Talk:Judicial system of Finland

Finland High‑importance

	Finland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Finland 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.FinlandWikipedia:WikiProject FinlandTemplate:WikiProject FinlandFinland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Good article status?[edit]

Romans, friends and countrymen,

What do you think? Does this article qualify for good article status? I think what we should do is to add actual references to the valid points of law. At present, the article is factually correct but does not cite anything. We should thus add the references. After that, I think we should be able to get this article a good or favoured article status. --MPorciusCato 12:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 April 2016[edit]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move the article has been established within the RM time period and thus defaulting to not moved. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 17:43, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Judicial system of Finland → Judiciary of Finland – reason Standardizing the name of main articles in Category:Judiciaries. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 13:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. Steel1943 (talk) 23:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose ambiguous naming wikt:judiciary means the body of judges. While "judicial system" clearly refers to the judicial system and not the body of judges -- 70.51.46.195 (talk) 12:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support: its actually a rather logical move. "Judiciary" means the entire system, not just judges. Its more succinct and can be made uniform across other nation's judiciary pages. DaltonCastle (talk) 23:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – When submitting a batch of similar move requests, these should be handled as a single multi-page move discussion rather than asking the community to conduct several very similar separate discussions. Instructions can be found at WP:RM for how to do this. If not too late, it would be nice to convert the request to that format before continuing. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:53, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as ambiguous, and as an attempt to force American English usage of the word "judiciary" onto the relevant articles. RGloucester — ☎ 15:45, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It is not ambiguous, this is simply a more WP:CONCISE and WP:CONSISTENT (with other countries) way of saying the same thing. And where's the evidence that "judiciary" is an American term? The BBC uses it often enough.[1] Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 09:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amakuru, this is exactly where the trouble comes in. Take a look at some of the articles you brought up. Look, for example, at this one, the first in the list. It says "Barrister and part-time judge Constance Briscoe, who was jailed for 16 months for lying to police, has been removed from the judiciary". In Commonwealth usage, "judiciary" usually refers to the body of judges, not to the judicial system. In this particular case, for example, that's what's meant. "Removed from the judiciary" means that the judge was stripped of her post as a judge. This usage does not really exist in American English, which is why it is somewhat of an ENGVAR issue, and also why said ambiguity exists. RGloucester — ☎ 14:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. A judiciary is a body of judges or the courts they operate, not an entire justice system; at least in American legal circles, the term "judiciary" would never include attorneys, prosecutors, or corrections officials. The current title is correct. Rebb ing 04:55, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Judicial system of Finland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:38, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]