Talk:Stephen M. Schwebel

Untitled

Archived discussion is here.

Suggestions & comments

1. The Court's decision in the nuclear weapons case will have an enormous influence on future (in my opinion inevitable) conflicts where the use of nuclear weapons is considered and Judge Schwebel's opinion will not be lost on those who, at some point, decide to wield these weapons. Therefore, what is written and nuanced in the article must be accurate. If you feel that something is not accurate or can be stated more effectively, please rewrite it. Pantethine (talk) 03:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
2. There needs to be an additional sentence or two added to the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons section that makes clear Judge Schwebels view on the use of nuclear weapons in countervalue (illegal) and tactical use (legal). p. 320 Dissenting Opinion. Pantethine (talk) 03:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
3. In the small intro posted to the ICJ section, it states that Judge Schwebel adjudicated 38 cases. During his tenure 49 applications were submitted; however, 11 of those applications either did not get past the application stage or his term on the Court ended before the cases were adjudicated. Pantethine (talk) 03:32, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
4. I will be busy the next couple of weeks due to personnel commitments. However, have allocated time to complete the article when I return. Of course, other editors are more than welcome to make changes, rewrite / add sections and complete the article at any time.
5. Apologize for my lengthy absence. Look forward to completing the article rewrite in the next few days. Pantethine (talk) 04:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
6. The article is, essentially, complete. The Panel of Recognized International Market Experts in Finance list of Judge Schwebel's post ICJ arbitrated cases mostly do not state the names of the Claimant/s in the arbitrated cases. The cases that do list the Claimant/s are incorporated in to the "Notable cases" section. So, the "Notable cases" section / table is complete. I am concerned about the accuracy of the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons section. I have tried my best to summarize Judge Schwebel's justification behind his ruling; however, the case is complicated. If another editor feels that part/s are not accurate, please let me know. Otherwise, outside of some minor changes during the clean up phase, the section will be published as it is. The cleaned up article rewrite I will place on this page for one week (under this working article copy) prior to publishing. If other editors do not have comments, objections etc.during this time the article will then be moved to the main page. I expect to have the cleaned up / completed article done by Wednesday of next week - hopefully sooner. Pantethine (talk) 07:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
7. We were editing the Talk page at the same time. When I tried to save changes, I received the "edit conflict" warning from Wikipedia. This means that the page I started working on did not have the changes you ultimately made and saved. So, I did not save the Talk page I was working on but opened a new Talk page with your saved work on it. The only section I was working on was the "Case: Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons" section. I made substantial changes to this one section - adding four or five new citations along with additional text. So, I pasted on to the Talk page (that you saved) my edits to this one section. I looked for the changes that you made in this section and tried again to make the same changes so you do not have to go through this section again and make the same changes you made before; however, once again only this section was affected. I apologize for not being more attentive about spacing, MLA syntax etc. when assigning references. It is a tedious job to go back through the document and correct these subtleties. In my opinion, one editor should make sure there is consistency in the citations so changes aren't accidentally reverted based on interpretation of MLA formatting etc. You seem knowledgeable in this area, and if you don't object, I will leave this task to you. I will then focus solely on the article content. I don't foresee adding anymore references, at least to this iteration, of the article. I noticed your many edits. They look great and I agree with your inclination that the article must be error free. Pantethine (talk) 07:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
8. Placed the completed article rewrite beneath the working copy on this page. If other editor/s feel there are no issues with the completed article, they are, of course, free to move the completed article to the main page. Otherwise, I will move it to the main page next Monday. Pantethine (talk) 00:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

   Although I edited other parts of the Talk page too only my edits of the ″completed article rewrite″ count. I'm sure there are some uncorrected errors left but I think you can move the ″completed article rewrite″ to the main page. --89.204.130.134 (talk) 03:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

9. The article rewrite has passed (without reversion) the period of immediate review by senior editors. So, unless there is an objection, I will archive this discussion by the end of next week. Going forward revisions / edits will be made to the present, posted article. Pantethine (talk) 09:08, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

   Protection of the main page must be removed. --89.204.135.16 (talk) 20:13, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

   The article is protected because there was, probably, prior vandalism of it. The articles of high profile people, many times, are protected. Given the controversial cases that were on the docket and that Judge Schwebel adjudicated during his tenure, it doesn't surprise me that there was prior vandalism. Given that he was also a President of the Court, in my opinion, the page should remain protected. I believe Wikipeida administrators are the only ones with power to remove protection from an article. However, Judge Schwebel's page can be edited by any registered user with 10 prior edits. Pantethine (talk) 12:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

10. There are error messages at the end of the article like this one: ″Cite error: Invalid (ref) tag; name "primefinance1" defined multiple times with different content″. --89.15.238.39 (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
11. Renamed "Ref" tags relating to the reference error codes in question. These error codes are odd. When I pasted the code in to my sandbox, the error codes did not appear. Only on the main page do they show up. I fixed the issue by assigning new tags, instead of the same tag, to reference the same page. There must have been a change in (Wikipedia's) main program limiting the number of times a single page can be cited using the same tag. However, the -[ a,b "Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons - Dissenting Opinion of Judge Schwebel", United Nations Cases, 8 July 1996, p. 322 ] tag is used twice -a & b- to cite the same page without an error code being rendered. Perhaps, the same page can only be cited twice using an identical "Ref" tag. Regardless, new tags were assigned and the References section is error free and looks good.Pantethine (talk) 05:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
12. Archived working copy of the article rewrite. Other editors interested in reasoning behind written sections in the current, published article can access the archived discussion. Pantethine (talk) 05:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
13. Still working on the table of adjudicated cases. Building this table serves two purposes. 1) It gives the reader an instant overview of all cases Judge Schwebel adjudicated, along with associated opinions, during his tenure on the Court 2) the table can be used as a template for other ICJ judges. Hopefully will have the table completed by month's end and will post it here. Pantethine (talk) 05:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
14. Good revision by Wikipedia editor on 4 April 2018. Francis Boyle, author of The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, characterizes Judge Schwebel's decision as being consistent with that of a moderate conservative; however, Boyle's interpretation does not reflect the opinion of all scholars. Moreover, although Clarity Press has printed and continues to print (in my opinion) very important work, it remains an advocacy publisher. The Permanent Court of International Justice was dissolved in 1946. Judge Schwebel was nominated to the International Court of Justice by the U.S. national group at the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Pantethine (talk) 06:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stephen M. Schwebel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090831064717/http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=3 to http://www.icj-cij.org/court/index.php?p1=1&p2=3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)