| Revision as of 15:55, 21 November 2010 editSvick (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers33,798 editsm moved Misplaced Pages:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court Cases/PCA to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases/PCA: corrected name of WikiProject← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:21, 25 April 2022 edit undoIzno (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Interface administrators, Administrators113,652 edits rmNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| <center><font size=+2>'''The current PCA is: ''(vacant)'''''</font></center> | <center><font size=+2>'''The current PCA is: ''(vacant)'''''</font></center> | ||
| <!-- The following code can be added, as necessary, to the talk page for the current PCA | |||
| {| class="messagebox standard-talk" | |||
| |- | |||
| |align="center"|''This article is the current ] for the ''']''', an attempt to create excellent and standardized articles about ]. If you would like to participate, you are welcome to edit the article, or visit the ], where you can join the project and/or contribute to the ].'' | |||
| |} | |||
| --> | |||
Revision as of 00:21, 25 April 2022
The United States Supreme Court Case Article Improvement Project Project Collaboration Article is an article chosen by members of the Project who wish to participate. The object of the collaboration is to improve the article to the level of a featured article on the Misplaced Pages Main Page.
Next PCA
Nominations
Voting for the next PCA may begin at any time. The following articles have been nominated:
- Marbury v. Madison - established judicial review
- Hamdi v. Rumsfeld - government's ability to detain unlawful combatants
- Webster v. Reproductive Health Services abortion regulation
- United States v. Carolene Products Co. Footnote four started modern levels of judicial scrutiny
- Prize Cases presidential power in wartime
- While I can't think of any off the top of my head, I'm proposing a case that, unlike the ones above, doesn't have very much substance to it at all, yet it has had a powerful effect on law. That way, everyone could get involved and work to build it from nothing.
- Category:U.S._Supreme_Court_stubs is full of short articles (and a few that no longer deserve the stub designation).
- Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, extremely short right now, yet an interesting case involving free speech
- Bush v. Gore - controversial case indirectly deciding 2000 U.S. Presidential Election
- Gonzales v. Carhart - Case upholding the federal Partial Birth Abortion Ban of 2003.
- Loving v. Virginia state laws banning interracial marriage uconstitutional
Voting
Wikipedians involved
Article sections
The sections as outlined by the Project are listed below. As sections are completed by Wikipedians, they should be crossed off to show that they are done.
- Introduction
- Prior history
- The case
- Effects
- Subsequent history
- Sources and further reading
- External links
- Categories
- Interlanguage links (if possible)
For an explanation of the type of information that should be included in each section, please see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject US Supreme Court Cases#Guidelines and article outline.
Votes for closure
This section is to be used once an article has reached the point of being completed and every section above is crossed off. All Wikipedians involved must register their vote to close a collaboration. When the every member involved agrees that the article is complete to both Project and featured article standards, the article will be submitted as a nomination for featured article. Until every member involved in the particular collaboration agrees that the article is complete, it will continue to be worked on.
- Hasn't gotten much work in the last few weeks after a ton of work by Axios023. Close?--Chaser T 23:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)