Talk:Joseph H. H. Weiler

Untitled
The entire second half of this article, and perhaps the whole piece, is compromised by aggrandizing terminology. Someone please size it down and even it up. Cjs2111 23:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The reason why the second half is so laudatory is precisely beacuse Weiler is one of the most influential and leading academics and policy-makers of our time. If we gave the blank facts, then it would be impossible to recognise his unique contribution.Harlay (talk) 01:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Not even in the entry on Beethoven will you find such overblown language. Weiler is, in my opinion, a very good and influential scholar, but even so I find this entry comical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.61.208 (talk) 08:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The petitesse of the previous commentator shows itself. Judging from contributions by the same contributor, am academic, maybe a fomer student of Weiler. For those who actually know about this subject, Weiler is unquestionably the greatest living scholar of EU law and has done even more - he is part of and influences the European integration debate. How many other professors of EU law get to go to Davos? Why does he get honorary doctorates at an unusually early age? One may not like him, but it is impossible to deny his towering presence. If he is so bad as the other commentators say, why would Federico Mancini, Habermas and others engage publicly with him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harlay (talk • contribs) 20:37, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

You ask "If he is so bad as the other commentators say...". The other commentators don't say he is bad. Merely that the article is bad. There's a difference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.61.208 (talk) 10:00, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

---

The judgment of the TGI, 17ème Chambre, in the Calvo-Goller defamation case is at http://www.scribd.com/doc/50272312/Ministere-Public-c-Weiler The case was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. Substantively it relates to the English libel case where Guardian science writer Simon Singh's criticism was (remarkably and happily) deemed privileged http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/index.php/site/project/333/ Andygx (talk) 13:02, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Joseph H. H. Weiler. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305142906/http://www.uniroma3.it/news2.php?news=2808&p=1 to http://www.uniroma3.it/news2.php?news=2808&p=1
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.comparativeconstitutions.org/2011/03/landmark-ecthr-ruling-on-crucifix-in.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/tackling-taboos-jews-and-christians-cross-and-deicide

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:40, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joseph H. H. Weiler. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129083040/http://www.catolicalaw.fd.lisboa.ucp.pt/en/programmes/ll-m-law-in-a-european-and-global-context to http://www.catolicalaw.fd.lisboa.ucp.pt/en/programmes/ll-m-law-in-a-european-and-global-context

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)