Talk:Guibord case

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Canada: Quebec / Law Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

Law C‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal 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
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Should NOT be merged

This article is about the decision by the JCPC, not the man. LastOthello (talk) 05:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• That was my reason for creating the Joseph Guibord article. The Guibord case is about the legal proceedings. I don't think everything about this issue should be seen through the lgal perspective. I hope to do some more work on the Case article which will highlight the legal issues. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:17, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Guibord case

Should NOT be merged

Navigation menu

Search