Talk:Gregory Watson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Gregory Watson, has edited Wikipedia as Gregory Watson (talk · contribs)

[edit] Professor

"His professor gave Watson a 'C' on the paper, explaining to him that she thought that he had not made a convincing case that the amendment was still subject to being approved by the state legislatures nearly two centuries after Congress had offered it to them"

This is odd. It was surely established once and for all by Coleman v. Miller in 1939 that such an amendment most certainly would still be subject to approval by the state legislatures. I'm somewhat doubtful that the professor would really have come to the conclusion she did. As the Supreme Court had expressly clarified the status of unratified amendments, Watson didn't have to do anything but point this out to make a convincing case. 86.139.159.146 22:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Writing about yourself...

... I didn't think you were supposed to do it. 00:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You're not.

I just re-deleted redundant text which someone (I presume Watson, although this particular edit only had the IP address) undid. Not only is the text redundant as it merely repeats information that's in the first paragraph of the article, it also commits another Wikipedia no no: That of using "As of . . ." for non time-sensitive information.

Mr. Watson, updating the article every month just to say that your job hasn't changed as of this month is pointless! YLee (talk) 22:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC)