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

Added a picture of a century-old Bates Automatic Numbering Machine. There's been very little change in this product in the last century; nearly identical devices are still sold. The ink pads are even compatible. --John Nagle (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The example link to Bates Numbering in Tobacco legal documents no longer points to a working page.168.215.215.148 (talk) 21:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The example can still be retrieved at the Wayback Machine. — Quicksilver^{T @} 17:10, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What exactly is NJ? There is a big world outside of the US. I assume it refers to the state of New Jersey? If so then the article needs to reflect relevant geographic information. Bopalula (talk) 16:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's the postal code for New Jersey, presumably, and the information is wrong, taken from a Web page advertising Bates numbering software. The inventor, Edwin G. Bates and the Bates Manufacturing Company were originally in New York, New York. I despise narrow-minded Wikipedia editors who use such abbreviations, be they from the United States or elsewhere, since we're typically not familiar with the postal codes of every country on Earth. — Quicksilver^{T @} 16:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not that familiar with the law project but outside of general recommendations at the start of a page I've never seen a specific correction included in a box at the end of a page. Things like "Initially should be referenced as (Bates stamp p.1) or (Jones000001), subsequent references within the same document should follow as (p.2), (p.3), etc or (Bates stamp p.4)(Jones000004)" Would seem to be an internal matter best put here, not to be seen by the general public. As I said, I don't know if it is common in the law project but it seems meaningless where it is, whatever the circumstances. RMoribayashi (talk) 04:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removed what appeared to be an advert for a software package for a Bates numbering system. Advert was unsourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.244.36 (talk) 21:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The History section jumps directly from the original 4-digit manual device, to recent acquisition of the Bates company by another. This is a non sequitur, and then some.

• It's the first mention of Bates's own company.
• No information is provided about the company's history throughout the 20th century.
• No information is provided on progressive development of the devices, including later electrical then electronic models, through to software approaches.
• No information is provided about changes to the systematics of the scheme (more than 4 digits, more than just digits).
• The implication is that Bates invented a 4-digit-only manual stamper, that is the entire system, and this system was recently purchased by another company.

 — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  08:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As of October, 2018, Advantus has removed all references to Bates products from their website. sydbarrett74 (talk) 09:20, 19 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article starts with circumstances when the B.N. is used. I read its first half then re-read it, and I still don't have even a remote idea what it is. It is presumably some numbers, for it's called “numbering,” maybe augmented with other symbols, placed on documents and maybe on something else for an unknown reason, often but not always during legal discovery, sometimes or maybe always using a machine that looks like it has been reified straight from a steampunk novel. That's all I've learned. Not much, to be fair, but the machine indeed looks cool!

It's crying for a complete rewrite.
— Goudron (talk) 23:57, 21 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]