Talk:University of Illinois Chicago School of Law/Archive 1

primary topic?
Why does the Atlanta school get to be at John Marshall Law School when this school is older and has been ABA accredited since the 50s, while the Atlanta school is not yet fully accredited? At the very least, John Marshall Law School should be a disambiguation page. john k (talk) 03:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a disambig. Speciate (talk) 04:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm...yes, you are right. Not sure where I got that from, then. john k (talk) 04:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Marshall Law School (Chicago). 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/20131227131543/http://jmls.edu/academics/ip/letter-mcgrath.php to http://jmls.edu/academics/ip/letter-mcgrath.php

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) 09:38, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Introduction reduction
Yesterday, I'd added this at the end of the introduction, which looked most apt, since there's no History or appropriate section:
 * On May 20, 2021, following review by a university task force, the school announced its official change of name to University of Illinois Chicago School of Law, effective July 1. The board of trustees issued a statement: "despite Chief Justice Marshall’s legacy as one of the nation’s most significant U.S. Supreme Court justices, the newly discovered research regarding his role as a slave trader, slave owner of hundreds of slaves, pro-slavery jurisprudence and racist views render him a highly inappropriate namesake for the law school."

First, I don't see why you chose to delete the above in the first place, being factual and sourced (and, clearly, the source suits you). Secondly, I think it was more appropriately included than it is now, taking over the lead, as the second sentence of a three-paragraph introduction; it seems a little tabloid in the high-profile placement you've given the now truncated facts. Thirdly, you left out a crucial historical detail, as it pertains to bias, in omitting the recentness of the evidence assessed by the task force, which you also left out:
 * The school was originally named for the influential nineteenth-century U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall although it will be changing its name to University of Illinois Chicago School of Law on July 1, 2021, to acknowledge Marshall's history as a slaveowner and slave trader.

Your reverts followed by your rewrites don't appear very collaborative, but may lay waste to a thoughtful addition, as well as the impetus to make a History section, currently lacking. (I'd have done that today, but am obviously doing this instead.)
 * I submit that the version I originally added ought be restored, though the quote may be preferable rewritten as prose. Others may have opinions as well Lindenfall (talk) 23:35, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I genuinely don't understand your objection. Can you please rephrase it to help me out?
 * If your primary objection is to the removal of the quote from the board of trustees then it's unlikely that we'll agree on that issue; the quote might be appropriate if this article had a "History" section but it would be highly unusual for any quote to warrant placement in the lede of an article about a college or university (or law school).
 * I don't think that this warrants more than a sentence in the lede of this article. I only placed it in the second sentence because that's where we talk about the school's namesake so it seems to make sense to place it there. If you think it belongs somewhere else, feel free to move it. In any case, we certainly don't need it to be mentioned twice in the lede which is what your edit did. ElKevbo (talk) 00:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Moved. When the name is changed is typically when it takes a top spot... even then, explaining why a name change occurred almost never belongs right up top. Double entry was a result of your first deletion, and my subsequently not even suspecting that anyone would add that statement to the lead-in of the Introduction, especially as it is an event scheduled for the future, so I overlooked your elevation of it and initial rewrite. I hope that clarifies. Lindenfall (talk) 22:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I added a history section, and did some reorganization. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 19:48, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Nice start. Well done. Lindenfall (talk) 21:15, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

ABA source #3
Caught my eye — Source #3: how could a 2019 stat be found in 2016? The archived copy is from 2015. The linked "original" however, is a 2019 doc. The numbers match up for the previously linked ABA PDF, so I deleted the 2015 Wayback link, which seems to have no bearing, and updated the rest. Lindenfall (talk) 22:47, 23 May 2021 (UTC)