Talk:Carole E. Handler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

This article was nominated for deletion on February 10, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

[edit] Speedy deletion

Carole Handler's finding of an important oversight in the complex IP laws enabled two small guys to wrest control from Ron Perelman and Carl Icahn. It was fancy legal work and helped many cases since. I am searching for the legal reference and will post it shortlyJuda S. Engelmayer 17:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

This article always asserted notability, so should be exempt from speedy deletion. If you haven't read it yet, look over WP:BIO to make sure that she's notable enough for an article. NickelShoe (Talk) 20:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Improvement

The article is improving rapidly. I am impressed. IMHO a further step would be to improve the structure, especially regarding the sections "Intellectual property expertise" and "Legal work". What about "Academic Career" and "Legal career" instead (a rigorous chronological order will help to follow what she exactly did in the past, in her career)? Thanks. --Edcolins 21:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll work on that. A bit tired at the moment. Thank you for keeping on top of itJuda S. Engelmayer 00:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not Sure if there is Still a POV Dispute

Can someone else take a shot at looking at it? I think it is referenced properly and only states what is provable. Juda S. Engelmayer 22:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, indeed. --Edcolins 19:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Nice to know, thanks. Juda S. Engelmayer 15:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)