Portal talk:Law/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This page is an archive of discussions from Portal talk:Law. Please do not edit the material contained herein.
Contents |
Opening argument
This looks like it could become a very active portal. I think we should get a few thinks decided though, mainly how often should the Featured Article and Featured Picture be changed, and how should we decide. -GregAsche (talk) 02:08, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- I suggest that these things be changed weekly, and by a nomination-and-accession process on this page. I think it would also be neat to have a "featured case" - there are now hundreds of cases posted on Wikipedia, and more coming all the time. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 02:16, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Well, seeing how as we have had the same featured article and picture since this was created (June), I think it's time for a change. I also agree with a featured case section, that's a good idea. Does anyone have any nominations for new featured articles, cases, or pictures? -GregAsche (talk) 02:43, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- For a case to start with, I'd definitely have to say Marbury v. Madison, the grand-daddy of U.S. Con Law. For articles and images, I'd have to think about it... images would be hard, but I like this one:
-
- That may be too much of a focus on the U.S., tho... maybe for another time. How about this picture of a courthouse in Burma:
-
-
- Marbury v. Madison is good for a case, and I like the Burmese courthouse picture. How is Freedom of contract for the FA? And I was thinking, there is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Law, but what if we had a collaboration of the week? or am I getting too far ahead of myself here? -GregAsche (talk) 04:15, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Not at all - I would hope that editors who are active in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Law (as I am) will be equally active with this Portal. We never got a collaboration of the week off the ground, in part because there are sooo many law articles that need sooo much work, but I think it's a good idea, and something that should be done with a single voice between these projects. -- BD2412 talk 04:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Well, to get it done, we would need more people active, even between this and the wikiproject, there arne't many people active (you and me are the only editors to both the portal and project for the past couple weeks) if we want to get a collaboration going. I'm sure there are more people out there interested in law that would be willing to help. -GregAsche (talk) 05:12, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Not at all - I would hope that editors who are active in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Law (as I am) will be equally active with this Portal. We never got a collaboration of the week off the ground, in part because there are sooo many law articles that need sooo much work, but I think it's a good idea, and something that should be done with a single voice between these projects. -- BD2412 talk 04:27, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Marbury v. Madison is good for a case, and I like the Burmese courthouse picture. How is Freedom of contract for the FA? And I was thinking, there is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Law, but what if we had a collaboration of the week? or am I getting too far ahead of myself here? -GregAsche (talk) 04:15, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
-
The page is looking good! -- BD2412 talk 20:16, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- Yep, I added the new Featured Case section, plus the new featured article and picture (albeit a bit belated). Hopefully we can get some more people to help here too, I got Ambi by going through law-related articles and checking for major contributors, which I'm going to continue doing. -GregAsche (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Proposal for next week's featured case
I'd like to nominate the Free Church case - it needs a little work in terms of format and citation, but it's a fascinating Scottish decision in which a church with lots of holdings changed its doctrine, and a splinter group sued for the church's property because of this. The splinter group lost at trial, won on appeal, and were finally reversed by Parliament. -- BD2412 talk 22:27, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- By the way, when and how often are we going to switch out old for new? -- BD2412 talk 22:31, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
- Given the activity here, I think every two weeks is good. And that case looks great for the next featured case. Sorry it took me so long to respond here, your last edit must have slipped through my watchlist. -Greg Asche (talk) 22:59, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good plan. I suggest that we can use the above constitution-signing picture as well. Do you have anything in mind for a featured article? -- BD2412 talk 01:42, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- The constitution signing picture if fine, and I don't have anything in mind for a FA yet. Maybe someone else will become active here an nominate one, but if they don't, we can dig something up. If the once per two weeks idea or anything else I propose doesn't sound that great, feel free to give your opinion, I don't want to control this process. -Greg Asche (talk) 01:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- I think the process will be controlled by the consensus of the three of us who are active in it, at the moment - unless more people get involved, which would be a good thing, of course. I hereby suggest (drumroll...) that we make 3:00 PM on Sunday the official time for the changing of the featured materials. -- BD2412 talk 13:45, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- The constitution signing picture if fine, and I don't have anything in mind for a FA yet. Maybe someone else will become active here an nominate one, but if they don't, we can dig something up. If the once per two weeks idea or anything else I propose doesn't sound that great, feel free to give your opinion, I don't want to control this process. -Greg Asche (talk) 01:53, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good plan. I suggest that we can use the above constitution-signing picture as well. Do you have anything in mind for a featured article? -- BD2412 talk 01:42, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
- Given the activity here, I think every two weeks is good. And that case looks great for the next featured case. Sorry it took me so long to respond here, your last edit must have slipped through my watchlist. -Greg Asche (talk) 22:59, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Featured bio
I somewhat arbitratily decided to add a featured biography, and equally arbitratily picked Johnnie Cochran to start the series off - feel free to remove it if you think it's inappropriate. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 17:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Featured case candidate: K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra
For next week's featured case, I offer K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra - a shocking reversal of fortune from a murder trial in India! BD2412 talk 03:22, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- Looks good (and it's interesting too). For a featured bio, maybe William Rehnquist? and for a featured article, I think Habeas corpus would be good. I was thinking about Precedent for the FA, but it's a bit short. I have no idea what to do for the featured picture... -Greg Asche (talk) 04:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- Habeas corpus sounds great. As for the bio, I'd like to try to keep an international flavor - of course, Rehnquist is iconic, so I can't object to that ;-) - but for the next one after that, I suggest we track down a jurist from Latin America (we've had nothing from there). We are rather short on picture options. Maybe an electric chair or a hanging to spice things up? After all, it looks like we're posting a death penalty case! BD2412 talk 04:23, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'd love to have something from outside the U.S., but I have little knowledge of internationl lawyers and jurists. If you have a bio in mind that you would like to nominate in the place of Rehnquist, I'm all ears. And the hanging picture sounds like a good idea, it is pretty dull here. -Greg Asche (talk) 04:31, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'll look for pics and bios first thing tomorrow morning. I found this: Image:Firingsquad.WWI.staged.jpg, but it's a bit too war-time to fit on a law page, I think. But it did make me think of the Nuremburg trials, which I think is a future featured case candidate. BD2412 talk 04:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- If the objective of the portal is to educate legal ignoramuses like me, I'd believe that the featured articles should be Habeas Corpus, Mandamus etc. apart from personal laws such as those related to marriage and divorce. I'd definitely think that a COTW is in order. Thanks, --Gurubrahma 06:50, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'll look for pics and bios first thing tomorrow morning. I found this: Image:Firingsquad.WWI.staged.jpg, but it's a bit too war-time to fit on a law page, I think. But it did make me think of the Nuremburg trials, which I think is a future featured case candidate. BD2412 talk 04:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'd love to have something from outside the U.S., but I have little knowledge of internationl lawyers and jurists. If you have a bio in mind that you would like to nominate in the place of Rehnquist, I'm all ears. And the hanging picture sounds like a good idea, it is pretty dull here. -Greg Asche (talk) 04:31, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- Habeas corpus sounds great. As for the bio, I'd like to try to keep an international flavor - of course, Rehnquist is iconic, so I can't object to that ;-) - but for the next one after that, I suggest we track down a jurist from Latin America (we've had nothing from there). We are rather short on picture options. Maybe an electric chair or a hanging to spice things up? After all, it looks like we're posting a death penalty case! BD2412 talk 04:23, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps we should have more dynamic timing for rotating in new features. I was thinking about this last night - we now have four featured items, with an article, case, bio, and image. We could rotate one out each week, so every week we have one new thing on the portal (of course, the news will update every few days, whenever law news breaks). How about we rotate in a new featured article this week, a new bio next week, case the following week (as I just posted the case last night anyway) and image the week after that? Or is that too slow? maybe two items per week? BD2412 talk 14:52, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- One per week seems fine, good idea BD. I'll change the FA now. -Greg Asche (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- After some searching of the wiki (and the soul), I'd like to propose Hugo Grotius for our next featured bio - Dutch, 15th century, and a founder of many ideas upon which modern international law is based. BD2412 talk 20:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- Grotius is now da man - Rehnquist next, then I'm thinking Mireille Roccatti Velásquez, a Mexican attorney who headed the investigation of a slate of murders in Chihuahua. Also, next week we can rotate in K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra as our featured case. BD2412 T 04:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds good. How do you dig up all these good foreign law articles? -Greg Asche (talk) 04:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ah, my secret is that I went to the Florida International University College of Law, which takes the International part very seriously - International law was a required class, and every class had an international component (we even had a Justice of the Costa Rican Supreme Court guest lecture in our torts class once). Also, I've looked in the categories where courts/cases/judges are listed by nationality. BD2412 T 04:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds good. How do you dig up all these good foreign law articles? -Greg Asche (talk) 04:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Grotius is now da man - Rehnquist next, then I'm thinking Mireille Roccatti Velásquez, a Mexican attorney who headed the investigation of a slate of murders in Chihuahua. Also, next week we can rotate in K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra as our featured case. BD2412 T 04:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- After some searching of the wiki (and the soul), I'd like to propose Hugo Grotius for our next featured bio - Dutch, 15th century, and a founder of many ideas upon which modern international law is based. BD2412 talk 20:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
It's about time to rotate in a new image - afraid I haven't come up with one yet. :-0 BD2412 T 05:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Image:Justice12.jpg
The image that's being used on the law portal (& various templates) (Image:Justice12.jpg) doesnt have any source or copyright information. The uploader hasnt responded to requests for some, and so the image is now at a state where it can be speedily deleted, I understand User:BD2412 is looking at gradually replacing it everywhere. I'm just putting this here so everyone knows. Cheers... Agnte 23:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
More rotation...
A bit late, but I've changed out the Constitution-signing pic with one of a Zimbabwe Republic Police badge. Next week: new featured article. Any thoughts? BD2412 T 20:13, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- For now, I'm just going to go with an earlier poster's suggestion to use Mandamus. BD2412 T 15:11, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Mandamus seems good, sorry I've been a bit stagant in keeping up here. -Greg Asche (talk) 04:21, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Just realized that the featured case had been up a lot longer than the featured pic, so I changed that out instead - brought in Commonwealth v Tasmania, a fantastic Australian conservation case. Pic goes out on Christmas, then. BD2412 T 16:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
No complaints here. Thanks for remembering to change that :). -Greg Asche (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Rotation
As a time-saving measure, may I recommend the format used at P:UK (based on the format used for WP:TFA) where the rotating entries are set up in subpages and scheduled for several months in advance rather than being changed ad hoc by hand. The referencing makes use of the CURRENTMONTHNAME (April) and CURRENTYEAR (2007)variables, and subpages like Portal:United Kingdom/Featured/December 2005.
If you want more frequent updates, Portal:Astronomy has weekly and monthly changes for various sections. -- ALoan (Talk) 00:39, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip - we'll sit down and figure out what to feature for the next few months, in order to use such a scheme. BD2412 T 00:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Oh, right - my mistake :) As it happens, Astronomy have done pictures for the whole of 2006, and articles to March. FWIW, I can't see any reason why this Portal (and the UK) should not set up the schedule, say, 6 months in advance: the number of new Featured articles and Featured pictures in the UK and Law areas are not immense. The only area where a bit of thought is necessary (in the UK, at least) it DYK, where it is nice to feature relatively new articles. -- ALoan (Talk) 01:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- We'll start on this plan in January - but we have four features and rotate in one per week. I'm not sure this will work quite the same. BD2412 T 01:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, here's what we'll do - keep the featured article and bio on a monthly schedule, put the featured image and case on a weekly and duplicate four weeks at a stretch. BD2412 T 01:51, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Huh? I'm a bit confused by your last sentence. ALoan's idea seems good, it would be nice to plan our featureds out at once and be able to just let them go for a while. -Greg Asche (talk) 03:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Here's the problem: suppose we set the articles by month. On January 1, the {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} code in the template turns over all four articles, and they all stay that way until February 1, when the next set of articles automatically rotates in. But the page is less dynamic that way - everything is the same for a month, then everything turns over at once. But I like a dynamic page, where one feature rotates out on January 1, another on January 7, another on January 15, and the last on the 22d. This can not be accomplished with the {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} code, which only knows whole months from the 1st to the 30th or 31st. So, we trick the system by doing individual weeks, but we put the same feature in for four consecutive weeks (say, beginning January 15 and ending February 11). That way, something changes every week - but we set it all in motion far in advance. BD2412 T 03:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you're saying. Good idea. I'll get a list of possible features going and run it through here in a bit. -Greg Asche (talk) 03:27, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- As I said, the Astronomy portal does it weekly, using the CURRENTWEEK variable. To avoid unnecessary duplication, you could redirect one week to another, to get things changing out of step, IYSWIM. -- ALoan (Talk) 03:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Ah, I see what you're saying. Good idea. I'll get a list of possible features going and run it through here in a bit. -Greg Asche (talk) 03:27, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Here's the problem: suppose we set the articles by month. On January 1, the {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} code in the template turns over all four articles, and they all stay that way until February 1, when the next set of articles automatically rotates in. But the page is less dynamic that way - everything is the same for a month, then everything turns over at once. But I like a dynamic page, where one feature rotates out on January 1, another on January 7, another on January 15, and the last on the 22d. This can not be accomplished with the {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} code, which only knows whole months from the 1st to the 30th or 31st. So, we trick the system by doing individual weeks, but we put the same feature in for four consecutive weeks (say, beginning January 15 and ending February 11). That way, something changes every week - but we set it all in motion far in advance. BD2412 T 03:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Huh? I'm a bit confused by your last sentence. ALoan's idea seems good, it would be nice to plan our featureds out at once and be able to just let them go for a while. -Greg Asche (talk) 03:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, right - my mistake :) As it happens, Astronomy have done pictures for the whole of 2006, and articles to March. FWIW, I can't see any reason why this Portal (and the UK) should not set up the schedule, say, 6 months in advance: the number of new Featured articles and Featured pictures in the UK and Law areas are not immense. The only area where a bit of thought is necessary (in the UK, at least) it DYK, where it is nice to feature relatively new articles. -- ALoan (Talk) 01:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
Here's what I dug up for possible featureds.
Cases:
Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto
Abington School District v. Schempp
Dietrich v The Queen
Lawrence v. Texas
Articles:
Paragraph 175
Stare decisis
Jury nullification
Power of attorney
Twelve Tables
Let me know what you think about those. I'll keep looking for bios and pics, but they seem alot harder to find... -Greg Asche (talk) 03:56, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Nice. German Federal Constitutional Court abortion decision could be good if it was written up a bit. BD2412 T 04:27, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Well, the actual Featured articles and Featured pictures are in WP:FA and WP:FP, but you may be happy with some entries in the WP:FAC or WP:FPC archives (out of date Index and its subpages) which are good but not good enough to satisfy everyone. For example, Nix v. Hedden (although I can't spot many others in the archive). -- ALoan (Talk) 04:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I know, I didn't mean to imply that all of those were WP featured articles, just that they could be for the law portal (although a couple are, I farmed from WP:FA.) What I meant was, there is no real way of categorizing law related bios and pictures, thus making them harder to find. -Greg Asche (talk) 04:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- ALoan brings up a very good point, tho - we should have more law-related articles in WP:FA, and perhaps we could use the Law Portal as a kind of device to spur improvement on articles so they can be vetted for FA status. BD2412 T 04:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I would certainly support this. Not to be pessimistic or anything, but I dunno how much work we could do with just the three of us (although BD2412, you do do a ton here.).I'm certainly willing to try though. Maybe we could have a collaboration section on the main portal page and we could work with WikiProject law to see what we can do, huh? -Greg Asche (talk) 04:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- ALoan brings up a very good point, tho - we should have more law-related articles in WP:FA, and perhaps we could use the Law Portal as a kind of device to spur improvement on articles so they can be vetted for FA status. BD2412 T 04:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I know, I didn't mean to imply that all of those were WP featured articles, just that they could be for the law portal (although a couple are, I farmed from WP:FA.) What I meant was, there is no real way of categorizing law related bios and pictures, thus making them harder to find. -Greg Asche (talk) 04:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
-
Next bio, Hugh Kennedy
I've tabbed Hugh Kennedy for our next bio - the article has lots of info, but needs improvement! BD2412 T 01:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sorry if this has already been clarified before, but I just wanted to know if the bio should be about a legal luminary or if it can be that of a criminal as well. I am interested in articles such as Lakireddy Bali Reddy, that deal with people who are convicted in a country that is not of their origin. --Gurubrahma 12:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
-
- I think both are acceptable. Hugh Kennedy seems good, I'll try to expand the lead and find a picture for him. -Greg Asche (talk) 20:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- Some of the links lead to pics (and substantial bio info) - judging by the asserted topics, they should be old enough to be in the public domain. BD2412 T 21:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- With respect to articles on criminals, I'd rather focus on lawmakers and interpreters - I can see an Ernesto Miranda or Clarence Earl Gideon getting the nod, based on the importance of their cases; or even an Al Capone - but I think those should be the exception, not the rule. BD2412 T 03:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think both are acceptable. Hugh Kennedy seems good, I'll try to expand the lead and find a picture for him. -Greg Asche (talk) 20:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
