Talk:Cohen v. California
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cohen v. California article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article follows the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Legal. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 October 2018 and 12 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shalichan. Peer reviewers: Weinshel, Erujhaider.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Further reading
editI've added Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties to the Further reading section. — Cirt (talk) 07:44, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Can we get a photo of the jacket? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.101 (talk) 04:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Article Evaluation
editThis article only had 6 references, which was not nearly enough. The references were also mainly citing the government record of the case, so it did not provide more than one view of the case.AstroFan2017 (talk) 02:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback, AstroFan2017. I've placed a template ({{primary sources}}) at the top of the article which indicates that it needs more secondary sources. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 03:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
- I removed the template. Per WP:MOSLAW, primary sources are authorized, and in some manners preferred for legal articles. GregJackP Boomer! 19:27, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
- Does https://legaltalknetwork.com/podcasts/make-no-law/2018/11/the-f-bomb/ qualify as a secondary source? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 22:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Potential References
editHere's a list of potential references I'd like to add to this article.
- Civilizing Public Discourse: An Essay on Professor Bickel, Justice Harlan, and the Enduring Significance of Cohen v. California - DA Farber (in Duke Law Journal)[1]
- A Look Back at Cohen v. California - William Cohen (in UCLA Law Review)[2]
- Looking Back at Cohen v. California: A 40 Year Retrospective from Inside the Court - Thomas Krattenmaker (in William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal)[3]
References
- ^ A., Farber, Daniel (1980). "Civilizing Public Discourse: An Essay on Professor Bickel, Justice Harlan, and the Enduring Significance of Cohen v. California". Duke Law Journal. 1980.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Cohen, William (1987). "A Look Back at Cohen v California". UCLA Law Rev. 34: 1595.
- ^ Krattenmaker, Thomas (2012). "Looking Back at Cohen v. California: A 40 Year Retrospective from Inside the Court". Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 20: 651.
Revising
editI'm going to start on a major revision of this article, including formatting the article according to WP:SCOTUS, revising the references to allow pinpoint references, and expanding. I'll probably change the reference system to Bluebook, if there are objections, please let me know, but the current system cites to the entire work instead of the point in the work that supports the text in the article. GregJackP Boomer! 19:36, 3 August 2019 (UTC)