User contributions for Non Curat Lex

28 June 2009

• 16:2116:21, 28 June 2009 diff hist +31 Gevrey-Chambertin I have it on good authority that Charmes-Chambertin and Les Mazoyeres are interchangeably-named.

26 June 2009

• 05:2805:28, 26 June 2009 diff hist −1 m Chambertin extra "(" removed
• 05:2805:28, 26 June 2009 diff hist +11 Chambertin Mazoyeres and Charmes are interchangeable, according to Meadows.

12 June 2009

• 23:0523:05, 12 June 2009 diff hist +300 Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Enigmaman 3 →Support: Count me in

21 May 2009

• 18:0218:02, 21 May 2009 diff hist +191 User talk:Non Curat Lex →Interested in a rewrite about a lawyer?

19 May 2009

• 22:4322:43, 19 May 2009 diff hist +220 User talk:Non Curat Lex →Interested in a rewrite about a lawyer?: reply

8 May 2009

• 21:5321:53, 8 May 2009 diff hist +12 Poussard v Spiers and Pond Hangon?

6 May 2009

• 06:1006:10, 6 May 2009 diff hist 0 m Sherman Antitrust Act Undid revision 288162337 by 70.158.94.2 (talk) rvv

29 April 2009

• 21:3321:33, 29 April 2009 diff hist −30 m Harvard-Westlake School Undid revision 286672167 by 67.209.48.2 (talk) rvv
• 03:5803:58, 29 April 2009 diff hist −33 m United States Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Rewrite to avoid editorializing.

28 April 2009

• 07:2407:24, 28 April 2009 diff hist −8 m Harvard-Westlake School Undid revision 286466541 by 67.209.48.2 (talk) rvv

20 April 2009

• 21:2421:24, 20 April 2009 diff hist +156 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →Why does the United States section need a litany of opinions ?: OK

19 April 2009

• 02:1602:16, 19 April 2009 diff hist +553 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →Why does the United States section need a litany of opinions ?

17 April 2009

• 22:2422:24, 17 April 2009 diff hist +902 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →Why does the United States section need a litany of opinions ?: comment

13 April 2009

• 05:0705:07, 13 April 2009 diff hist −15 Côte-Rôtie AOC No edit summary

12 April 2009

• 08:2908:29, 12 April 2009 diff hist +192 User talk:Loonymonkey →FYI

10 April 2009

• 19:0019:00, 10 April 2009 diff hist +480 User talk:Loonymonkey →FYI: new section

6 April 2009

• 06:0706:07, 6 April 2009 diff hist +309 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law →Fundamental rights deletion-by-redirect
• 06:0406:04, 6 April 2009 diff hist +269 Fundamental rights Rearrange. Add Brief explanation of Europe. The copy I added is OR/SYN. Try to replace it w/ something better.
• 06:0106:01, 6 April 2009 diff hist +9 Fundamental rights quick rewrite of intro
• 05:5905:59, 6 April 2009 diff hist +3,700 m Fundamental rights Restore last version by 190.135.202.127 - per consensus, redirect was inapproprite. See discussion at WP:LAW talk.

1 April 2009

• 07:2507:25, 1 April 2009 diff hist +636 User talk:Arthur Rubin →What do you think?: deduction

31 March 2009

• 07:4507:45, 31 March 2009 diff hist +343 User talk:Arthur Rubin →What do you think?: surprisingly enough
• 07:4307:43, 31 March 2009 diff hist +154 User talk:Risker →Re: Kay/InternetReader2
• 07:4207:42, 31 March 2009 diff hist −12 Lemon v. Kurtzman Undid revision 280318447 by 152.160.56.93 (talk) rv - unsourced edit (and personally, I don't think it's accurate.)

30 March 2009

• 01:0001:00, 30 March 2009 diff hist −824 Pro se legal representation in the United States Reverted edits by InternetReader2 to last version by Arthur Rubin (inappropiate edits/content warring)
• 00:5300:53, 30 March 2009 diff hist +223 User talk:Arthur Rubin →What do you think?: new section
• 00:5000:50, 30 March 2009 diff hist +397 Talk:Pro se legal representation in the United States →U.S. Judicial Canons: comment

29 March 2009

• 09:1409:14, 29 March 2009 diff hist +140 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law →Fundamental rights deletion-by-redirect
• 01:2301:23, 29 March 2009 diff hist +282 User talk:Famspear →"Fundamental rights": new section
• 01:2101:21, 29 March 2009 diff hist +499 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law →Fundamental rights deletion-by-redirect
• 01:1601:16, 29 March 2009 diff hist −809 Pro se legal representation in the United States rv two changes by user "InternetReader2," - sources do not show relevance to the subject matter WP:SYN?; and per previous consensus re: identical content
• 01:1401:14, 29 March 2009 diff hist −849 Edward Nottingham Undid revision 280243286 by ColoradoResident (talk) rv per WP:CITE & consensus that these are not reliable

27 March 2009

• 18:1818:18, 27 March 2009 diff hist +7 Harvard-Westlake School →Mock trial: qualification

24 March 2009

• 05:5905:59, 24 March 2009 diff hist −1 m Inspector Clouseau →The Pink Panther 2 (2009): Martian -> Martin

17 March 2009

• 23:1323:13, 17 March 2009 diff hist −1,029 Pro se legal representation in the United States Undid revision 277931748 by Studentstill (talk) rv blatat pov/misleading/unhelpful edit; consensus against this content.

16 March 2009

• 08:5508:55, 16 March 2009 diff hist −9 Miller test Undid revision 277559397 by 65.78.190.45 (talk) rv apparent test edit

15 March 2009

• 22:5222:52, 15 March 2009 diff hist +120 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →why does the UK section need a litany of laws?

9 March 2009

• 10:3510:35, 9 March 2009 diff hist +558 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.

8 March 2009

• 20:4720:47, 8 March 2009 diff hist +454 m Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →Part of a sentence removed: poor response

7 March 2009

• 23:2023:20, 7 March 2009 diff hist +7 m MI 2N Insert obviously missing word for grammatical reasons; no modification (or verfication) of the content

5 March 2009

• 17:5217:52, 5 March 2009 diff hist +1,946 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.
• 17:4117:41, 5 March 2009 diff hist +322 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.
• 17:3717:37, 5 March 2009 diff hist +238 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.
• 09:1609:16, 5 March 2009 diff hist +1,125 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.
• 09:1109:11, 5 March 2009 diff hist +9 m Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.
• 09:1109:11, 5 March 2009 diff hist +492 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.
• 09:0609:06, 5 March 2009 diff hist +2,127 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →The split by "judicial origin" is a meaningless one in the context of this article. It should be removed.

4 March 2009

• 07:3007:30, 4 March 2009 diff hist +184 Talk:Right to keep and bear arms →gun violence, gun politics, synthesis, statistics, etc.
• 07:1207:12, 4 March 2009 diff hist +26 m Harvard-Westlake School Revert two edits identified as vandalism by anon users; restore last version by ClueBot