Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/R v Jordan (2016)

< Template:Did you know nominations
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:12, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

R v Jordan (2016) edit

(
)

Created by Valmi (talk). Self-nominated at 18:01, 7 April 2017 (UTC).

  • New enough. Long enough. According to QPQ Check, this is their first DYK, so no QPQ needed. I'm no lawyer, but "ruled" might work better than "judged" in the hook. Several paragraphs need citations. The hook fact is not cited. The lead mentions "a fixed maximum delay of 18 months from charges to trial, applicable to most cases", so it is not clear that the hook can be correct if there can be exceptions. Edwardx (talk) 22:35, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I've added references to all paragraphs--not new references though, just placing the existing ones in all places where I've used them. Is this a correct way to do things? I've taken the opportunity to extend the introduction. I think you are right that "ruled" is better. I could propose the following updated hook:
ALT1 ... that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a person charged with an offence in a provincial court normally has to be tried within 18 months?
Valmi ✒ 03:57, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

ALT1, at 141 characters, is stated in the article, and referenced at the end of the sentence where it is mentioned. Striking original hook. As noted above, all paragraphs now have at least one in-line citations. Earwig's tool shows a high rate, only because it sees the block quote as a copy; so, no issues with copyvio. This one is good to go with ALT1.— Maile (talk) 12:02, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

  • No, they normally have to be tried within 18 months or within 30 months, depending on whether a preliminary enquiry is done or not. Nothing in the article or source indicates that 18 months is the normal situation and 30 months the abnormal one. Fram (talk) 14:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Returning to Nominations page for the consideration of a new hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

ALT2 ... that the Supreme Court of Canada held that a 44 month delay from filing charges to trial's end was unreasonable under §11 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? 176 characters.
ALT3 ... that the Supreme Court of Canada held as unreasonable a 44 month delay from filing charges to trial's end? 107 characters. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:03, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

  • New reviewer needed to check newly proposed ALT hooks. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
    • verified both hooks against the decision. The article was new enough and long enough at time of creation; I agree that there are no copyvio issues. The use "JJ" and "J" instead of "justices" is confusing jargon but not enough of an issue to hold up the issue. No QPQ required. Mackensen (talk) 21:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/R_v_Jordan_(2016)&oldid=786083093"