Talk:Vicious Lawless Association Disestablishment Act 2013

Edits of this date
All content in this article was checked against the single source appearing, and any content that does not appear in that source (unsourced material) now bears an appropriate inline tag. Based on this review of sources, the article appears in largest part to be text material (including in its extensive quotations) that is drawn directly from the text of the titular Act itself. However, the Act does not currently appear as a reference (only as an external link). The Act citation, as a primary source, and one requiring violation of WP:OR to interpret and use directly, should not simple be added, cosmetically, to remove tags (and certainly not based on presumption as source); rather, secondary sources must be found that support each quoted and unsourced statement.

Hence, as of this date, the article stands as an extensive example of editor through its direct use and interpretation of a primary legislative source, and one that repeatedly violates WP:VERIFY by presenting quoted and factual material without stating its sources. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:28, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Lead section needs clean-up
The lead section of this has so much extra information that is not included in the body of the article that I could almost say that the lead section was missing. I added the Lead extra info clean-up tag, but I could have added a Lead missing tag, instead, considering how bad the lead is. The lead should introduce and summarize an article, not just contain the legislative history of the law concerned. The first sentence should explain why this now superseded legislation is still notable, why it was introduced, repealed and what it achieved while it was law, not just what it was intended to do before being passed. See MOS:LEAD to understand how the lead section should be structured and organized. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 10:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)