Talk:Cole v Whitfield

Australia: Law Low‑importance

	Australia portal Cole v Whitfield is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian law (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

Latest comment: 19 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This page was modified by me on 01 MAY 2007. Some of the basic facts were incorrect regarding which states I lived in and where the lobster were caught. (They were lobster not crayfish) I know some of the facts about this case. My name is David Whitfield! Whitfieldd 02:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for correcting the errors. I really don't know how they were made in the first place... especially the part about crayfish! enochlau (talk) 14:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

A page that knows where it met you.

Comments