Talk:De facto

this term is misrepresented in this article. this article refers to a de jure government, not a de facto one.


 * Edited the article a bit to make proper corrections. Thot Prad, 03:29, 01 January, 2007

the article still reads as it did, a de facto government is the usurper, not the usurped. that is the de jure governmnet in the relationship, it leaves the article and the cardassian history page still incorrect in thier usage. I mean, jsut look at the latin, why would we call the government that is not doing the actual ruling "government in fact?"


 * How exactly is the current use of "de facto" on Cardassian history wrong? It seems to use the same definition of "de facto" as, for example, stated here: De facto. -- Cid Highwind 21:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)


 * As per that wikipedia document: "When discussing a legal situation, de jure designates lawfully what the law says, while de facto designates action of what happens in practice."

As per this de facto page: " A de facto government is an administration in which all the attributes of its sovereignty have been transferred to another party via usurpation, which assert to act for them." In the case of cardassian history, my most recent examination of the page shows that someone has indeed corrected the error(it previously read that Damar was at the head of a de facto government), but that still leaves this page, which is utterly backwards.