Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Lafler v. Cooper"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>L235
(create DYK nom)
 
imported>Gerda Arendt
(appr)
Line 11: Line 11:
  
 
-->
 
-->
* ... that in a dissenting opinion, [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the [[US Supreme Court]] had '''[[Lafler v. Cooper|elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"]]'''? <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small>
+
* <s>... that in a dissenting opinion, [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the [[US Supreme Court]] had '''[[Lafler v. Cooper|elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"]]'''? </s> <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small>
** '''ALT1''':... that when dissenting from the [[US Supreme Court]]'s decision in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the Court had elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"? <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small>
+
** '''ALT1''': ... that when dissenting from the [[US Supreme Court]]'s decision in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', [[Justice Scalia]] wrote that the Court had elevated "plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement"? <small>Source: "Today, however, the Supreme Court of the United States elevates plea bargaining from a necessary evil to a constitutional entitlement." ({{ussc|566|156|2012|pin=186}})</small>
** '''ALT2''':... that the [[US Supreme Court]] created a new body of constitutional law in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]'''? <small> Source: "the court has created a new body of constitutional law" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html]</small>
+
** '''ALT2''':<s>... that the [[US Supreme Court]] created a new body of constitutional law in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]'''?</s> <small> Source: "the court has created a new body of constitutional law" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html]</small>
** '''ALT3''':... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal convictions can be overturned if defense counsel ineffectively [[plea bargain]]ed? <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007]) </small>
+
** '''ALT3''':<s>... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal convictions can be overturned if defense counsel ineffectively [[plea bargain]]ed?</s> <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007]) </small>
** '''ALT4''':... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal defendants have a [[constitutional]] right to an effective lawyer when [[plea bargain]]ing? <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007])</small>
+
** '''ALT4''':<s>... that in '''[[Lafler v. Cooper]]''', the [[US Supreme Court]] held that criminal defendants have a [[constitutional]] right to an effective lawyer when [[plea bargain]]ing?</s> <small>Source: "A divided Supreme Court ruled for the first time Wednesday that the guarantee of effective legal representation applies to plea bargain agreements" ([https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-expands-plea-bargain-rights-of-criminal-defendants/2012/03/21/gIQA6vIZSS_story.html?utm_term=.cf834d779007])</small>
 
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Kyrö Distillery Company]]
 
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Kyrö Distillery Company]]
 
:* ''Comment'': I'm aware of the neutrality complications from quoting from only one justice, so I proposed a number of other hooks. My only concern is that I can't seem to think of any brilliant, ''per se'' "hooky" hooks at the moment. Best, '''[[User:L235|Kevin]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; [[User talk:L235#top|t]]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 
:* ''Comment'': I'm aware of the neutrality complications from quoting from only one justice, so I proposed a number of other hooks. My only concern is that I can't seem to think of any brilliant, ''per se'' "hooky" hooks at the moment. Best, '''[[User:L235|Kevin]]''' (<small>aka</small> [[User:L235|L235]]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; [[User talk:L235#top|t]]&nbsp;'''·'''&#32; [[Special:Contribs/L235|c]]) 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Line 23: Line 23:
 
-->
 
-->
  
:* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING  :*  -->
+
: [[File:Symbol voting keep.svg|16px]] Substantial article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. I like the quote, because I think it shows best for the average reader what's going on, but I don't like it bolded, - the topic is the case, not the quote. Therefore ALT1. --[[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 12:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
  
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 12:24, 3 March 2018

Lafler v. Cooper

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kyrö Distillery Company
  • Comment: I'm aware of the neutrality complications from quoting from only one justice, so I proposed a number of other hooks. My only concern is that I can't seem to think of any brilliant, per se "hooky" hooks at the moment. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Moved to mainspace by L235 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC).

Symbol voting keep.svg Substantial article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. I like the quote, because I think it shows best for the average reader what's going on, but I don't like it bolded, - the topic is the case, not the quote. Therefore ALT1. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:24, 3 March 2018 (UTC)