Talk:Cert pool

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Justice Powell's Role

With all due respect to Newyorkbrad, his earlier edits that Justice Powell helped instigate the cert pool were unsupported by citation, and find no support in The Brethren (which claims only that Powell thought it was a good idea). This is not to say that it's false, but we are now told that "[t]he threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether it is true." See Wikipedia:Attribution. I think that policy is spinach, and renders Wikipedia absolutely worthless if taken in the slightest bit seriously, but nevertheless, it has apparently been accepted as "an official policy on the English Wikipedia." Lamentable. However, in view of it, I've therefore removed this statement from the introduction and changed the manner in which it is addressed in the main text to permit a citation required tag. Simon Dodd 00:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarity

In Powell's and Burger's view, particularly in light of the increasing caseload,

it was redundant to have nine separate memoranda prepared for each petition and
thus, despite objections from Justice William Brennan, Burger and Associate
Justices Byron White, Harry Blackmun, Lewis Powell, and William Rehnquist began
pooling their clerks

This sentence seems a bit unclear to me. I'd like to change it to

In Powell's and Burger's view, particularly in light of the increasing caseload,

it was redundant to have nine separate memoranda prepared for each petition and
thus, despite Justice William Brennan's objections, Burger and Associate Justices
Byron White, Harry Blackmun, Lewis Powell, and William Rehnquist began pooling their clerks

but, due to the lack of clarity, I'm not sure that's the right interpretation. Thoughts? --mcpusc 03:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly right, go for the change. Newyorkbrad 03:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)