From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|WikiProject Law||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
- Samoa info ought to be moved out, I think. --Lukobe 23:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- No, there's no (more) logical place for such an in se illogical arrangement Fastifex 12:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
- The capitalization scheme seems a little strange, but maybe that's just me. I don't know the thing about "constituent states and even territories", I think that its true that all states in the U.S. have a Chief Justice. I didn't know that South Dakota was ever a territory, I thought that when Dakota Territory was split that South Dakota became a state. Rlquall 01:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Lead paragraph discrepancies
In the lead paragraph/run-on sentence, most of the links are to articles on the supreme court of a particular country. The last sentence, though, says:
- In England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, the equivalent position is the Lord Chief Justice and in Scotland, the equivalent is the Lord President of the Court of Session.
I have some of issues with it:
- England, Wales links to Courts of England and Wales, not a supreme court
- Northern Ireland links to Northern Ireland, not any court
- Lord Chief Justice links to Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales even though there is a separate Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland.
- Scotland links to Scotland, not any court
- It appears there is also a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. Isn't this more relevant to the article?
- Actually, the sentence, in whatever form, seems to belong better at the end of the 3rd graph, discussing different names for the presiding judge of courts named other than "Supreme Court".
- The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom sits above the three "top courts" of the Courts of England and Wales, the Courts of Scotland and the Courts of Northern Ireland. The chief justices of England and Wales, of Northern Ireland, and of Scotland sit in the courts of their respective countries, not the UK Supreme Court. So the lack of a link to a supreme court is correct.
- I've linked and un-Easter-egg'd the links to the three jurisdictions' courts system. I've also mentioned the UKSC.
- As the article says the title of Chief Justice derives from the English system, it probably makes sense to have the explanation of the English position sooner rather than later. Hope this helps. BencherliteTalk 18:33, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fixes. I do wonder if the article should really just be a part of the supreme court article, and also whether it should clarify that it is only about the chief of the supreme courts of "countries" (and why?) (since it does not include individual US states' supreme court chief justices, for example). Also, any thoughts about trimming down the (IMO overly-long) list of 10 examples in the lead sentence? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 22:47, 11 December 2012 (UTC)