1. If you start a chat, talk, or discussion, or make comments here, I will respond here and not on some other talk page. Similarly, if I post on your talk page, I'd prefer to continue the conversation there. Thus, we can avoid incomprehensible disjointed threads spread over several pages.
2. If you are complaining about an edit that I have made, just pause to consider the Five pillars of Wikipedia before you post.
3. No matter how much I may have p*ssed you off with my edits, please assume good faith.
4. Nobody likes an angry mastadon, even if they are right.

Every so often I clear out and delete all the messages on my talk page. I do not keep an archive, I simply delete them on the basis that no one will ever care. I make no apologies for this. I am a caveman.

Hi. Have you found a source yet for his death? Per WP:BLP, I'm going to have to revert it if you have not, since we cannot list someone as deceased unless there is a reliable source that either explicitly says or implies that he is deceased, as all material regarding living people must be verifiable. The source can also be an offline one and, if you provide me the information, I will gladly provide a suitably formatted reference. Cheers, CP 17:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, nothing to hand. Definitely dead, definitely died in the mid-1980s (probably 1986), but I have been unable to track down an obituary or the like. Sorry. --Legis (talk - contribs) 00:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was looking at the Flanagan Island article and saw the disputed border material. I couldn't find anything about this on the Internet so I left a comment at Talk:Flanagan Island and stuck a {{fact}} tag on the sentence. The U.S. does not include it in its list of territorial disputes.

Can you find a reference on this? Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Liked your edit! I put those pics up on the commons and its gratifying to see them used like that.I liked your choice of the lead image. I am going to be adding a lot more wreck pictures in the future. I have them all, it's a matter of uploading. Cheers Jetlife2 (talk) 23:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you for putting the images up on the commons. I have been meaning to take some photos of the Rhone to illustrate that articles for ages, but never got around to it. But some of your photos were excellent, so I am glad that a more skilled photographer got their first! --Legis (talk - contribs) 17:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 21:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Global Underwater Explorers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on 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. Woland (talk) 16:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that can happen. What you need to do is establish that it is a notable company right from the get go with references or some jerk like me will tag it for spd. Ciao. --Woland (talk) 16:00, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir

Belravia Group are insolvent and i have invested funds with them. I had requested my fund be paid to me in april 2008,the fund manager informed me this would take 12 weeks £418k less costs to wind up my fund. After the 12 weeks june 2008 £198k was paid into a client account of a solicotor verraslaw to pay my fund to me.I had recieved £70k over 2 yrs from my fund and this would bring the total to £268k.I had asked for a breakdown of how they come to these figures,but never recieved this and the funds have nevver reached me.

The liquidator who was called in to Belgravia in september has said i have no claim to these funds held by the solicotor.

I believe i do as this was funds paid to the solicotor on instructions to pay myself. There were no other funds paid to the solicotor.

I gave my instructions in writing in april and the funds were paid out from the company in june some 10 weeks before insolvent.

I need advice as i have no funds available to pay a solicotor.

I am not a member on here but would be gratefull of your help.

(--86.153.75.37 (talk) 14:19, 1 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Peter Mcevoy email petemak13@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.75.37 (talk) 14:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surprised to not find an article on GUE (especially since there was one on the Norwegian Wikipedia), I decided to create a stub. Joined the WikiProject, I then discovered after a little looking around that you had a draft on your user page. I believe I have referenced the current stub sufficiently to withstand an AfD—even seeing the trouble it has been in before. According to my interpretation of the deletion log it has been deleted for lack of references and POV. I hope these issues are resolved. Anyway, I was just informing you that I was being bold without knowing you were working on the matter, and hope this doesn't cause too much trouble. Happy diving and editing. Arsenikk ^(talk) 22:43, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - I got slightly side-tracked from the project, so I am glad someone else is picking up the baton. Take care. --Legis (talk - contribs) 11:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! - and thanks for adding the footnote about deep air - it had escaped my limited concentration span even though we had discussed it <g>. Do you think it would be better placed in the main article - I was thinking about at the end of the fourth paragraph in Prevention? Maybe if you did that, I could work in the BSAC/SAA/CMAS certification to 50 metres and when we take it to GA, that will be one less reference to take out of the lead. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 23:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure - I will move it down. However, I am not too familiar with European diver training (despite being a Brit myself), so I may leave it to you embellish re other agencies. --Legis (talk - contribs) 13:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Scuba diving article is indeed in need of some work, but take a look at this cite. The point is that all divers are affected by narcosis even at as little as 10 metres! It's just that there is almost no recognition of it until deeper. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the webpage http://center4debtmanagement.com/CreditRepairArticles/Security-Interest.shtml contains text identical to material from the article security interest, to which you are a major contributor. I take it that the above-mentioned webpage is copying from Wikipedia, even though it has its own copyright notice and does not mention Wikipedia as a source? You might want to contact them about GFDL compliance, if that is the case. Thank you! 69.140.152.55 (talk) 08:08, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good spot. I suspect that is probably something for an admin to do rather than a humble editor like myself. --Legis (talk - contribs) 11:41, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been nominated and reviewed for good article status and needs some improvements, as discussed here. Since you have made some edits to this article, would you please help improve it? Cheers. Truthanado (talk) 14:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article you created, Bill Nagle is about to be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Nagle. The faster your respond, the better chance the article you created can be saved. This is because deletion debates only stay open for a few days, and the first comments are usually the most important.

There are several tools and other editors who can help you keep the page from being deleted forever:

1. You can list the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. If you need help listing your page, add a comment on the .

2. You can request a mentor to help explain to you all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted, here: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond on the deletion page.
3. When try to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you.
Here is a list of your own acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.
Acronyms in deletion debates are sometimes incorrectly used, or ignore rules or exceptions.

If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. travb (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Latin-American Wikipedians,unite us!"

Hi wikipedian!Today I'm going to talk you about a new proposal that can to advantage you and many other users of Latin America. You,that is from Latin America (or write about it),already shall to have observed the importance of the Wikimedia Frojects in the region.Only Wikipedia represent 40% of the internet access[1].With every this importance,why don't we make a big meeting? Of this idea,was borned the proposal for a Latin-American Wikipedian Meeting.Various Wikipedists has Latin-American users and this is a proposal of a culture and ideas interchange,that can be help all projects.Above this,comtemplate to help in the formation of new WMF chapters in Latin America. The main page and the talk page is originally in English,with translations in Dutch,French,Portuguese and Spanish.

Tosão (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Restitution law, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Restitution law has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Restitution law, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:BVI Standpoint.JPG. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 18:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Legis, I wanted to ask you a quick question: you cite in the first footnote McKendrick and Goode, Commercial Law (2004) for the idea that banks want floating charges to become a monopoly lender. Is that the penguin edition which you are talking about? For the new 2009 release, McKendrick is an author, but I didn't know he was for that. And do you have a page number?

Also, while I'm here, I see an awful lot of work that you do, and it's really good. So it's probably about time for you to have some more recognition:

		The Society Barnstar
		For Legis' superb contributions to many legal articles, particularly in the difficult subjects. Wikidea 12:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the Barnstar. I'll dig out my copy of Commercial Law and see if I can find a page reference; I certainly remember it was one of the things that Roy Goode used to bang on about in his lectures at Oxford (yes, sadly, I am that old). It wouldn't shock me if Ewan McKendrick dropped it in the newer edition; it might have been true when Roy Goode was in private practice in the 1970s, but the comment starts to look a bit dated in 2008. --Legis (talk - contribs) 14:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I am looking at page 578 (start of Chapter 22 - Classification and Characteristics of Credit and Security), but the closest he gets to those words is when he says "Other reasons for taking security include ... in the case of all-assets security under fixed and floating charges, the influence the chargee enjoys vis-a-vis the debtor company and other creditors..." Sort of similar, but not directly on point. I will try and dig up a better citation. --Legis (talk - contribs) 18:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Theoretical dive profile.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Legis - did you make the Diving decompression navbox? If so, well done! I wanted to have a look at it, but the v . d . e links don't work :( Any ideas? --RexxS (talk) 03:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I must have screwed something up - if you just go to Template:Decompression and click edit, you should be able to get into the guts. --Legis (talk - contribs) 00:15, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Worked it out. The v . d . e links are automatically generated from the |name parameter, so you use the |title parameter to produce the wording "Diving Decompression" in the top band, but set the |name parameter to the page name, so that the auto-generated links take you to that page. I've made an edit, but please check out that it does what you want - if not revert me and I'll have another look. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 04:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you've been repeatedly stuck tidying up after the confusion resulting from {{Diving-stub}} and {{Diving-bio-stub}} apparently referring to different activities, so I thought you might be interested to know that they're in the process of being replaced by more specific alternatives: {{Underwater-diving-stub}}, {{Underwater-diving-bio-stub}}, {{Acrobatics-diving-stub}} and {{Acrobatics-diving-bio-stub}}.

The foregoing discussion is recorded here, if you're interested. —Paul A (talk) 05:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Legis, I wondered if I could ask your expert advice: you know how the Enterprise Act 2002 has restricted the scope of administrative receivership to vanishing point. But for receivers, are they subject to the same duties as were administrative receivers; for instance, two cases are Downsview Nominees Ltd v Fist City Corporation Ltd [1993] AC 295 and Medforth v Blake [2000] Ch 86? Or is that a dumb question?! I mean, the latter one stands for the proposition that a receiver (or is it administrative receiver, if he's running the business?) has to run the business with due care. So that presumably means that receivers cannot have a wanton fire sale of assets and expect to still hold a debtor liable when they could've already achieved a better result? Wikidea 12:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an expert on the position post-1999 (which was when I left the UK to practice overseas), but I think that receivers duties remain the same - it was just the ability to appoint them that changed under the Enterprise Act, 2002. Sorry to be so vague. Also sorry for the delay in replying - I have been away on vacation until yesterday. --Legis (talk - contribs) 15:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I think that's right too. Hope you had a good holiday. Wikidea 00:57, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]