Talk:Bad Elk v. United States/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Buffbills7701 (talk · contribs) 21:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Nicely cited.
- "...discuss the issue as defense against unlawful force, and most also note that a person may not use force to resist an unlawful arrest." Shouldn't most become must?
- The article states that in 1999, "sixteen states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest..." Is there a more recent version?
- Same thing with this line. "By 1999, twenty-three states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest by statute."
Addressing:
- "...discuss the issue as defense against unlawful force, and most also note that a person may not use force to resist an unlawful arrest." Shouldn't most become must?
Done Clarified most to show that it meant "most of the cases" citing Bad Elk.
- The article states that in 1999, "sixteen states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest..." Is there a more recent version?
Done.
- Same thing with this line. "By 1999, twenty-three states had eliminated the right to resist unlawful arrest by statute."
Verdict
[edit]I'll put it on hold for a week. Seeing as you've retired, I might put it on hold for a bit longer. Great article, by the way. buffbills7701 21:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- Great job. The article passes.