Excellent job on the edits on Sommersett's case. I did a bit of tidying up to link in some other terms (esp. the Yorke-Talbot slavery opinion and just conform some of the citiations to the Manual of Style for legal citations on Wikipedia. I have always though that the article on Somersett's case is a GA waiting to happen. Hopefully with a bit more work we can have it ready to put it into the nomination process. But we need to be a little careful to preserve the distinction between that article and Slavery at common law. Glad it is not just me that has a fascination with this area of the law! --Legis (talk - contributions) 11:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I'm not sure I'm doing this right, because this is the first time I've posted on Wikipedia and to be honest I wasn't even aware of any of the rules and guidance about it, still less how to communicate with people on it !
I'm a Barrister in Birmingham - slightly less glamorous than your locale by the sounds of it ! I agree, it is a fascinating area of law. In fact I was reading a book on slavery and the author was having a bit of a pop at Lord Mansfield and in researching him, I felt the Wikipedia page, whilst more balanced, didn't really reflect the radicalism of the judgment notwithstanding Mansfield's essential personal conservatism (what else would you expect from a Judge of his or any time ?). Thanks for your helpful changes and comments - not sure what a GA is though ! Jim Tindal (30th May 7.11 BST)
- Don't worry - I think that is how we all start. GA is Wikipedia slang for "Good Article", which means one which has gone through the Wikipedia:Good article candidates nomination and approvals process. Don't worry too much about style - there are plenty of style Nazis around patrolling for that; there is a real shortage of editors contributing content though, and it will be nice to have someone else chipping in legal stuff from time to time. Funnily enough, I almost started my career at the Birmingham Bar too (at what used to be called 5 Fountain Court, but I think has since rebranded itself), but at the last minute I switched and did my pupillage in London and from there moved offshore. --Legis (talk - contribs) 07:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- 5 Fountain Court still going: now 'No.5' which I always thought sounds like a hair product - I'm at their big rivals 'St Philips', but get on fine with them really. My impression is that there are plenty of Wikipedia links around this subject - the Yorke-Talbot opinion in particular - which are really good but need 'aligning' with each other (for want of a better word) - not necessarily written by the same people or even from the same standpoint but with a consistent structure, proper links and minimum of overlap. On a different subject, might also be interesting to do a bit of stuff on modern human rights law, will have a think about potential subjects. Jim Tindal (31st May 7.52 BST)