Talk:International Shoe Co. v. Washington

Outline of this article and other similar articles
This and other articles would be more useful if the facts only contained facts. There is quite a bit of analysis and opinion as well as resulting law represented in the facts section. In my opinion the facts should be represented in a nearly list format and followed by an analysis section that interprets how these facts affected the case. There should be no fact listed that did not have an effect on the case, nor should there be any analysis of a fact not included in the facts. Then there should be a subsequent section referred to as analysis that includes the discussion represented as above. There should also be a section referred to as Rules of Law; here there would be a list of any rule of law referenced in the case as well as a citation for where it has been derived. All of the additional information about the evolution of law as related to the case could be presented in an additional section stating the effect of the case on law and its progression. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jstarin (talk • contribs) 14:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on International Shoe Co. v. Washington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090822021856/http://supremecourtus.gov/opinions/casefinder/casefinder_1926-1948.html to http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/casefinder/casefinder_1926-1948.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)