Talk:Buckley v. Valeo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Elections and Referendums  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 
WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Law (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Infobox[edit]

Is there any reason that all the main text of the article is displayed below the infobox rather than alongside it? You get a fairly narrow infobox, with wasted screen space to the side of it. It doesn't look as good, and also you have to scroll down to get to the beginning of the actual article text. twfowler (talk) 18:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Citations[edit]

This article totally lacks citations. 65.100.48.249 (talk) 19:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality[edit]

The last section about the significance is a one-sided tirade about campaign finance and democracy, which is great and all, but the other side should be represented as well. 204.111.244.233 (talk) 04:35, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Some of the recent edits seem to be trying to reargue the theory of campaign finance rather than describe this case. I think a collateral reference to the "dark money" controversy that began about 35 years after Buckley was cryptic and uninformative. The article, as I read it, quotes the majority mainly to describe it's holdings. The lengthy quote from the dissent seemed to go beyond that core description, and seemed an inappropriate effort to bias the article without equally long excerpts from the majority, which seemed self-defeating. Gadfly1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)