User talk:Jjack182

This page is being revised over the next month as part of the Cyberlaw WikiProject

Cyberlaw WikiProject
Hey Jjack182. It's great to see that Berkeley students will be helping the Cyberlaw topics here - the articles on cyberlaw here could really use some loving editing! I also wanted to ask a favour - when you create a new article, please don't just leave text saying that it will be edited soon. Articles here really need to have some content to stay, and if articles with just that message are created there's a good chance someone will delete them. Instead, it would be awesome if you could either create the page when you have content, or create a "stub" - that's a really short page that isn't finished yet, but does give a very brief description of what the article is about. For example, I've changed your article Prefect 10 vs. Visa to be a stub here. Thanks so much for helping us out, and please let me know if you need any help.  Flying  Toaster  07:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey Flying Toaster. Thanks for the help. I am a first time wikipedia user, so I'm unfamiliar with the editing tools. I will write the case up on Microsoft Word, and I will consult you for any help when it's time to post it. Of course, I'll try to figure it out myself first.. thanks again!

On posting your article
Hey Jjack. You can just paste your article into a sandbox for now, and that way we can work on it before it goes live as an article. I've made a sandbox that you can use under your own username here.  Flying Toaster  19:27, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Article
Hey Jack. I'm a bit busy at the moment, but after work I'll take a look at the article. Thanks!  Flying Toaster  19:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Article feedback
Hey Jack-

Thank so much for writing so much content on Perfect 10 v. Visa. I've gone through and taken a first pass at getting it "wikified" by adjusting some of the headers, copyediting, fixing style, fixing links, and making tenses consistent (past).

The article definitely needs some citations, as you pointed out. To add one, just type after your reference. It will appear at the bottom of the article in the section I added, labeled "References."

The article's really coming along well, so here's some feedback of what could be done better.
 * 1) The article should be written so that it can be understood by everyone, not just people familiar with law. Instead of sounding like a lawyer defending a case, this article should be explaining the case and its significance.
 * 2) Instead of defining and describing terms such as "contributory trademark infringement," the article should feel free to use these terms and simply link to articles which define them.
 * 3) The article should be written in a neutral point of view wherever possible, so no phrases assigning value to the opinions of the court should be present. The views presented by the court should be presented as just this, without indication that you agree or not.  I made some changes to help the point of view be more neutral.
 * 4) The article needs more context. Right now the finer points of the lawsuits are discussed, but not things like who the key people are, what the timeframe is, where the trial took place, and the effects of the ruling.  In an effort to describe this case to a layman, it really should describe not only the case itself, but the background and significance.

I'll try and go through later and add some citations to get you going. Thanks again, and please feel free to ask if you have any questions.  Flying Toaster  12:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum
Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 21:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)