Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law/Categorization
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
How precise?
[edit]How precise do we make this stuff? For example, if we add a case or concept fitting into "specific performance" or do we just want Contract_remedy? It seems like it would be legit to make it somewhat specific. Especially for really broad common law topics as they might get unweildy. mmmbeerT / C / ? 00:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Good question. A table containing every topic in law in the world would be ridiculously huge. Since the section is called categorization it would be best to stick with categories for starts. However, we've already gone beyond that. Perhaps we should remove the excess detail or else just avoid adding more article names and focus on the categories. I'm open to suggestions. --PullUpYourSocks 04:15, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
- The Priestley 11 was the result of a legal education review in Australia. It may be something worth considering. VeryRusty (talk) 12:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Category:Computer law legislation
[edit]Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_8#Category:Computer_law_legislation Ottawahitech (talk) 02:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Don't know if anyone participates here, but just in case, the above discussion is still active and needs more input. Ottawahitech (talk)
Merging or Clarifying the Case Law and Lawsuit Categories
[edit]Not sure how many people watch this page, but you are invited to join this conversation. Thanks. RevelationDirect (talk) 19:17, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Categorization of case law
[edit]See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_U.S._Supreme_Court_cases#Category:United_States_Supreme_Court_opinions_by_topic and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_April_15#Category:United_States_Supreme_Court_patent_case_law. Apokrif (talk) 14:56, 17 February 2016 (UTC)