Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Schmerber v. California"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Mandarax
m (rm {{DYKnom}} (self nom))
imported>Notecardforfree
(Added review Egleston (MBTA station))
Line 12: Line 12:
 
-->
 
-->
 
* ... that some scholars fear the [[United States Supreme Court]]'s ruling in '''''[[Schmerber v. California]]''''' will one day be used to justify the involuntary [[Thought identification|mind reading]] of criminal suspects?
 
* ... that some scholars fear the [[United States Supreme Court]]'s ruling in '''''[[Schmerber v. California]]''''' will one day be used to justify the involuntary [[Thought identification|mind reading]] of criminal suspects?
 
+
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Egleston (MBTA station)|Egleston]]
 
:*
 
:*
 
<small>5x expanded by [[User:Notecardforfree|Notecardforfree]] ([[User talk:Notecardforfree|talk]]). Self-nominated at 09:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC).</small>
 
<small>5x expanded by [[User:Notecardforfree|Notecardforfree]] ([[User talk:Notecardforfree|talk]]). Self-nominated at 09:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC).</small>

Revision as of 07:00, 3 July 2015

Schmerber v. California

5x expanded by Notecardforfree (talk). Self-nominated at 09:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC).

Symbol confirmed.svg Absolutely fascinating article and hook to back it up. 5X expansion within date, quality referencing and prose, length and QPQ satisfactory. Excellent piece of work. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 21:22, 29 June 2015 (UTC)