Talk:Inner Temple

Local authority

A page from the Inner Temple website [1] suggests that it is not a local authority - its Sub-Treasurer is. It also suggests that most local authority powers have indeed been "delegated" to or are exercised by the Corporation of London so "the local government functions are few". The same applies to the Middle Temple except that its local authority is the Under-Treasurer. --Henrygb 00:02, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Territorial status

The inclusion of Inner and Middle on the Template:London suggest that they have some special status and are perhaps not part of the territorial authorities that they lie within. If this is the case. The Template_talk:London has a short discussion, but it should probably be mentioned in the articles if the special status is unique enough to be noteworthy. Conversely, if their status is nothing special, they oughtn't be on the template. Thoughts? /Kriko 14:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Merger with 1 Temple Gardens

I suspect that 1 Temple Gardens was an inadvertant vanity article creation by a barrister practicing there. Besides the article does not assert any notability, let alone notability independent of Inner Temple. Merge JASpencer 17:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Merge The Blackfriar 14:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

MergeVikÞor | Talk 23:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. JASpencer 22:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't take it name from the Knights Templar

Photos

The requested photos were added so I deleted the reqphotoin London tag. What do you reckon? The Blackfriar 14:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

A Confusing Sentence

This sentence confuses me:

The Inn is both a professional body for many barristers which provides legal training, selection and regulation.

The Inn is both a professional body and what?

DavidHeald (talk) 04:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Fixed; that was initially meant to have another clause, but it got lost somewhere along the way. Ironholds (talk) 10:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Either these dates or this sequence is wrong. Please fix.

The following is written wrong:

"first, a decree by Henry III of England on 2 December 1234 that no institutes of legal education could exist in the City of London,[9] and secondly a papal bull of 1207 that prohibited the clergy from teaching the common law, rather than canon law.[10][11]"

1207 was before 1234. Either one of the dates is wrong, or the papal bull was first and the royal decree was second.

Someone who knows, please fix this.

71.109.150.141 (talk) 06:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Yup, sorry; fixed. Ironholds (talk) 11:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Templarsign.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Templarsign.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:07, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thoughts on a draft page

I recently declined Draft:1 Crown Office Row Chambers as being too much of a duplicate of this page, along with the fact that it is barely longer than the section in this article as it is. That being said, I recognise that this article is rather lengthy, and wanted to get opinions on whether it would be worth splitting out that section into a new page (i.e. the draft page). Thank you for your thoughts. (please ping on reply) Primefac (talk) 08:25, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

@Primefac: I contributed to the article Draft:1 Crown Office Row Chambers. Hopefully I can help a little. The reason I think this ought to be in a different article from the section in this article is because that article is about the *buildings* within the Inner Temple, whereas Draft:1 Crown Office Row Chambers is about the specific organisation of lawyers (similar but not identical to a law firm). The organisation is housed in 1 Crown Office Row but it a separate entity from the Inner_Temple. Inner Temple is an historic location in London comprised of many buildings, of which 1 Crown Office Row is one. Inner Temple is an Inn of Court. 1 Crown Office Row is a distinct association of lawyers operating from an address within it. The terminology is confusing. Barristers belong to Inns of Court as a professional body. Inns of Court are also physical areas in the City of London. The buildings within the Inns are historic monuments, but also contain within them these associations of lawyers who are not necessarily part of the Inn.

There is precedent for having free-standing articles relating to barristers chambers (the associations, not the buildings), see:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Hare_Court
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/39_Essex_Chambers
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brick_Court_Chambers
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex_Court_Chambers
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_Court_Chambers
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Essex_Court
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone_Chambers

Please let me know if any of that is unclear - it may well be! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.33.192.47 (talk) 13:17, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Any further articles about specific firms must meet WP:NCORP. Merely being an occupant of the building doesn't make a firm notable. Nor does having notable barristers working for the firm. Nor does being listed in Chambers or similar. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 05:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)