Talk:Rosalie Abella

Biography assessment rating comment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- KenWalker | Talk 19:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Controversy
The Controversy section seems to be more about someone disagreeing with a decision in which RA took part than a genuine controversy. SCC justices make hundreds of decisions each year, all of which are controversial in the sense that they are all contested. And someone wins and someone loses. The articles would get pretty big if each decision of the Court were to be listed. I think I'll remove the section in a few days if someone can't come up with a good reason that this particular case is "especially" controversial. --24.68.252.200 (talk) 07:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Done 24.68.252.200 (talk) 11:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Greetings User 24.68.252.200, See revised article for "good reason that this particular case is "especially" controversial." Boyd Reimer (talk) 16:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to suggest that Hintzman's case isn't controversial or important. But this is RA's article, and it goes against WP:SS and WP:UNDUE to allow JH's case to dominate RA's page. Put another way: someone coming here to learn about RA neither wants nor needs to know about what Amnesty thinks about JH's case: they'd want to go to JH's page to find that out. And a brief link to JH's page can direct an interested visitor to that. Having more than half of RA's article devoted to the minutiae of someone else's case means it isn't RA's article any more 24.68.252.200 (talk) 04:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC).

Is this Censorship?
Greetings User 174.88.97.225,

On Apr 30 2009, you deleted the following entire paragraph:

Quote:

On November 15, 2007, Justice Abella was one of three Justices in the Coram regarding the dismissal of "the application for leave to appeal" of American conscientious objector, Iraq war resister, and refugee applicant Jeremy Hinzman. As is the case with every leave decision, neither reasons nor a vote was released, so it is impossible to know how Justice Abella voted. Nevertheless, “in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision,” a motion was quickly developed and eventually passed in the Parliament of Canada which appeared as a response and a remedy to those lower courts decisions. (See details)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rosalie Abella. 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/20130515213644/http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/court-cour/ju/abella/index-eng.asp to http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/court-cour/ju/abella/index-eng.asp

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) 23:02, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 16:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Rosalie Abella.jpg