Talk:James Allan (law professor)

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Australia: Queensland Low‑importance

	Australia portal James Allan (law professor) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Jan 2021 addition

Noteduck, Vanadime, this is newly added material [[1]] which has been challenged. Noteduck, as the editor who wants to add the new content, WP:ONUS says, "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." That means it is up to you to start the the talk page discussion and get consensus for inclusion. I think this looks a bit like RECENT to me and I also agree this looks like a POINTY edit. Given the limited content here I would ask if the whole article shouldn't be AfD'ed. Regardless, the disputed content should not have been restored without consensus first. Springee (talk) 17:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]