User talk:Judge Magney

Hey, welcome again to Wikipedia. Here's the standard welcome greeting; it has some useful links you might be interested in:

Welcome!

Hello, Judge Magney, 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! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

PS I'll look over your arguments about Pelosi in a minute and tell you what I think. Dave (talk) 16:42, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Category:American lawyers

Hi, you seem to know law quite a bit better than I do. Another user and I have been trying to figure out exactly who should be in Category:American lawyers. I welcome your input at Category talk:American lawyers. --Idont Havaname 20:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lost Liberty Hotel

I just spent about 15 minutes going through the article and trying to come up with a version where both sides agreed on everything except for the parts that were being discussed. Here are the differences from your last version, which you may want to review. Much of the red text in the commentary section is a result of things changing order, so things look much different than they really are. Hopefully, this version will allow us to have less dramatic edit wars, because we'll only be reverting the parts we care about directly. Dave (talk) 02:02, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

judicial activism

I understand the distinction you're making, though I don't know if the two terms qualify as "fundamentally" different. If the judicial tyranny page is only one or two lines I don't see why it cannot be incorporated under activism. Either fill out the tyranny page to make the distinction more robust or take the paragraph you've added to activism and make it a full section so that people re-directed will notice. I don't mind changing my vote if you can make Judicial tyranny more than a stub. Marskell 10:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I changed my vote. We shall see. Marskell 09:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Judicial tyranny

I'm happy with the way Judicial tyranny stands now, and noted this change of opinion on the AFD page. Edgar181 17:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I (the original deletion proposer) too am happy with the new version of this article. It is a neologism but I am inclined to see it as a notable one (172,000 Google hits for the phrase put it into a different class than most WP:NEO cases seen on AfD). I've added a legal stub category to the article to make it more likely that other knowledgable people come across it and expand it. Hynca-Hooley 00:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo Black

This is a bit tardy on my part, but I thought you might be interested in this. I quoted, and responded to, your criticisms of the Hugo Black article here. Would love to hear what you think of my responses to your objections—I think it would help in improving the article's quality. Best wishes, Hydriotaphia 02:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]