Talk:Legal nullity

I created this page because another user, (specifically, whichever user who wrote the entry on Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) used this phrase there, and then enclosed it in brackets, indicating they felt it warranted a Wikipedia entry.

I noticed the link to this entry was red, so I supplied some basic text. i see no reason to delete it immediately upon its creation, merely because it lacks some content right now. Clearly, i am not the only person who believes it to be worthwhile. As I stated above, there is at least one other Wikipedian who believes we should have this article.

It is also useful to have this article here, in a concise manner, merely as an overview of ths interesting aspect of legal practice and temionology. thanks. --Sm8900 16:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It certainly doesn't look like a dicdef to me. Furthermore, "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" is explicitly listed as not a reason for speedy deletion at WP:CSD. I'm removing the notice. Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio/Mirror
There is a potential copy violation for direct text copying given the identical language used here and in [book].

I will have corrected the duplicate language shortly and cited so any checking should be done at the time of this post.

The book's most recent ed is in 2010 - I've no idea if earlier eds pre-date this by the four years or so necessary (it's vaguely possible it is actually a mirror). I also see that the creator of this page was moving another's content, and given 12 years ago I felt that actually querying any editor seemed a bit pointless.

Nosebagbear (talk) 15:36, 27 May 2018 (UTC)