Talk:Brooklyn Law School
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Notability
I do not know who Amit Shoor, Todd Blumenfeld, or Ian Nanos are, but I searched for them on Google and have not found anything notable about them in any way. There are much more prestigeous alumni from Brooklyn Law School who are documented on the Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdogsimmons (talk • contribs) 20:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Norris
Wow, Chuck Norris? Really? could you show me some kind of evidence that he actually went to Brooklyn Law School, because I haven't seen any on wikipedia or Google. Same story with Amit Shoor, but maybe you know better. 20:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdogsimmons (talk • contribs)
- Chuck Norris did not go to Brooklyn. Also, the Leiter Report is not objective, as stated in the entry. It is subjective because all he does is ask other professors. Brooklyn is a TTT, so I also added that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.206.192 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Rankings
Leiter's rankings are neither respected nor objective —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.99.149.191 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Latin Motto
what does "lex gladius juris est" mean? Streamless 14:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's something like "the law is a just sword" or something along those lines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jilliker (talk • contribs) 20:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Third Opinion
Cdogsimmons complains of Continuous reversions by anonymous editors of one of his previous edits. The addition proposed is as follows: [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Work permit (talk • contribs) 04:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- Third Opinion: A third opinion can only be provided if there is a discussion between two editors. Here's nothing, the only pointer are a few edit comments. If you have problems with anonymous editors reverting things, a third opinion will hardly help; in the worst case you should consider asking for protection.
- That said, the whole "News" section is of dubious quality at best, including Cdogsimmons' additions. It's hardly informative or relevant, and Wikipedia is not a news clipping collection. In order to improve the article, describe the relevant facts in the appropriate section of the article, citing the news as a sources.
- At the very least you should convert this to a list of "external resources" and remove the quoted text entirely (leaving only the links and descriptions). Averell (talk) 17:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- Agree that the quoted text is not relevant. Also agree that Wikipedia is not a news clipping collection, so there is no need for this section to exist. Propose the following compromise, if anything:
- In March 2008, Crain’s New York Business mentions Brooklyn Law School in an article about law schools which produce large numbers of public service lawyers. . [1]
- In September 2007, Brooklyn Law School was mentioned in a Wall Street Journal article regarding the waning job market for U.S. lawyers, and questioning the integrity of some law schools’ marketing campaigns. [2]
- A May 2007 Bloomberg.com article noted that, due to increasing demand for lawyers, top Manhattan firms which had not traditionally recruited from Brooklyn Law School were now recruiting from it. .[3]

