User talk:NotJim99

Welcome!
Hello, NotJim99, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Shibboleth ink (♔ ♕) 04:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Pseudo-Science - legal fiction.
"fact assumed".... therefore by the standard of the scientific method it's a belief and not evident and can very well be argued as relivent to Pseudo-Science... I'm not saying they're synonymous... it's just that many people agree that a theory requires evidence... another relivence is ad-hoc... there are quite a few that can be added... I'd like to re-add pseudo-science and also add ad-hoc on the basis that you understand that where people disagree on something to be fact (on the notion that it's based on belief) this constitutes as pseudo-science in all fairness.

I hope we can meet to the reasonable standard that Wikipedia policy asks us to include new content... by the notion of also adding "ad-hoc"... we've add 2 pieces of content to the matter. We should be connecting articles where people see relivence.

This is clearly a controversial topic as different judges and philosophers have different points of views on this. Jeremy Bentham clearly states it's misrepresentation (pseudo-science) and fiction is a class of psuedo-science when it's instated as fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.220.157.192 (talk) 23:31, 12 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The only thing pseudo-scientific here is your understanding of the law. Also, please sign your talk page comments instead of relying on the bot to do it for you. NotJim99 (talk) 18:39, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)