Greetings

edit

Hi everyone,

I created this as a stub since there was no article previously and a state Supreme Court judge seems to meet the criteria of notability.

I can't say I have a lot of interest in this particular topic so others will have to carry the ball. At this point, I think I have provided enough cites to remove the ref improve tag related to insufficient in line cites. It remains basically a stub, so I'm in favor of keeping the other tag, at least until the article is fleshed out.

One thing that could be done is to rename the article so that her last name is capitalized. I'm not sure how to do this myself. Mr. Swordfish (talk) 18:33, 1 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joan Larsen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:54, 23 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Dates

edit

The infobox says that she assumed office on the Sixth Circuit on Nov. 2, but the body text says she received her commission on Nov. 8. My sense is that probably she could not join the court without receiving her commission and being sworn in, so I think those should be reconciled, but didn't want to change it without floating the question. MrArticleOne (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

It's the 2nd. Check her FJC bio for the commission date, which the project uses for term_start in the infobox. The body of the article is likely referring to the date she was sworn in. – JocularJellyfish TalkContribs 21:19, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the FJC does say she received the commission on the 2nd. The article's body text contradicts that and says she received it on the 8th. I guess the body text needs to be correct then? Although personally, while I am no expert on the particularities, it seems odd to me that she (or anyone) could be said to hold an office before taking the oath of office. MrArticleOne (talk) 03:25, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:38, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply