Talk:Robert H. Jackson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Rehnquist Memo
I do not really see why the Jackson article should contain an at length discussion about the Rehnquist memo. The controversy was about Rehnquist and his attempts at attribution, not about Jackson. This is all discussed in the Rehnquist article.
Yes, the memo was written for Jackson; but then so were hundreds of other memos. The Rehnquist article rightly contains a paragraph long discussion on the memo. While a mention of the controversy and a link to the Rehnquist article might be appropriate, a lengthy discussion (longer than the far more relevant Black-Jackson feud, as it stands now) seems out of place to me. Magidin 17:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that the Rehnquist article should discuss it in much greater detail; if you feel you can trim it down appropriately, go ahead, as long as you don't remove it entirely. Postdlf 17:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Family
Did this man have a family? Parents, wife, children or something? To me it seems like he came from space without any human relationsips. This whole article is jst about his work. Family facts are sadly not included. 89.51.158.22 09:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Most recent addition on feud with Black
The most recent addtiion (June 14 2007) is out of place in the sequence of the article. The cables to Truman are mentioned later on, in their proper chronological place. It should be moved to its proper place, and repeated matters should be removed (e.g., the contents of the cable). In addition, it seems to contain a fair amount of POV comments. Magidin 04:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nuremberg section
Jackson's confrontation with the surviving Nazileaders during the international tribunal is curiously absent from this section. The link to the site honoring Jackson is perhaps understandably quiet on the matter, as Hermann Goering seems to have won more points against Jackson than he lost, though of course Goering's debating skill had no effect on the verdict. As written, the Nuremberg section places more emphasis upon Jackson's concern with the vacancy for chief justice back in DC.
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of the subject could expand the section, though not necessarily in the detail shown in the Goering entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.172.199 (talk)
[edit] Jackson vs. Black dispute
This article has been greatly revised since the last time I read it. It is no longer presented in a clear, chronological fashion. Furthermore, it appears to be biased against Justice Black. With the numerous citations and use of ibid, it almost seems like the individual whom revised the article was copying and pasting portions of a research paper. This article needs extensive clean-up to maintain a more neutral standing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.160.140.209 (talk) 20:27, August 20, 2007 (UTC)
I have begun with some tentative reorganization. This was done by deleting most of the research paper that was dumped in here (although the part on Dennis, though it needs to be reworked, may prove useful). We now have only one section each on the feud with Black, and on the Nuremberg trials. --Max power 17:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I find the section "Feud with Black" to be gossipy and overly sympathetic to Jackson's point of view. It diminishes the article. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 23:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)