Wikipedia:Peer review/Provincial Judges Reference/archive1

Provincial Judges Reference
Good Article material? Landmark Canadian case on judicial independence. My main concerns are that it's understandable to someone unfamiliar with the subject matter, and NPOV. I don't have particularly strong opinions about the outcome of the decision itself, but academic commentary has been virtually unanimously hostile. Thanks in advance for consideration, CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 00:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Overall, the article seems extremely well researched and referenced. I found myself wondering if the number of notes could be reduced, since many of them are repetitious and just vary in paragraph number, but couldn't see an obvious way.
 * 'Institutional sieve' is mentioned in the lead paragraph, and perhaps you could add some words to show that the judge meant that to be a term of approval not disapproval.
 * The word Reference is sometimes capitalized and sometimes not. Is there a rule for this?
 * This article seems quite long compared to the other articles on the decisions of the Lamer court. . It would be perverse of me to suggest that too good a job has been done, but I found myself wanting more drama. For instance the writeup on R. v. Feeney, the search and seizure case, seems vivid and highly readable.  But this Provincial Judges case seems to be a complex story where the court might have overreached, and the salaries are an economic issue. In a long (and thorough) article you might want to know more about financial consequences down to the present day. Did all judges salaries shoot up?  Since the article cites some academic papers, maybe one of them might have done a study.  Possibly a graph of judicial salaries might be included.
 * When researching this article were you personally convinced that pressure had been put on judges via their salaries? You talk as though the court was moving in a fog of irritation at government salary decisions, and perhaps tried too hard to correct matters. Were they oversensitive? Is there any data to show this?
 * The narrative of what various judges said is possibly of value to law students but the general reader might tire of the details. (Unless this is an objectively more important case than R. v. Feeney, for example). One thirsts for the bottom line.
 * Did any elected officials comment on this decision or complain about it? In the US where I live it is popular in many quarters to beat up on the Supreme Court.
 * You say that the case damaged the reputation of the judicial system. Sounds POV unless you can put those words in the mouth of a citable commentator.
 * Since you argue this is a landmark case on judicial independence, perhaps you could refer to one or two other major cases on judicial independence in Canada.
 * Does WP have any articles on parallel court decisions in other countries that you could link to? --  EdJohnston 04:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)