This article 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.
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
This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
A fact from Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 13 September 2008, and was viewed approximately 908 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
I don't want to get bogged down too much in what might ultimately be superficial semantics, but I believe the article is about the Supreme Court's decision (its written opinion), not about the case as a whole. The article lead, as is standard for articles about SCOTUS decisions, starts with a citation to the SCOTUS opinion, Personnel Administrator MA v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256 (1979). This is not a cite to "the case"—i.e., the litigation as a whole; rather, it is a citation to a written court decision rendered within that case. That SCOTUS rendered a written opinion is why the subject is notable enough to merit an article. The article is accordingly organized around the centrality of that opinion being the topic. Postdlf (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A decision is not a case; a decision is contained within it. cf. Roe v. Wade's page. We could add a section detailing who's who in terms of parties and such, for example. An article is not just about the decision, though some writers, like me, may focus on that. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 21:44, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
