Talk:List of African American jurists

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal 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.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

African diaspora Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vandalism by User:Poetlister

I know you're trying to make a pedantic and obnoxious point over at List of African American jurists. But, let's just put it this way: Don't do it! If you violate WP:POINT persistently, I'll report the vandalism, or ask an admin to intervene. For passers-by, Poetlister is trying to indirectly argue that List of Jewish jurists doesn't require any evidence about whether a listed name is somebody Jewish, by vandalizing the AA list to remove names that are allegedly disputed.

As to Johnnie Cochran, your forced example is an utter failure. Aside from the suggestive picture on the page, we find:

By the late 1970s, he had made his name in the black community...

On the linked bio:

Cochran almost took the approach of a "black preacher" to the mostly African-American jury...

And on the WP page Category:African Americans.

I know the Cochran article does not contain the exact phrase "Johnnie Cochran is African American" verbatim. But it gives several obvious indicators. As I say (repeatedly) on Talk:List of Jewish jurists, any such reasonable inferential evidence is perfectly acceptable... it's just that the complete absence of any verifiable evidence is not. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 19:04, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Allegation of personal attack

This is not the place to launch personal attacks against other users. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Thank you. It really disrupts Wikipedai in doing something like this. Also, the Category:African Americans page has not been vandalised by anyone [1], so this is an example of lying to try to make someone look bad. Very bad form. Indeed, the only true claim is that Poetlister made one solitary edit, which was this one: [2], which put comments around Johnny Cochrane, giving reasons why. There is nothing wrong with doing this, as it is consistent with Lulu's own practise on List of Jewish jurists in many, many places. The Johnny Cochrane article was not vandalised by anyone. I think that a (fact) sticker is more appropriate however. As Cochrane was dark skin coloured (per his photo) the only question should be whether he identifies himself as being African American. He probably does. Its not proven though. I will add in a (fact) next to him to validate this suggestion. I am sure that there is evidence somewhere that he is African American, but until it is produced the (fact) sticker should remain. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 10:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Major cleanup needed

Lists shmists. Why is this list even needed? I am very tempted to nominate it for deletion. It seems to be a POV fork on List of Jewish jurists which in itself probably wasn't necessary, and has been a WP:POINT to try to justify a certain POV in the whole Jewish lists dispute that is quite frankly doing a lot to hurt Wikipedia.

I think that we'd probably be better off to wipe all of these lists including this one. But, since they remain, I put in all of the stickers, and put in (fact) tags on all of the entries where there is no verified proof that they are in fact African American (all of those listed do have evidence that they were jurists however). Being dark skin coloured doesn't make one African American, it should be noted. The qualification of what is African American is hotly disputed.

So why do we need such controversial lists? If this was created outside of any disputes, then maybe it could have some basis, but seriously this is a big old WP:POINT thing. Unless it is seriously cleaned up, I am going to put it up for deletion on the basis of being a POV fork that may never be able to be cured of NPOV issues. Its usefulness is also questionable. What is the point of it? Why do we need such a list?

I really hate lists on topics like this. Just put in category African American jurists in the individual article pages. What's wrong with doing that? Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 09:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed (?)

If there is some dispute as to NPOV or accuracy about this page, please place it here prior to adding any template tags to the article itself. These tags should not be used in violation of WP:POINT.

RfC

I'd like to invite the editors here to a discussion at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Lists by religion-ethnicity and profession. We're attempting to establish uniform guidelines for these types of lists. There's been some contentious voting on similar lists at AfD. The proposed guidelines are getting a warm response. Maybe you'd like to help solve this dispute by addressing the larger problem? Regards, Durova 03:47, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I saw someone peppered your page with flags again so I added some reference links. Durova 22:55, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think Durova may have put the comment about flags in the wrong place... I cannot see what it has to do with this page.

In any case, I tend to be sympathetic with the guideline Durova and other editors are working on for ethinicity+profession lists. In particular, I'm thinking that the initial description of this list should say something about the fact that these jurists are notable specifically in relation to their ethnicity. In a sense, that's pretty easy to meet for this particular list, since the obstacles based on racial discrimination that any African American jurist had to overcome are substantial; the fact a given person achieved juridical prominence despite those obstacles is notable. But we might as well be clear on it. Many of the figures listed were/are particularly concerned with the legal status of African Americans (and the legal history around this), and if so that's a pretty obvious notability criterion for this list (many jurists who are not ethnically African American, of course, also had this intellectual concern). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 02:31, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Visiting again. The citations and descriptions do make the list look much better. Best wishes, Durova 20:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any specific suggestion for how the list description might be improved to indicate that the individuals listed are notable as African Americans (I think the notability as jurists is pretty well covered... i.e. not just any average lawyer). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 20:51, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the article could reference profiles in Jet or Ebony, or similar ethnic interest television biographical broadcasts? Durova 20:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contribution

I've converted the list to a table, added life dates, and added a category. Regards, Durova 07:33, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice! "Life dates" seems an odd phrase though. Maybe "birth/death" (with "living" the value for the latter, where appropriate). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 07:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to change the phrasing if you have something better. Regards, Durova 09:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about making this a category?

Tracking African American jurists is a noteworthy project for Wikipedia. I think this list should become a category and there should be a difference between important persons who were law professors and those who became judges. Who was the first black judge ever? It's not an easy fact to determine. It seems to have been someone in Missouri who was appointed to the state supreme court for some time. It's time this information became organized and available. Right now the only useful category is African American Politicans, but that's too broad. There's a category for Roman Catholic Jurists, I think it's time this one got put together, but I don't know how to create categories.--Smashingworth 21:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list does something a category cannot. It contains annotations letting readers see in a quick comparative sense what each of the persons did, and also what years they lived (or still live). Obviously, the individual articles on each person contains much more detail than this, but this helps make overview comparisons. I would not oppose a category, but it should be in addition to rather than instead of this lisst. Of course, this list itself could desperately use some expansion... I am its main editor, and I just added some names that struck me off the top of my head; certainly there have been many other notable African American jurists than those that I quickly think of. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 02:50, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would still like to make the list more specific to only African American judges ... perhaps I should start a new list for that. I'm very interested in tracking down the very FIRST African-American judges in every instance ... first per state, first trial, first state supreme, first federal, etc. In some ways it's surprising how few African-Americans have risen to this sort of power. Only about 3 senators, only 1(!) ever elected governor, etc. Otherwise, I think I could make some valuable additions to this list.--Smashingworth 03:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you just add some sort of annotation to this list? You could use another column, or a color, or something like that. There really isn't enough here to warrant a sublist yet... maybe if it grows a whole lot. But then, the distinction doesn't seem all that important to me; most important jurists in fact are judges at some point in their careers, but law professors and even some regular attorneys contribute to jurisprudence as well. There's no reason you couldn't expand this simply to indicate "So-and-so was the first AA state supreme court judge in Texas" (or whatever). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 03:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, BTW, I looked around, and I cannot find any evidence of a category of Catholist jurists existing... are you sure it does? Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 03:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's included on John Roberts or Samuel Alito's page. Maybe both.--Smashingworth 05:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fact-check Update

Updated Sears entry to reflect Peggy Quince's installation as Chief Justice in Florida, 2008.

RfC

BAn RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:54, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of African-American jurists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of African-American jurists. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.usmayors.org/uscm/us_mayor_newspaper/documents/09_09_02/archer.asp
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.nbjcoalition.org/news/the-honorable-deborah-a.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051216205511/http://www.brownat50.org/brownBios/BioJudgeHigginbotham.html to http://www.brownat50.org/BrownBios/BioJudgeHigginbotham.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This list is not that comprehensive.

There needs to be more on this list. I find it disturbing that there are so many Black people who have contributed to the field of law, yet are refused to be on this page. Where is the page they are supposed to be, if not this one? Let me know. Best Allie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allieb1996 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:African-American gospel which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:17, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]