Talk:Lock Han Chng Jonathan v Goh Jessiline

A fact from Lock Han Chng Jonathan v Goh Jessiline appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 October 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a dispute about S$60 has led to a court appeal amounting to over S$120,000 in legal costs?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/October.

Wikipedia

Singapore Low‑importance

	Singapore portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Singapore, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Singapore 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.SingaporeWikipedia:WikiProject SingaporeTemplate:WikiProject SingaporeSingapore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

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.

Renaming of article[edit]

This is a well-written and interesting article. Just a brief note to say that this article will probably need to be renamed when the case is officially reported in the Singapore Law Reports, as Lock v. Goh is not the official name of the case. Cheers, Jacklee 18:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements to article[edit]

You may want to take the following step to improve the article:

Apply the {{Cite news}} template to citations to newspaper articles.

I'll add to this list if I think of anything else. Cheers, Jacklee 13:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]