Talk:Reference Re Persons of Japanese Race

Canada: Law Low‑importance

	Canada portal Canada notice board This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

Law Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Famous"?

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Obviously looking back with perfectly clear hindsight, would it not be better to call this decision "infamous", in the sense of "widely known but considered now to be erroneous"? 2600:1004:B174:9B94:0:35:109E:1A01 (talk) 20:05, 12 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for starting the discussion. I think "infamous" is too loaded a word to qualify as NPOV; I'm not a fan of "famous" either; it may be more neutral, but truth be told, are law cases ever famous? What about taking "famous" out entirely: "Reference Re Persons of Japanese Race[1] is a decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, etc." That way, no comment at all about the quality of the decision. I think the "Aftermath" section could be expanded, to deal with the criticisms of the decision, both at the time and now, but I'm tied up a bit. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

"Famous"?