Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Law

Currently, this project has about ~81 articles in need of some reference cleanup. Basically, some short references created via {{tl|sfn}} and {{tl|harvnb}} and similar templates have missing full citations or have some other problems. This is usually caused by templates misuse or by copy-pasting a short reference from another article without adding the full reference, or because a full reference is not making use of citation templates like {{tl|cite book}} (see Help:CS1) or {{tl|citation}} (see Help:CS2). To easily see which citation is in need of cleanup, you can check these instructions to enable error messages (Svick's script is the simplest to use, but Trappist the monk's script is a bit more refined if you're interested in doing deeper cleanup). See also how to resolve issues.

These could use some of your attention

{{columns-list|colwidth=30em|

1. 1988 Canadian federal budget
2. Civil Rights Act
3. Heckler v. Chaney
4. Human rights in Canada
5. Legal pluralism
6. Legal status of fictional pornography depicting minors
7. Legalism (Chinese philosophy)
8. List of ministers of law (Indonesia)
9. Mediation
10. Mikhail Smirtyukov
11. Missouri Executive Order 44
12. Mixed Commission Court
13. Mountain Meadows Massacre
14. Muslim world
15. National Resources Mobilization Act
16. Natural person in French law
17. New York City Criminal Court
18. New York energy law
19. Nikah mut'ah
20. North American Man/Boy Love Association
21. Operation Bajrang
22. Oranga Tamariki Act 1989
23. Order of the Coif
24. Organic Law (Spain)
25. Originalism
26. Palestinian Citizenship Order 1925
27. People v. Muybridge
28. Peremptory challenge
29. Planned Parenthood v. Casey
30. Political offence exception
31. Posadas Hospital Trial
32. Posthumous birth
33. Presidential directive
34. Pro se legal representation in the United States
35. Product testing
36. Proximity of blood
37. Public Service Act 1999
38. Public execution
39. Public law
40. Purge
41. Sam Sheppard
42. Sampling (music)
43. Samsung v. Huawei
44. Samuel Romilly
45. Scientific jury selection
46. Secret Treaty of Dover
47. Secret trusts in English law
48. Senate Judiciary Committee reviews of nominations to the Supreme Court of the United States
49. Seventeen Point Agreement
50. Sex offender
51. Shakhty Trial
52. Shaykh Tusi
53. Shurat HaDin
54. Special Criminal Court
55. Spring Valley Race Riot of 1895
56. Statute of Marlborough
57. Strata management
58. Structure of the Federal Reserve System
59. Sullivan & Cromwell
60. Sunny Metal & Engineering Pte Ltd v Ng Khim Ming Eric
61. The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013
62. The New Jim Crow
63. Thomas G. Shearman
64. Title IX
65. Treaty of Fontainebleau (1541)
66. Treaty of Paris (1303)
67. Trial by combat
68. Trial of Charles I
69. Uddat al-Usul
70. Undang-Undang Melaka
71. Unenumerated rights
72. United States Declaration of Independence
73. United States v. Rahimi
74. United States war crimes
75. Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act
76. Vermont vs Hunt (1982)
77. Vidovdan Constitution
78. War on drugs
79. Wartime sexual violence
80. William Henry Melvill
81. Women's suffrage in states of the United States

}}

If you could add the full references to those article/fix the problem references, that would be great. Again, the easiest way to deal with those is to install Svick's script per these instructions. If after installing the script, you do not see an error, that means it was either taken care of, or was a false positive, and you don't need to do anything else. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:46, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Can someone please find and add reliable sources do that we can bring this up to a Start class, please? Bearian (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Efforts to impeach Sara Duterte#Requested move 5 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:42, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Representative democracy in Singapore has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. WhinyTheYounger ※ Talk 04:20, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Was already available via Wikipedia Library, but nevertheless a helpful addition. [https://opil.ouplaw.com/page/454637 Full announcment]. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 00:15, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

There is a whole, lightly sourced, section on North Carolina law, of which I am unsure whether it is undue weight. Can someone with more patience than me edit this section? Bearian (talk) 15:23, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 21:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Criminal damage in English law has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:00, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Karl Menninger was an important psychiatrist who participated often in the overlap between Law and Psychology. He was also a very vocal proponent of Prison Reform, writing a book The crime of punishment. Could his biography be included in the articles of this wikiproject? User:Dwarf Kirlston - talk 18:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

:Yes. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:00, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

::Just do it. Bearian (talk) 03:39, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Please rate: is this a start article yet? Can you find additional sources as tagged? Thank you in advance. Bearian (talk) 03:39, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dan Sullivan (U.S. senator)#Requested move 22 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 12:37, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Florida Parental Rights in Education Act#Requested move 24 February 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 06:06, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Inviting discussion at Talk:Court cases related to Donald Trump's second presidential term#How comprehensive will this article be - will it list all cases? re: the relationship between that article and an older one, Legal affairs of Donald Trump as president. Questions include whether they should be merged, or if the older one should be moved to a new name that parallels the newer one but is limited to his first presidency (or, possibly, if they should both be moved to new but parallel names). Over 100 cases have already been filed since his inauguration, involving DOGE, First Amendment issues, mass federal layoffs, birthright citizenship, immigration, dismantling of USAID, and more. FactOrOpinion (talk) 00:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

This poor little stub could use some TLC to expand it, perhaps even from an expert in bankruptcy law. There's an interesting discussion about student loans on the talk page. Bearian (talk) 09:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Can we work on this one, too? Or should it be merged somewhere? Bearian (talk) 14:02, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I'm going through the law stubs alphabetically, and found this old chestnut. It was revamped 11 years ago and then not much has happened. I was bold and assessed it as a Start article, but with a little more work it will be a B-class article. Bearian (talk) 14:04, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article :Art equity has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced and unimproved dictionary definition for 8 years. No reliable sources that I could find define this phrase in this way; some sources refer to it as in representation. No obvious target exists to merge and/ or redirect.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 03:07, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

With a little work, this could be a cute DYK. Any takers? Bearian (talk) 09:10, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article :Beau pleader has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Referenced to a single source. Dictionary definition. Unimproved for a decade. Few sources online Google; they are all dictionary definitions themselves. Obscure legal term not used in 200 years.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 09:37, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

• Follow up: This has been redirected in lieu of deletion. Bearian (talk) 23:04, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Trump v. United States (2024)#Requested move 7 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Feeglgeef (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Sadly, the creator passed away after he requested an assessment, but before it could be fulfilled. Someone else assessed it as C-class in the past. I assessed it as B-class, with specific and actionable goals on the talk page for a GA. Can someone else please help by giving a required second opinion? Bearian (talk) 23:30, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Auckland District Law Society#Requested move 24 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 07:43, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Federal Service for the Oversight of Consumer Protection and Welfare#Requested move 17 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. –𝐎𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐥 𝐐𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢 ʕʘ̅͜ʘ̅ʔ 15:16, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

In Detention of Mahmoud Khalil, Khalil is involved in two legal cases, one before an Article III court (a habeas corpus case) and one before an Article I court (a deportation case before an immigration court). Since there are two relevant cases, we're trying to pay attention to both, though there's a lot more info about the former than the latter. We have the info for the {{Infobox court}} in the habeas corpus case. But I'm having trouble finding {{Infobox court}} info about the immigration court. I know that the case involves Khalil, and the name/location of the immigration court (LaSalle Immigration Court in LA), but can't find a case no. or a judge's name or a case name. Are immigration court cases just called something like "In re Mahmoud Khalil" or "In the matter of Mahmoud Khalil"? Do they get case numbers and dockets? Do immigration courts publicly identify the judge assigned to the case? My impression is that {{Infobox court}} generally isn't used for Article I court cases, but I think it would be helpful to readers of this article if we lay out the two different cases proceeding in different kinds of courts. I'd appreciate guidance about what info should be included in the deportation case Infobox.

Less important: I've seen the habeas corpus case identified both as Khalil v. Joyce and Khalil v. Trump. Joyce was named as the first respondent in the initial petition for a writ, but Trump and Rubio were added as respondents in an amended petition for a writ, with Trump named first. Some of the lawyers (e.g., the ACLU) representing Khalil identify it as Khalil v. Trump, but the judge's order transferring it from SDNY to DNJ, and some other other documents still refer to it as Khalil v. Joyce. Does anyone knows which is the correct title? Thanks, FactOrOpinion (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:There isn't really a case number for the administrative adjudication within DOJ, it's just the person's alien registration number ("A number"), which isn't public info. Nor is the record of proceeding public. DHS's notice-to-appear form uses "In the Matter of" [https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/8a3cbff6-4589-43e1-8455-042fa9555e3c.pdf]. If it were to lead to a (very rare) published decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals or the Attorney General, that would then be cited as Matter of Khalil, but I doubt that any source would call it that unless and until that happens. An appeal of a final order of removal would be filed in the court of appeals as Khalil v. Bondi (or whoever the AG happens to be), but obviously that wouldn't refer to the agency adjudication. JensonSL (SilverLocust) 04:58, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you. I guess we won't use an infobox for the immigration court case, and we'll just address what's known about the case in the article's text. I'd seen that the A number was included in [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2014/07/25/3400.pdf this BIA ruling] that addressed the government's previous use of the same law (perhaps that's because Ruiz-Massieu died shortly after) and had wondered if that was a case number, so thanks for explaining the actual use. FactOrOpinion (talk) 12:31, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act#Requested move 17 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America#US law categories that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Tule-hog (talk) 22:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

:Additional questions probably more appropriate for this WikiProject: would it be correct to re-categorize 'acts' currently listed in :Category:United States federal Indian policy into :Category:United States federal Native American legislation? Also, is it meaningful to have the latter as a subcategory of the former, or should they just link to each other with {{tlx|see also}}? Tule-hog (talk) 23:03, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

::I think all discussion should probably happen at one place to avoid things getting messy, so I will respond at the indigenous peoples talk page. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Censorship in Islamic societies#Requested move 14 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 10:26, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Refugee Act#Requested move 13 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 11:13, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

{{disdis|Manuductive|spi=Lardlegwarmers}}

I have a userspace draft article going on this topic. I'd invite any and all constructive input. Feel free to edit the draft with regular BRD protocols if you wish to do so. I could use a little help with the placement and formatting of the references. Manuductive (talk) 03:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

:For reference formatting, see Wikipedia:Inline citation. You also need to dumb this down and explain it in plain English. Legal citations in the first sentence is not accessible to non-lawyers. Don't abbreviate things like SecState either. Additionally, I generally prefer citations to law reviews over news stories when writing legal articles. See, e.g., a featured article I wrote, Shostakovich v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.. voorts (talk/contributions) 16:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

::I've searched for "22 I&N Dec. 833" in a couple different places and nothing comes up except the opinion itself. Does any other legal source cite this case? I think it's mostly notable for its coverage in news media. Manuductive (talk) 06:29, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Have you looked on Westlaw or Lexis? voorts (talk/contributions) 12:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::::Just noting here that I've added a Merge proposal. I don't think that the case is notable in itself. It didn't get significant coverage at the time, it didn't get significant coverage in the intervening years, and it's only getting small amounts of coverage now because the Trump admin. is trying to use the same law to deport a lot of people on visas and some with green cards. The more significant legal issue is whether the law is constitutional, and that will have be addressed in an Article III court. I've suggested merging it into Mario Ruiz Massieu, and perhaps a bit into Detention of Mahmoud Khalil, where it's already mentioned. FactOrOpinion (talk) 14:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::I could be mistaken, but the notability is established by the coverage in articles like {{tq2|Nathan, Debbie (March 21, 2025). "The Insidious Doctrine Fueling the Case Against Mahmoud Khalil: How a century of immigration law has evaded constitutional rights". Boston Review. Retrieved March 30, 2025 https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/the-insidious-doctrine-fueling-the-case-against-mahmoud-khalil/}} which go into moderate analysis and do mention that its a precedent decision at the BIA, which is not for nothing. Manuductive (talk) 20:39, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::Most precedential BIA cases are probably not notable, just like most published court decisions aren't notable. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::::I don't have access to those databases, as far as I know. They're not in the Wikipedia library, my public library doesn't provide them, and INAL. Maybe somebody else could look. Lexis Nexis does have a source that probably covers it that popped up:

::::https://store.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/the-national-security-implications-of-immigration-law-grpussku-us-ebook-32400-epub.html Manuductive (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Try HeinOnline on TWL. They archive legal journals and law reviews. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:33, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::Nothing came up Manuductive (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::This case may not be notable in the legal literature then, but that doesn't mean it doesn't meet GNG for being a prominent case that was written about by historians, etc. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::::It's been referenced in a lot of news articles this week, with medium-depth analysis. Manuductive (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

::{{outdent|6}} Sure, but that coverage isn't really likely to be sustained. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:52, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

I merged the article into the BLP for Mario Ruiz Massieu. Manuductive (talk) 21:15, 31 March 2025 (UTC) Blocked sock. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Does anyone have expertise in this area? This stub, of unassessed importance, has been unreferenced for 15 years. Please add reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 16:32, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

Not being a lawyer I am a bit stuck with Talk:Arrest of Ekrem İmamoğlu#Arrested vs Detained?. Could anyone fix short “Turkey” subsections in the Detention (confinement) and arrest articles? Chidgk1 (talk) 10:37, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

:I think you'd need a Turkish criminal lawyer or someone who can read Turkish sources to answer that question. In the US, arrest and detention (which could mean a seizure, imprisonment, pretrial detention, or a host of other things) are distinct legal concepts. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:35, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this list works. It's been unsourced for 15 years. Should we delete it? Can you add reliable sources? Discuss. Bearian (talk) 22:51, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

:Seems somewhat redundant for purely navigational purposes as categories and the template {{tlx|Asia topic|Law of}} cover this. Delete seems an option in its current iteration, but there is certainly a wide body of literature on law in Asia generally speaking. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 23:19, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Assess class C, in accord with User:Nettrom/sandbox/WikiProject Law stub predictions. This would easily be a B-class (or even a GA) if all sections had inline citations. Can somebody help with this please? Bearian (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy#Requested move 26 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 12:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:David Maxwell Fyfe, 1st Earl of Kilmuir#Requested move 26 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 13:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article :Casu proviso has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dictionary definition sourced to a single source and unimproved for about 19 years.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 04:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

: Note: I have boldly merged this into List of writs. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks, {{U|BD2412}}! Bearian (talk) 13:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Executive Order 14172#Requested move 7 April 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 06:38, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I have nominated Treaty of Devol for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:43, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

This Mid-important article has issues. I assessed it as a Start, but with all statements sourced reliably, and an image of a person doing community service, and it will be a B-Class article. User:Nettrom/sandbox/WikiProject Law stub predictions assessed it as a C-Class, FWIW. Please help! Bearian (talk) 13:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

A few weeks ago, I suggested changing the redirects for four Trump executive orders with "Department of Government Efficiency" in their titles from List of executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump to Department of Government Efficiency (and I now think that it's better to redirect to Department of Government Efficiency § Legal status, which lists the #s and titles and then discusses the structure that arises from the combined EOs). It was relisted to generate more discussion, but there have been no new comments so far. I figured I'd post a notification here in case anyone wants to voice a preference. Here's the link. FactOrOpinion (talk) 18:17, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks! Bearian (talk) 10:23, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

In a couple of cases about deportations by the Trump admin of Venezuelans and Salvadorans to a prison in El Salvador, the Trump admin. has made emergency appeals to SCOTUS. The articles are J.G.G. v. Trump (about whether it's constitutional to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of Tren de Aragua without due process, and whether the Trump admin. ignored a court order to bring planes carrying these men back to the US mid-flight) and the other is Deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia (about whether the Trump admin. must seek the return of a Salvadoran who was mistakenly deported to the Salvadoran prison despite a withholding of removal order). The articles have short sections on SCOTUS actions (a per curiam decision in the first case, an administrative stay in the second case while the appeal is referred to the court). Do people ever add infoboxes for emergency docket cases?

I'm trying to decide whether to add infoboxes for the dockets in these emergency appeals, or if I should just add external links and docket #s at the bottom of the articles, since the Template:Infobox US Supreme Court case is really designed for normal SCOTUS cases where they've granted cert. FactOrOpinion (talk) 18:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:Sure, see Tandon v. Newsom, which I recently co-created. – JensonSL (SilverLocust) 21:29, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

::Thank you. FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

:::If you want to build better articles, an infobox is basically a criteria for GA status. It's also a good place to put essential information in one place for our readers. It's like a head note in West Reports. Bearian (talk) 10:25, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

This is possibly the worst article of our Project. Does anyone want to fix it? Or do we need to blow it up and start over again? Should we nominate it for deletion? Bearian (talk) 10:20, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Nine years later, this article still has serious issues. Chu is a patent attorney who has argued some of the most important cases in that specialized field of law, so he's notable. Can somebody please fix the issues with this? Bearian (talk) 10:37, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Responses to the 2020 Chinese involvement with Hong Kong national security law#Requested move 1 April 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 04:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi editors, I made an edit request on the ASCAP talk page regarding a lawsuit that may be of interest to editors here. Any feedback would be appreciated! Cheers Stephanie BINK (talk) 20:38, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi! I've posted some COI edit requests at Talk:Sidley Austin. Sharing in case anyone here is interested in taking a look. Thank you for any help or feedback! Mary Gaulke (talk) 04:52, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The just decided For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers, which is garnering news coverage globally, is in need of expansion. Interested editors are invited to help improve the page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:46, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:It's not a High Court ruling - it's a Supreme Court ruling. Sweet6970 (talk) 22:10, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

::I stand corrected. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:16, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Thanks for the amendment. Sweet6970 (talk) 13:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Following Rinkoff v Baby Cow Productions, we really should have an article about format rights, which, depending on who you listen to, are either a valuable and important form of intellectual property around which a whole industry is based, or a nonsensical idea that doesn't actually exist in law. I've created a sub-stub draft article at Draft:Format rights. — The Anome (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

It is now possible for any citation template to automatically format dates. Is this desirable in any of the law citation templates?

The most popular citation templates all automatically format the dates if {{tl|use dmy dates}} or {{tl|use mdy dates}} are present in the article. These citation style 1 (CS1) and 2 (CS2) templates are implemented by Module:Citation/CS1. Auto-formatted dates are also possible in any template via the recently written Module:Auto date formatter. It will either format the date, or if it cannot parse the date, it will output it as written. The module does not have the broad range of error detection, tracking, and warning that CS1 templates offer. Earlier this month, {{tl|cite patent}} was updated to use this module.

Would auto-formatting dates be desirable for any templates in :Category:Law citation templates? Some match external standards and style guides where a date format is specified. For example, the Bluebook citations output mdy dates. Others, like {{tl|UN document}}, look like CS1 formatting rather than an external style.

Rather than try to guess where it would be desirable to implement, I thought it would make the most sense to ask here. Also, I can assist or clarify anything in the module's documentation if there's a consensus to add auto-formatted dates to any of the legal citation templates.

Regards, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

:Yes. Consistency with article date style is in our guidelines and should be followed. voorts (talk/contributions) 13:53, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

File:Information.svg There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Prostitution in the State of Palestine#Requested move 18 April 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 04:40, 22 April 2025 (UTC)