source to File:SinoTibetanTree.svg? It looks more or less like Matisoff, but not exactly what I remember.

Thanks, kwami (talk) 02:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

It's primarily based on Thurgood & LaPolla (obviously very simplified), which mostly comes from Matisof, yes. LSD (talk) 03:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Goodnight, Irene has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. --Rrburke(talk) 18:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I both summarized and explained that edit. Do you have reason to believe that those lyrics actually are public domain? 'Cause if not, I don't see why you reverted. LSD (talk) 18:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

This was a simple-enough error, which I see you've corrected. The edit was made using Huggle, a semi-automated counter-vandalism tool which employs the Wikimedia IRC recent changes feed to help interested users detect and revert vandalism, and to place standardized notices on users' talk pages when vandalism is suspected.

That's pretty much what I figured.

Removals of content accompanied by only vague edit summaries not specifying the rationale for the removal are easily mistaken for vandalism. In cases where an editor removes content due to a policy concern, it is helpful, for clarity's sake and to assist editors monitoring recent changes for vandalism, to cite in the edit summary the policy in question -- which in this case was Wikipedia:Copyright violations. The content of WP:Songs#Lyrics is not Wikipedia policy; WP:Songs is a WikiProject. --Rrburke^(talk) 21:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, although since not every edit is due to a policy concern it still strikes me as imprudent to automatically revert any deletion without first checking the talk page. But, whatever, no harm done. LSD (talk) 21:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Anxiety disorder

Hi -- I just want to compliment you on your work on that article, which has made it flow a lot more smoothly. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 17:27, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

great addition to DSM

a useful tag ?