User talk:68.113.110.55

In regards to service of process:

Out of the nine points under "Links normally to be avoided," only one could be mis-applied:

"#4 Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services, with objectionable amounts of advertising, or that that require payment to view the relevant content. "

(The linked page does not primarily exist to sell products or services (the linked page is a reference page - it primarily exists as a resource for interested parties). The linked page does not carry objectionable amounts of advertising, and what few references there are are merely links lacking even a soft-sell. There is no requirement to pay to view the pertinent content, it is there for the clicking.)

On the other hand, it matches number five under the "what should be linked to" section:

"#5 Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already not in the article... because the site has a level of detail which is inappropriate for the Wikipedia article."

It seems that your main qualm is with the stock border that is put on PFI's pages, but you should not misinterpret that as objectionable content. Look at what the site actually provides - a neutral (verbatim replication of legal code, with some summarization), accurate consolidation of state codes. The surrounding frame doesn't change that, and certainly doesn't warrant removal of a valuable resource.

24.22.17.67 21:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)