Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law/Archive 5

message: could someone look over my modifications to Contract Clause? Thanks, Jmatthew3 16:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After a very superficial glance, a very minor technical note, you can use  instead, as it offers a little more flexibility. dr.ef.tymac 21:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  contract clause lookover 

message: There are an incredible number of biographical articles in wikipedia, many/most of which fall within the scope of WikiProject Biography. I have recently proposed that the Biography project perhaps be involved in a number of subprojects to work on smaller, and perhaps more focused, areas. One such proposal relates to people in the legal professions. This proposal can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Lawyers. Any member of this project who would be interested in working specifically on biographical content relating to people in the legal professions would be more than welcome to indicate as much there. Thank you. John Carter 16:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed legal biography project 

message: Could someone with experience/knowledge in International Law please check the cites in the above article. Cheers 
^ Lehideux and Isorni v. France,  1998-VII, no. 92  (European Court of Human Rights 23 September 1998) 
^ Faurisson v France,   2 BHRC UN Doc. CCPR/C/58/D/550/1993, 1 (United Nations Human Rights Committee 1996) 
-*- u:Chazz/contact/t: 20:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Holocaust denial]] 

message: Philip K. Howard has been hugely influencial regarding Tort reform in the United States... or so I'm told. Unfortunately the article was created by a PR firm of some sort, could someone clean it up a bit? – Steel 00:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Philip K. Howard (author)]] 

message: A number of people have become notable over immigration issues to do with their visa, or cancellation of a visa. Examples include Egon Erwin Kisch, Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin, Scott Parkin, Cat Stevens and Naomi Robson. I think a new category might be necessary and it has been suggested at Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians%27_notice_board#Immigration_Controversies that a new sub cat of Category:Visas or a subcat of Category:Immigration law would be appropriate. What do people in this work group think would be appropriate? Takver 12:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A sub cat under "immigration law" would be more appropriate, I think, as you could also include someone like Elián González if the category is a bit broader than merely "visa controversies" (though, frankly, I don't remember exactly what the specific controversy was in that case it was an asylum case). · jersyko talk 12:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with above statements. A new category or subcategory is needed. Bearian 20:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest :category:immigration incidents might be a more neutral category name which would include controversies.  For example the case of Naomi Robson was of an Australian journalist who entered Indonesia under a tourist visa and was deported for working under that visa which breached the conditions - not actually a controversy although widely reported.--Golden Wattle  talk 23:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Immigration law Sub-Category?

message: These two articles should be merged, or the latter re-named International legal marketing. Bearian 20:16, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Legal advertising]] and [[Legal marketing]]

message: Hello WikiProject Law members. I am trying to create and expand the Colombian judicial branch of power. So far we have some issues translating names. Colombia has two attorney general's offices. One in the judicial branch (Fiscalia General de la Nacion) and the other one part of the "control institutions branch" (Procuraduria General de la Nacion). So far we came up with a couple of names Office of the Attorney General of Colombia for Fiscalia, and Office of the Prosecuting Attorney General of Colombia for Procuraduria. My doubts are with the Prosecuting meaning.. the Procuraduria is basically for Procurement. What do you think?--I am greener than you! (Lima - Charlie - Over) 04:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You could create a disambiguation page. eg: Office of the Attorney General of Colombia links to Office of the Attorney General of Colombia (Fiscalia) and Office of the Attorney General of Colombia (Procuraduria). Unless you could elaborate on their precise job in english...Office of the Attorney General of Colombia (prosecution). Bamkin 18:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:COL]] names

message: I placed this on the Things to do list, but I think it might better be placed here. Is this doctrine still good law in your jursidiction? Bearian
:Under UK jurisdiction, there has been an incredibly small ammount of judicial activity here. I quote R v Davis (1851) 15 JP 450... "If two names spelt differently necessarily sound alike, the court may, as matter of law, pronounce them to be idem sonantia; but if they do not necessarily sound alike, the question whether they are idem sonantia is a question of fact for the jury". (There have only been four cases reported since). The case of Re Vidiofusion Ltd [1975] 1 All ER 76 establishes a four stage test when a name of a company is spelled differently. The second part being the idem sonantia test, rendering a word Idem sonans. 1. No Company of a similar name; 2. Idem Sonantia - similar pronuniciation; 3. No marked vision difference (judge gave example of Jackson/Jaxon being too dissimilar visually); 4. mispelling does not substantially change the placement of the name if placed in a aplhabetical list. Interesting...especially the varying grammatical derivations of residual Latin. Bamkin 21:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've read the article and still have no idea what the concept is supposed to be. Vidiofusion (as I read it) is confined to the particular issue, namely advertising petitions in bankruptcy etc. What on earth would such a doctrine do and/or achieve? I am utterly baffled. Francis Davey 23:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ''[[Idem sonans]]''

message: A couple of us at WP:UNION have been talking about creating .(Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour#Labour law category?) The thought is to create this cat together with the sub-cat , and then connect them to ,  and . Any thoughts?--Bookandcoffee 14:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a conversation going on at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (categories)#Labour law of country about the proper name for this new category. Your input would be welcome. Cheers.--Bookandcoffee 15:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Labour law category

message: There is currently a discussion on the accuracy of the following graphic  which delineates nations by their use of common law and mixed systems. It is my understanding that the majority of the United States now uses statutory laws, and application of common law is mixed. The discussion is taking place here, and some expert guidance would be appreciated. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 15:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guidance Requested 

message: Input at Wikipedia:Peer review/Report of 1800/archive1 would be greatly appreciated. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Law-related peer review

message: Can editors here please have a look at Talk:Act Constituting the Government of Democratic Transition and National Unity?  This Act has also been referred to unofficially as The Carmona Decree, which IMO has been used to deny its legality, while others argue that the informal name gets more Google hits.  Guidance is needed on article naming.  Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll take a look. Bearian 23:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Input needed regarding article name

message: Is there a way to make "Category:Wills and trusts" to be a sub-category of "Category:Law"?  I do not see how they are linked presently. Can anyone help?  Bearian 23:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It already is, but about three categories down: CAT:Law --> CAT:Laws by issue --> CAT:Propery Law --> CAT:Wills and Trusts Hope that helps. Aboutmovies 23:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sub-category

message: Can theft be added to the 'criminal law' menu on the right hand side?  Larceny is listed but it goes to a solely US article (as larceny is not a crime in the UK, for example, I'm not complaining about the influence of the article, just the link).  The article on theft seems to take a more worldwide view.  I'm fairly rubbish at the wiki thing so I thought I'd just ask.  Thank you  Darla 07/06/07
:Excellent suggestion.  I also put in Robbery and [Deception offences]], partly because they should be in, and partly to balance the new row. --Legis (talk - contribs) 12:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: theft

message: The article Compulsory Sampling License, which is relevant to this WikiProject, has been proposed for deletion, on the grounds that the article is primarily original research.  The discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compulsory_Sampling_License.  Please feel free to contribute to the discussion.
Thanks,
--EngineerScotty 18:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD notice 

message: Hi, I would like to request articles for a couple of fair use cases. These have been cited by a few Wikipedians during debates about the use of copyrighted images and it would be good if we didn't have armchair lawyers trying to interpret them. The first is Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Limited, Dorling Kindersley Publishing, and RR Donnelley & Sons Company which has been used in an attempt to defend the use of non-free images (see Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 June 4#Image:Cogny Castries Navarre.jpg and User talk:Howcheng/Archive10#Fair use images. The second is Folsom v. Marsh, 9 F.Cas. 342, which was used by an admin (User:Durin @ WP:AN/FURG#On the subject of the character of use of fair use in articles) in attempt to define fair use for other editors . Anyway, if these rulings are still in effect and they're being incorrectly cited by editors, I would appreciate some articles to point them to so they can see the actual scope of the rulings. Thanks. howcheng  {chat} 16:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article requests 

message: United States Congress has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Sdornan 18:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[United States Congress]] featured article review

message: Greetings :)
I was wondering if anyone here combines their interest in Law with an interest in ancient Roman history? Specifically, I was wondering if anyone might be interested in working with me in untangling the evolution of Roman law regarding citizenship and legal status of the various levels of citizenship (at least at first, this could very well spill over into other Roman "legal projects"). If you might be interested, please feel free to contact me :) --Vedexent (talk) - 15:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancient Roman Law 

message: I keep coming across articles that have the WikiProject Law tag on them, but their connection to law is tenuous at best.  Is it okay to just start cleaning them up?  There are so many worthy articles in the Project that it seems silly to have them included.  Examples, with the apparent basis for including them:
* 'Neath Brooklyn Bridge: because the film includes crimes (theft and murder);
* $ (film): because the film includes a crime (bank robbery);
* Baseball metaphors for sex: because, you know, one way of "getting to second base" is by stealing.
Terry Carroll
:If you consistently encounter articles on that level of frivolity, then yes, you should feel free to clean them out of the project. You might, however, want to consider moving this to the discussion page. dr.ef.tymac 21:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that; I thought I was on the discussion page.Terry Carroll 22:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These and similar movies, with plot points around legal themes, ought to be removed from the project.  Only keep in movies where the major theme is the law, e.g., Erin Brockovich. Bearian 15:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles to be removed from project