Template:Did you know nominations/Federal Court of Bankruptcy
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:38, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Federal Court of Bankruptcy[edit]
- ... that
the Australian Federal Court of Bankruptcy stopped hearing cases in 1977 but was not formally abolished until 1995? Source: Chief Justice Robert French AC Federal Circuit Court – History Repeats Itself page 3.
- Reviewed: Willie Borsch
Converted from a redirect by Find bruce (talk). Self-nominated at 00:47, 19 October 2018 (UTC).
Creation from redirect verified as new text, well-written and long, no copyvio picked up by Earwig's; QPQ not done, but editor appears to be on their first submission, so not required. I have verified the hook from the source, and it appears not to state what's in the hook: it says the court was superseded in 1976 (not '77), without mentioning whether this was the date when it heard its last case or anything similar. If I'm misreading the source, I do apologize, but please clarify, or specify what other source spells out that the FCB heard its last case in 1977. (The tidbit about it being dissolved in 1995 is verified, tho.) Dahn (talk) 05:51, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review @Dahn:. I will see if I can find a source that meets your concern, otherwise I will tweak the hook slightly. It might take me a few days though. Find bruce (talk) 09:23, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Find bruce: You are most welcome. There is no real rush here: nominations might expire after weeks of no reply, but a few days is perfectly fine. Dahn (talk) 18:35, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review @Dahn:. I will see if I can find a source that meets your concern, otherwise I will tweak the hook slightly. It might take me a few days though. Find bruce (talk) 09:23, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
On reflection the phrase "heard its last case" is ambiguous & clarifying it to tie into a source gets a bit technical & messy, so I have struck that & come up with a couple of alternatives
- ALT1:... that the Australian Federal Court of Bankruptcy lost its jurisdiction in 1977 but was not formally abolished until 1995? Source: Lost jurisdiction Such Other Federal Courts as the Parliament Creates: 100 Years of Evolution pages 7 & 10, abolition Federal Circuit Court – History Repeats Itself page 3.
- ALT2:... that the Australian Federal Court of Bankruptcy heard no new cases after 1977 but was not formally abolished until 1995? Source: No new cases Bankruptcy Amendment Act 1976 section 7 abolition Federal Circuit Court – History Repeats Itself page 3.
- @Find bruce: ALT2 is a bit iffy, because technically the source mentioning anything about the 1970s only spells out that the Bankruptcy Court was still active in 1976, nothing explicit about 1977. ALT1 is better, but note that you have to add one or two citations in the text for it closing in 1995 -- though your sources verify this, the article text must have a citation after that fact, particularly since it is on DYK. Please revisit the DYK rules. Dahn (talk) 05:27, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to look at this @Dahn:. I have edited the article picking up your suggestions. For ALT1 I have included the long title of the Act which summaries what it does "Transfer of Jurisdiction from the Federal Court of Bankruptcy to the Federal Court of Australia and for the Abolition of the first-mentioned Court", references after the facts for the precise date of the transfer of jurisdiction, and the date on which the court was abolished. For ALT2 these references also verify the date on which no new cases could commence. Let me know if this satifies your concerns or if I need to do a bit more digging. Find bruce (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Bruce! Please note that generally the more exact details of the narrative, as well as the precise citations, are for the body of text (WP:LEAD); this is for instance why DYK asks that every paragraph in the body be cited. Personalluy, I would prefer if you moved both to the text section, but this works too. Dahn (talk) 04:31, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to look at this @Dahn:. I have edited the article picking up your suggestions. For ALT1 I have included the long title of the Act which summaries what it does "Transfer of Jurisdiction from the Federal Court of Bankruptcy to the Federal Court of Australia and for the Abolition of the first-mentioned Court", references after the facts for the precise date of the transfer of jurisdiction, and the date on which the court was abolished. For ALT2 these references also verify the date on which no new cases could commence. Let me know if this satifies your concerns or if I need to do a bit more digging. Find bruce (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Find bruce: ALT2 is a bit iffy, because technically the source mentioning anything about the 1970s only spells out that the Bankruptcy Court was still active in 1976, nothing explicit about 1977. ALT1 is better, but note that you have to add one or two citations in the text for it closing in 1995 -- though your sources verify this, the article text must have a citation after that fact, particularly since it is on DYK. Please revisit the DYK rules. Dahn (talk) 05:27, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
