Talk:California Southern Law School

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Updating this page -- COI Declaration[edit]

I'm S. Rich and I have an ownership interest in California Southern Law School. With WP:COI#Declaring_an_interest in mind, I declare I'm here to contribute information that will improve the quality of all Law school and Law-related pages. I am aware of WP:PG and I abide by them. If you want to contact me, please leave a message on my talk page (User talk:Srich32977). --S. Rich (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC) As of May 21, 2011, I no longer edit this page. Accordingly, some of the personal info on me has been removed from this comment and the comment itself was slightly revised. 14:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The disclosure is welcome.   Will Beback  talk  08:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance[edit]

The bulk of this article seems to cover generic law school issues rather than specific information about the school. In particular, the second and third sections don't seem to concern the school at all. As a rule of thumb, all sources should mention the subject of the article. Unless there's a good reason to keep them I'll delete those sections.   Will Beback  talk  08:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see response on Will Beback's talk page. (In fact, I'll copy it and put it here.) --S. Rich (talk) 12:59, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Permit me to continue to work on California Southern Law School. To clarify on the relevance issue, I think you are referring to the Pre-legal education and Law study sections. Well, I think I'll put the "off-topic" info into notes.
But I read in WP:REL that the goal is to be relevant and useful to the reader. With this in mind, keeping the CBE requirements within the various California based law school articles is much more useful to the readers. Legal education in California is a complex system of ABA approved schools, non-ABA/CBE accredited schools, non-accredited schools (which include "fixed facility", distance learning [internet], and correspondence schools), and law office study. (Only much of this info is "buried" in the California State Bar article.) Overall, my goal is to have a concise article that covers the bases and serves as a template for all the other law school articles out there, particularly for the minor ones such as CSLS. (E.g., without all the puffery and spam.) But please note CSLS is completely legit -- it was founded 40 years ago and some of the top attorneys and judges in the Inland Empire are graduates. (Virginia Blumenthal and John Evans to name two.) Past faculty members include Rod Pacheco and Stephen G. Larson. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 12:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)12:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Adding a list of notable instructors and alumni would be a big improvement. But most of the article is generic and could apply to any similarly situated school. Perhaps we could move that text to California_Bar_Examination and link to it. Then the same text could serve similar schools, avoiding repetition.   Will Beback  talk  22:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One improvement I've been considering is the outline in WP:UNIGUIDE. Re the CA Bar Exam, the other wrinkle is the "Baby Bar" which is the consumer protection mechanism for non-accredited schools. Seeking to explain it, along with the various methods of obtaining a law degree makes a concise explanation for the non-accredited school system difficult. Also, some students in these schools forgo the Baby Bar and simply look for the J.D. to add to their resume. (They face the same academic standards, but are not eligible to take the regular Bar Examination.) In other words, there is no such thing as "any similarly situated school" in the complex California scheme. Your guidance re notable people is greatly appreciated and I have been working on it for a while. --S. Rich (talk) 23:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The combination of factors may be individual but, if I understand correctly, the rules are the same for every school. There are a number of schools that are non-accredited but accepted by the CBA. Ultimately, the purpose of an encyclopedia article about a school is not to help potential students to decide whether to attend, nor to help current students figure out which test they need to take when. This article is about the school - what makes it unique. If this were a biography we would not include an explanation of the human digestive system, even though it might apply to the subject. And in an article on the Corvette model of cars we would not include a section on how internal combustion engines work. Likewise, in an article about a law school we don't need to describe details of the bar exam.
Given the current length of the rest of the article, the apporiate weight would be a couple of sentences. Something like, "Because CSLS is an authorized but non-accredited school, students must take the 'baby bar' at the end of their first year". For the admission part, rather than explain the CBA requirement why not list CSLS's requirements?
As the only secondary source for this article, we should make better use of the PE profile.[1] Articles should not be based mainly on primary sources, as this article currently is.   Will Beback  talk  07:31, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
An additional secondary source has been added (for a total of three) describing the school, albeit I don't have a Press-Enterprise link for it. (I'm looking.) Notable people added with appropriate sources on each, except for Larson who has his own article. Rather than redink all of the judges IAW WP:POLITICIAN, I've left them with black typeface. (Note, judges in California are statewide offices. They sit in the "Superior Court of the State of California" in and for the county of such-and-such.) The two added redlinks are appropriate in that Blumenthal is notable in her own right and there are various listings of DAs in which Ramos is already redlinked. The pre-legal ed stuff has been rearranged. Why? CSLS accepts people who meet the basic requirements. It is a school of opportunity and it allows the students the freedom to make their own decision as to attending. Still, I think I'll put some of the CBE requirement stuff into a note. IAW the WP:UNI guidelines, I can get a photo. Renovations are underway and will be complete for photo purposes soon. In closing, may I have other/additional suggestions please? Thank you.--S. Rich (talk) 00:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is looking better. Regarding the list of notable people, please be aware that the people on such lists need to meet the general standards of notability for Wikipedia biographies, Wikipedia:Notability or the more specific guideline you found at at WP:POLITICIAN. I'm afraid that most of the judges on the list would not qualify. For those people it might be best to summarize them by saying something like, "Eight superior court judges are CSLS graduates."   Will Beback  talk  07:04, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Judgepedia is an open Wiki, and we can't use those for sources.   Will Beback  talk  07:15, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Judgepedia refs were deleted earlier today. I have to disagree about the judges. The are nominated/appointed to sit by the governor and they serve as Judges of the Superior Court of the State of California (as stated above). In this regard, they are "judges who have held . . . sub-national (statewide . . .) office . . .." They can be and are assigned across county-lines to sit in different courts by the Judicial Council of California. (And thanks for the complements on the improvements.) --S. Rich (talk) 04:16, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that was intended to refer to state-wide posts, like state supreme court judges, not local judges who are moved around. Can you point to any biographies of superior court judge that've survived AFD?   Will Beback  talk  04:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I looked around and found several bios for superior court judges, but in each case their notability arose from other accomplishments. David S. Cunningham, III, although perhaps extra notable for being president of his district, is perhaps the cleanest example I've seen. We could nominate the article for AfD and see what the community thinks.   Will Beback  talk  04:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I invite you to look at [Category:California_state_court_judges]. At first glance, I don't know how many of the names are strictly state court judges vs. federal judges. Some of them moved from state to federal positions. There two points behind this: one, none of these names are "local" judges. (In some jurisdictions, e.g., other states, there are judges who are strictly city or county judges, not California.) Two, to say that Superior Court judges are not state-wide ignores the fact that judges of the courts of appeal sit "locally" in the sense that they serve in judicial districts. (The next step up is the Supreme Court of California.) Do the appellate court judges get deleted? Also, judges are paid by the State of California. Their system of discipline is a state-level system. (I imagine I can find other facts to support this premise.) Another point, in New York each of the trial courts is described as the "New York Supreme Court" and these courts have general jurisdiction in New York as a whole -- they are not limited to counties. How do we parse out what judges are state-wide in the 50 jurisdictions? So, rather than get hung up on whether the Superior Courts of the State of California or the New York Supreme Courts are "state-wide" political offices, I hope we can live with the ambiguity in the guideline and leave the judges per se as notable even if we do not have articles on them. Meanwhile, I'll delete Hudspeth & Reikes as non-judges, although teaching a subject (Torts) for 25 years straight is a notable accomplishment!--S. Rich (talk) 05:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accreditation[edit]

Accreditation is an important attribute of an educational institution. Is CSLS accredited and if so by whom? That should go in the lead.   Will Beback  talk  01:34, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second section of History covers the details. (It was moved from the lead.) I shall provide a brief explanation in the lead.--S. Rich (talk) 04:07, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on California Southern Law School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:33, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on California Southern Law School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:53, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:California_Southern_Law_School&oldid=1206512908"