This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
People v. Murray article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article was nominated for
deletion on 14 June 2016. The result of
the discussion was keep.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michael Jackson, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Michael Jackson 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.Michael JacksonWikipedia:WikiProject Michael JacksonTemplate:WikiProject Michael JacksonMichael Jackson articles
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
California v. Murray →
People v. Murray – Per
MOS:LEGAL, "unless needed for specificity, leave state names out of the title, e.g., use State v. Elliott, not State of Vermont v. Raleigh Elliott, et al., and redirect the latter to the former." Official title seems to be People (of the state of CA) v. Murray
Natg 19 (
talk)
03:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Support: The short title of this case is People v. Murray. If it went up to the U.S. Supreme Court it could be retitled to California v. Murray, but I don't think that's happening.
MOS:LAW plainly applies here and there's no rationale I've seen to depart from that guideline.
69.174.144.79 (
talk)
01:58, 22 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Support rename as People v. Murray (2011): Per
MOS:LEGAL "Ambiguous titles like "People v. Superior Court", or "United States v. Smith", are written with the full name of the state and distinguishing name of individual or entity, or distinguishing year, in parenthesis. If still further clarification is needed, then a comma and the year may be added after the identifying individual name." Requested move is too ambiguous and confuses readers of this page with People v. Murray (1859).
Phillip Samuel (
talk)
07:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.