Talk:Cornell Law School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject New York / Cornell University  (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Cornell University (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Law (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
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.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Revision[edit]

how does this page look —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cornell010 (talkcontribs)

  1. Don't copy text from a source, that is plagiarism. Use multiple sources to write an article.
  2. Always log in if you have an account.
  3. Always sign your comments. -mercuryboardtalk 18:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
But, you have to admit the library section really blows.--Cornell010 19:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but you can't plagiarize. The library section should be expanded... just go through the source and rewrite the section (from scratch) around it. -mercuryboardtalk 19:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I was wondering, if we cited the source, then would it still be plagiarism? I am asking this because, on some other wikipedia pages I have seen people copy from another source word for word, however, they cited it, and by citing it wouldn't we be recognizing the source, thus not commmitting plagiarism. Thanks.User:Cornell010 20:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Then you're mirroring content which has not been released under a Wikipedia-friendly license and you're not plagiarizing, but instead blatantly infringing on a copyright. -mercuryboardtalk 20:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I see.--Cornell010 20:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I just re-wrote the Library section, however, I need help with using the same refernce more than once (citing it). I tried to learn from the main Cornell article, where this is done many times, however, I could not get it to work. User:Cornell010 17:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
First instance of the reference: <ref name='something'>{{cite whatever}}</ref>
All instances after the first: <ref name='something' />
The somethings have to be the same. -mercuryboardtalk 21:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Admissions numbers[edit]

There seems to be a problem with the admissions percentages, as the 583 number is the TOTAL number of J.D. students at Cornell. CLS class cohorts are typically 180-200 students in size. So, the applicants compete to be one of the roughly 180-200 students entering in a particular year, not one of 500-600. I'll wait to hear some debate on this, but I will change the numbers soon. Masonpatriot 18:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the editor also combined yield and acceptance into one mostly useless statistic. —mercuryboardtalk 18:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Introduction[edit]

The introduction of this article is in desperate need of citations. I know that many of these pages are written/edited by students/alums/administration, but the introduction reads like an advertisement, with nothing to back up many of the boasts. Rms869 (talk) 08:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Assessment[edit]

Needs WP:MOS work to get to B class. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Drive-by tagging[edit]

Lots of WP:BOOSTERISM. —Notyourbroom (talk) 17:33, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Notable faculty[edit]

This section was padded out with several people who lacked a Wikipedia article to back the assertion of notability. Please see this edit for the specific list of names I removed. Note that I am not asserting that these people are non-notable. In the absence of corroboration within Wikipedia, however, I am erring on the side of a purge of the section, as is standard practice in these cases. —Bill Price(notyourbroom) 00:33, 27 July 2010 (UTC)