Talk:Pro se

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pro se article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

"It is perhaps unfortunate that legal systems are set up for the convenience of the legal profession, which includes the judges and the attorneys, and not for the parties' convenience, the very people without whom the others would not have a job. It is discerned by litigants that they have an inalienable and absolute right to defend themselves, or to prosecute their cases, under constitutional guarantees."

"Due to the high overhead costs of litigation, and the massive backup of cases, the trend today is to provide legal self-help materials to enable would-be litigants with their cases. Such free materials can usually be found in the courts, but mostly on the internet. The courts and the lawyers are by their very nature intimidating, but slowly the process can be seen to be adapting to these changes, and the courts are realizing that they have to adjust to the demands of the public if they can be helped to be knowledgeable and intelligent, and that they need to hold any inbuilt bias in check."

I removed the prior sections due to editorial content. Manney 22:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Legal Standing

I'm looking for information on the legal standing of self-represented cases and judgments when cited in later cases. I realize this is esoteric, but I've been up a creek trying to decipher the phrase, "this case is not to be cited in any other case and is not to be reported in any courts", which I've been finding references to on the Internet lately. Sweetfreek 10:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added Barbara Schwarz to famous Pro se litigants

I was a bit surprised that she wasn't already listed here. Anynobody 03:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Might want to add the citations to this article too, so people don't have to go digging through the referenced article to find them... Smee 06:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC).

Can do, but I thought if editors really wanted to know they'd link over to her article. This is based on my observation that this article doesn't seem to have one (a reference section). If one is required I'm all for it, but if references for Barbara Schwarz are entered it would obligate us to reference all those on the list. Anynobody 07:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Not required, just a thought. In general all Wikipedia articles should have References sections, and be standalone referenced in their own right with citations. Not any one person's responsibility to reference the whole thing, but at any rate, I will add a references section and see where it goes from there... Smee 07:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC).

Still, only referencing one entry makes the entire article look "incomplete" so I've referenced the others from their respective articles. Anynobody 07:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from pro per, Litigant in person, and propria persona

I'm suggesting a merge with all these terms. All the articles are as stubby as possible and have no information that differentiates them from pro se.Mneumisi 19:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)