Talk:Relevance (law)

	This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Law Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I am adding block quotes and references to serve as 'foundations' for discussion of the rules of evidence. At this time the jurisdiction in question in US Federal although I do plan to adjust the headings to reflect the US fed focus.

Obviously other jurisdictions should be added. --Colobikeguy (talk) 21:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added some other sections. Also, regarding the references, I would like to add references without 'id' because sometimes the order of the references change over the life of the page. After this pages reaches a certain 'maturity' such that the order of the references will not likely change... then the redundant long reference should be changed to id.--Colobikeguy (talk) 00:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since the definition of

I believe we need some segway sentences in this article to build up to the distinc nature of the terms "probative", "probative value", "probative evedience", etc. vs. "Relevance". First off... we should consider that dead link in the main title. I understand the merge... and I congradulate the good initiative, but really, I think think this needs some work. --CyclePat (talk) 19:06, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

discuss 105.161.4.172 (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]