Talk:Board of Education v. Walter

Untitled
This is a start but it's not clear what your topic is. Is it the court case? There's already a DeRolph v. Ohio article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeRolph_v._State. So what are you writing about?Mcassell04 (talk) 23:05, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

You have a lot of information, this is great. Try formatting the article in a wiki context. Also maybe try a section on effects or societal implications.--Jfords25 (talk) 01:44, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Importance
I concur. The article is a good start but the formatting needs work. Also, there needs to be a clearer statement of why this case is important. How does it matter? Mcassell04 (talk) 13:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Sourcing question
Hi. Taking a look at your article, I see you have a particular claim ("The ruling overturned a previous trial court ruling that stated that the system of funding violated the Ohio Constitution's requirement of providing a thorough and efficient system of public education") cited to the Ohio Constitution. When referencing claims on Wikipedia, you need to make sure that the source provided supports the specific claim you made. In this case the sentence is claiming that the court overturned a ruling on the basis that the system violated the constitution. The source provided only shows the text of the constitution, and doesn't support the salient claims in the sentence, specifically that a lower court ruling was overturned (Though that's a given in most states when a case reaches the state supreme court) and that the basis for the ruling was a conflict between the law and the constitution. You'd want to cite the state constitution if you refer to a specific section cited by the judges, but not to support a claim about why the ruling happened. Instead for that you could cite the section in the ruling or an article talking about the ruling (in popular press or a law journal). I realize you have other citations in the draft, but each should stand on its own and allow a critical reader to assess the claims made one by one. Please let me know if you need any help or have any questions. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Last peer edit
This article is great and in my opinion, looks just about finished. Your article looks very organized and gives plenty of non-biased information. Maybe you could include a section on how this case and DeRolph v. State of Ohio is impacting Ohio schools currently, if the information is out there. Other than that, this article looks finished. You made good use of the other editors’ suggestions in your talk pageKatelynyac (talk) 21:05, 10 November 2015 (UTC)Katelynyac

Little more information
I really like how clear and to the point this article is. It gives vital facts for the understanding of hate case, and does not spend too much time on unnecessary details. The only thing that I would add to this article would be a little information about the plaintiff. I think this will give the reader a better idea of the case. This is not a change, but maybe a request for more Information concerning the case. Overall this article is really good! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarrienW2 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Last Peer Edit
I must say, this is a very Interesting article choice. My advice is as follows for each section.

Background: Who was the plaintiff? What was the political atmosphere that contributed to this outcome then and now? What changed to overturn the decision? Any statistics to back that up? Was there any other lawsuit by other cities and is there any correlation to them via income differences?

The ruling: This section comes off a bit more relaxed in it's format. Possibly look to make it more formal/ professional text. Also back up sentences with links to cases to help validate what you're saying. The text is also a bit relaxed and somewhat opinionated but other than that just try to elaborate more on what you're disgusting and add as many links as you can that can help you paint the picture you're trying to create.

Keep up the good work!Ccofojohn20 (talk) 00:00, 14 November 2015 (UTC)