|NOTICE, please do not remove from top of page.|
|I wrote 100% of this article at Wikipedia. I intend to expand it.Thomas Wright Sulcer 01:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)|
|Check the history of edits to see who inserted this notice.|
Great updates, HB, been noticing the improvements; you're a pro.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 00:40, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Notability -- not necessarily a CZ standard
This isn't the first time there has been a question about "notability", and, indeed, if it's a CZ concept. If anything, there's opinion here has been that "maintainability" may be a better, but not ideal, term.
While I don't always succeed, I avoid using subjective terms, such as "expert", in ledes. This isn't to say that Levinson indeed is not well-versed in the topic, but my preference is to state an individual's specialization. Happily, we have avoided the WP-ism "...is notable because...". Howard C. Berkowitz 15:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for your explanation, and I'll try to avoid the "is notable because". In my view, the term "expert" is a valid word describing something and I think it's fitting to use it when appropriate. SL is generally considered as one of perhaps 5 or 6 experts in constitutional law by the mainstream press, by other academics; you can use the word "authority" also if you wish. That he's a professor is secondary, in my view, to what SL is about.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 19:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC)