User talk:Joncnunn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Harry Turtledove

I notice you've done some work on Harry Turtledove. You might want to take a look over at Turtlewiki

Just turning the series titles into wiki links that don't already duplicate an existing wiki title as a form of strongly sugesting they get articles here. Jon 15:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

I noticed your comment at Talk:Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. I'm trying to organize work on writing summaries of the opinions. If you're interested in this stuff, any help would be appreciated.--Kchase02 T 22:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Space advertising

I've now done the referencing - I think it'll satisfy your requirements! violet/riga (t) 21:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Single-party state

Hello Joncnunn. Since you've made an edit to the article regarding Singapore [1], guess you'd be interested to join the discussion at talk:single-party state. — Instantnood 07:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Missouri cities

I have written 5 keys points on the talk:Missouri page that I hope that most people are in agreement. This is a step towards informal mediation. Hopefully, this will be a foundation so that the issue of Kansas City and St. Louis can be resolved. Once there is agreement with the 5 basic points, then we can proceed further and possibly reach a concensus in a few days. This message is being sent to several people who have previously written comments about the Missouri matter.VK35 18:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fatah-Hamas conflict

Hello. I added the template {{Arab-Israeli Conflict}} again in article. First because the template (which is edited by specialists) mentions the conflict and so we have to be logical ;). And then because it's for me obvious that this conflict is part of the bigger conflict (which is called arab-israeli conflict on wikipedia) between each country and "association" in this part of the world.

What are you thinking about that ? Adding this template is perhaps premature a bit but.... --Mrpouetpouet 21:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the listing in the template was because someone saw it in this article and then added it over there. As to my use of "premature" my thoughts are running a bit too speculative for a discussion page of an article. But somehow I don't think Israel is too pleased with the Hamas take over of the Gaza. If they do intervene then this would definately involve Israel and would then meet my criteria for including in the template. Jon 21:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
    • "I was under the impression that the listing in the template was because someone saw it in this article and then added it over there" Nope. I added the template because the conflict fatah-hamas was in.

[edit] Featured List nomination

109th United States Congress has been nominated for Featured List status. Please comment here. —Markles —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 12:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007 Writers Guild of America strike

Hi Jon, I noticed your post in the discussion: “At one of my previous consulting gigs, the regular programmers there wished there wasn't a union handling their salary (a federal govt independent agency that just about everybody does business with). Basiclly the union with jursidiction over them also handled clerks; the clerks outnumbered the programmers and no new union could be split off without consent of the old one. In addition the union would not consent to the programmers getting a higher rate than them. So the regular programmers ended up being paid at the same (lower) rate as the clerks. Jon 21:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)”

The issue you describe is called “Wage Compression” and is a real challenge for unions. If you have 100 clerks & 10 programmers, or 5 doctors & 50 nurses, or 10 senior mechanics and 20 junior mechanics the democratic nature of unions will favor the many over the few. Over time, the skilled workers’ wages can be suppressed below the fair market value and those workers will start thinking of themselves as more aligned with management than the union.

Unions have used 3 tactics to combat this problem:

  • Craft Unionism: The Iron Workers building the steel superstructure on a construction site make way more than the Laborers shoveling the debris because they’re in different unions.
  • Separate Locals: The Theatrical & Stage Employees has separate locals for each job classification:

http://www.iatse-intl.org/directory/types.asp

  • Segmented Contracts: The United Auto Workers segments its members into “Production” for the workers on the line and “Skilled” for engineers and electricians in the plants. Both groups had to vote to ratify the recent GM and Chrysler contracts, or the whole contract is rejected.

None of this really applies to the WGAE or WGAw though who receive pay based on performance. Union writers get their initial pay when they work and then get residuals (basically commissions) for how well the product sells. So, writers on Titanic and Friends would make more than others because they get a percentage of the total take. DirectRevelation 06:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)DirectRevelation

[edit] WikiProject St. Louis

 Hello, I noticed you've made edits to St. Louis articles or that you are in some way connected to metropolitan area. I thought you might want to become a member of the St. Louis WikiProject. We've recently built the project page and started a drive to improve St. Louis related articles. Please take a look to edit an article or add one of your own. Once an article's status has been agreed upon, feel free to stop by and lend a hand in getting it to featured article status. Hope you can participate!

Grey Wanderer | Talk 20:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Texas primary

Thanks for your comments at Talk:Democratic Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2008. I'm trying to move us quickly toward consensus on the Texas issue. Please vote here: Talk:Democratic Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2008#Moving Toward Consensus. Thanks! Northwesterner1 (talk) 08:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vote to overturn previous consensus on rows

Thanks for your past comments and contributions at Results of the 2008 Democratic Party presidential primaries. Right now there is a significant vote taking place at Talk:Results of the 2008 Democratic Party presidential primaries#Vote to overturn previous consensus on rows about whether or not to overturn a previous consensus that each row in the Overview of results table should represent individual nominating events. The vote ends at the close of March 19, 2008 (UTC). The vote contains the negative-option that if there is a tie or fewer than 4 total signatures the previous consensus will prevail. I invite you to visit the talk page and submit your vote on the matter. Thanks! --Bryan H Bell (talk) 01:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The vote has completed. The result was to uphold the previous consensus that each row in the Overview of results table should summarize nomination events, not aggregate state results. Thanks for your participation in the vote! --Bryan H Bell (talk) 00:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tags on "Guess What's Coming to Dinner"

I'm curious as to why you've soley picked this article for the notability, plot, and sources tags. The articles on the previous too episodes (Road Less Traveled & Faith) are so similar in structure that any cleanup tags added to Guess What's Coming to Dinner would apply to them. (The other season 4 episodes articles aren't that much better written either.) Jon (talk) 20:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree, feel free to add them. dorftrottel (talk) 20:54, 26 May 2008 (UTC)