 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I marked this as being somewhat superficial and inaccurate. I used to work for a legal publisher. Most of the oversight was by the United States Department of Justice in connection with the antitrust inquiry under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act in connection with Thomson Corporation's purchase of West Publishing, and West's and Lexis's settlement of various outstanding claims in that proceeding, resulting in LexisNexis purchasing certain titles from Thomson [1]. Also, Wolters Kluwer is internationally as formidable as Reed Elsevier and Thomson Corporation, and owns CCH is the US. Busjack 20:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Since User:Coolcaesar frequents this page, I request that any of the editors on this page that have an opinion of User:Coolcaesar to express it on a recently filed Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. You may also add further evidence there to support your view, as well as explain all situations/attitudes/etc. about the user. I urge anyone that has any sort of opinion about this user leave a comment, and comments cannot be used against you in any way on the arbitration page in the future. Thanks for your time. --Mr.Executive 09:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed the cleanup tag and made some of the corrections previously suggested in this discussion myself. --Busjack 18:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Wes'LexisNexis
editShouldn't a theoretical merger of Westlaw and LexisNexis be Wes'LexisNexis? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.56.81.63 (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2010 (UTC)