This template 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
This template is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONDESKTOP__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Motivation_and_scope?-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z","replies":["c-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z-Motivation_and_scope?"],"text":"Motivation and scope?","linkableTitle":"Motivation and scope?"}-->
__DTSUBSCRIBEBUTTONMOBILE__{"headingLevel":2,"name":"h-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z","type":"heading","level":0,"id":"h-Motivation_and_scope?-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z","replies":["c-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z-Motivation_and_scope?"],"text":"Motivation and scope?","linkableTitle":"Motivation and scope?"}-->
Apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere, but what is the motivation for this template? The fact that Article I is so broad means that this template is ginormous and always growing.
After that, what is its scope? Is the ambition really to put this massive thing at the bottom of every article on a case law regarding Article I? If so, is there a reason why they should all be one template rather than a template per clause, if that?
How does this improve on categories? lethargilistic (talk) 04:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z","author":"Lethargilistic","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z-Motivation_and_scope?","replies":["c-CommonKnowledgeCreator-2021-04-24T19:10:00.000Z-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z"]}}-->
@Lethargilistic: Motivation is to coordinate all Supreme Court decisions related to Article I of the United States Constitution. While I would agree that it is quite large and will continue to grow, that only means that the template should be broken up by section and only by clause if the case law is long enough. It would improve on categories because they would be more consolidated. The Article III case law category now includes 22 categories including some that it previously did not include. -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 19:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2021-04-24T19:10:00.000Z","author":"CommonKnowledgeCreator","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-CommonKnowledgeCreator-2021-04-24T19:10:00.000Z-Lethargilistic-2021-04-18T04:01:00.000Z","replies":["c-Lethargilistic-2021-04-24T22:55:00.000Z-CommonKnowledgeCreator-2021-04-24T19:10:00.000Z"]}}-->
@CommonKnowledgeCreator: I've started a discussion among WP:SCOTUS about case law navigation boxes generally. It's become clear that this discussion should be broader than one specific template of this type. I thought it would be unfair to you to leave you out of that loop. lethargilistic (talk) 22:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2021-04-24T22:55:00.000Z","author":"Lethargilistic","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Lethargilistic-2021-04-24T22:55:00.000Z-CommonKnowledgeCreator-2021-04-24T19:10:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
