Talk:Arthur Alan Wolk: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson: new section |
m Signing comment by Boo the puppy - "→Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson: new section" |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== [[Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson]] == |
== [[Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson]] == |
||
I disagree with the edit that removed all discussion of [[Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson]]. This is a notable case that has been covered by many publications and is of a lot of importance to the Internet (including Wikipedia).[http://www.google.com/search?q=arthur+wolk+libel+lawsuit+-site:wikipedia.org] I have cited only notable ones, [[Reason (magazine)]], [[The Legal Intelligencer]], and [[Philadelphia Business Journal]].[http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/06/lawyer-trying-to-protect-his-r][http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464319845][http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/blogs/law/2010/08/overlawyered_blog_case_testing_statute_of_limitations_for_defamation.html] |
I disagree with the edit that removed all discussion of [[Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson]]. This is a notable case that has been covered by many publications and is of a lot of importance to the Internet (including Wikipedia).[http://www.google.com/search?q=arthur+wolk+libel+lawsuit+-site:wikipedia.org] I have cited only notable ones, [[Reason (magazine)]], [[The Legal Intelligencer]], and [[Philadelphia Business Journal]].[http://reason.com/blog/2010/08/06/lawyer-trying-to-protect-his-r][http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464319845][http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/blogs/law/2010/08/overlawyered_blog_case_testing_statute_of_limitations_for_defamation.html] <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Boo the puppy|Boo the puppy]] ([[User talk:Boo the puppy|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Boo the puppy|contribs]]) 16:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
Revision as of 16:35, 3 November 2010
 | Articles for creation Start‑class  | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
I disagree with the edit that removed all discussion of Arthur Alan Wolk v. Walter Olson. This is a notable case that has been covered by many publications and is of a lot of importance to the Internet (including Wikipedia).[1] I have cited only notable ones, Reason (magazine), The Legal Intelligencer, and Philadelphia Business Journal.[2][3][4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boo the puppy (talk • contribs) 16:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)