Talk:Dietrich v The Queen

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dietrich v The Queen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060210030141/http://www.aph.gov.au:80/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/completed_inquiries/1996-99/legalaid/report/c07.htm to http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/legcon_ctte/completed_inquiries/1996-99/legalaid/report/c07.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091115084049/http://www.news.com.au:80/story/0,27574,26344221-2,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26344221-2,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't think this is FA quality atm. The case was an important one, but the only legal analysis is from a journal article soon after the case was decided. There is no other scholarly analysis even though as the lead notes, this is an important case in Australian jurisprudence. The other followup material only consists of newspaper articles that have no legal insight Bumbubookworm (talk) 05:31, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Bumbubookworm (talk) I think the topic is notable enough that it warrants FA status, but after a careful perusal it does not meet the current quality standards. I am actively reviewing now. Hopefully it can be saved. Such-change47 (talk) 02:23, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA concerns 

message: Hi , firstly, great work on this article! I am wondering though why the judgement spelling. My understanding has always been that the first e is not used in law. Eg the case citation uses judgment, and the Fed Court.
MOS:SPELLING has "In Australian and British law, a judge's decision in a case is always spelt judgment. On the other hand, the forming of opinion or conclusion by an ordinary person is usually spelt judgement."
I was going to change the 3x "judgement" in the article but thought I should discuss with you first. Thanks and congrats on the GA! JennyOz (talk) JennyOz (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks @JennyOz. You’re right, there’s no need for an e.  I really appreciate the collaborative approach. So kind. Enjoy your day. MaxnaCarta (talk) 19:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting actually. Macquarie and Oxford spell it judgement. Judgment is for US. Yet judgment is used sometimes by Aussie courts. So too is judgement. Honestly given that from what I can see judgement is considered Australian spelling let’s just leave it as is. MaxnaCarta (talk) 19:05, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: In the decision  judgment is used 29 times, judgement nil. Similarly a search on AustLII shows only 150 decisions in the High Court using the spelling "judgment"  and 7,405 without an e. On that basis I'm with @JennyOz and your first response to use judgment Find bruce (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Find bruce fair call. It's a non issue for me. Happy for it to change. MaxnaCarta (talk) 21:26, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judgement v Judgment