Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Constitution

Article Assessment
Would it be possible to get one of these? I tried to figure it out but it is too complex for me. Winner 42 Talk to me!  02:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - That would be great to have! I am new to creating a WikiProject, so I am not sure how to, but maybe our Administrator member could help us.   CookieMonster755   (talk)   02:49, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Nope, technical stuff. Blech. I'm useless for that. bd2412  T 02:50, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ... Hmm... Know anyone techy I could ask?   CookieMonster755   (talk)   02:52, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Importance scale for Delegates of the United States Constitutional Convention
What should the Delegates of the United States Constitutional Convention be ranked? Top, High, Mid or Low on the project's importance scale. I rated George Washington as Top, because he was voted as the head of the convention.  CookieMonster755   (talk)   01:55, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It depends on the individual delegate. It should vary according to their individual achievements. GregJackP   Boomer!   03:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Aye, okay. I will try my best to asses the delegates importance rank based on their involvement in the convention. Delegates with little involvement and only signed the Constitution should be rated mid importance on the project, what do you think of that ?  CookieMonster755   (talk)   04:57, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I would even be OK with going "Low" on those you described. Obviously those like George Washington and James Madison should be "Top" but that would leave two intermediate levels for others that participated to varying degrees. I can see Gouverneur Morris as "High" due to his religious freedom actions, his view opposing slavery, and his part in drafting the Constitution. John Rutledge would be a "Mid," as he was better known as a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and Governor of South Carolina than as a member of the Convention. GregJackP   Boomer!   05:17, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your thoughts on the ratings . I will take your advise and rate the articles accordingly. Cheers.  CookieMonster755   (talk)   05:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Encyclopedic style throughout
Two of my edits at Constitution of the United States of America have been reverted. They both removed a bullet list appropriate to a List Article in WP, replacing them with a summary in an encyclopedic style appropriate to mainspace articles. Rather than edit war, I would like your assistance educating collaboratively, but there seems to be a failure to communicate.

The previously featured link to Wikisource for access to the entire original document is restored with my third edit. There should be no need to mirror the entire document in WP, that is the function of the sister project Wikisource. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 08:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I agree with the reversion of your edits. One of them eliminated a bulleted list of the Enumerated Powers Clause, which is something that should be in the article. GregJackP   Boomer!   10:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * There is nothing wrong with the substance, the objection has to do with style. The Enumerated Powers Clause DOES belong in the article; it is value added to the narrative, as is the Recommendation Clause for Article II. Particular names of clauses used in jurisprudence are useful to the general reader for further study, because that is how the literature is organized.
 * The point is that bulleted lists do not belong in narrative articles, they belong in lists. The bullets are just bad style -- they are unencyclopedic. Merely mirroring an original document is not the purpose of Wikipedia, it it the purpose of Wikisource. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I also think your edits were great for the project . If you have not already, please add yourself to the participants list. Thank you!  CookieMonster755   (talk)   00:20, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. The Manual of Style puts it this way: MOS:LISTBULLET Do not use lists if a passage is read easily as plain paragraphs. I'll go back and re-edit the bulleted passages including the omitted material of previous drafts. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 15:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with the removal of the lists per TVH and MOS:LISTBULLET, but I feel that the paragraphs TVH replaced them could use expansion once they are reinstated as to not lose the information given in the lists. For example the article two section should mention the president is given the power to be the commander in chief and grant pardons. Winner 42  Talk to me!  16:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Collegial expansion of the paragraph narrative would be the way to go -- wherever I am guilty of an oversight. Thanks. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 09:34, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, are we to discuss a section extensively here instead of in the article's talk page? Seems to be happening, at least. Anyway, expansion, no. The detail articles should cover additional details. For example the bullet point:
 * To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
 * Should be shortened to:
 * Taxation;
 * Yes, tax details are important. That's why they should be in the correct article. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. See the plain paragraphs proposed at Talk. Here my point was MOS:LISTBULLET Do not use lists if a passage is read easily as plain paragraphs. --- for any article in the project. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 13:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm back!
Hi everybody, is me, Cookie Monster! I wanted to let you know after months of being "off the grid" I am back on Wikipedia! I hope we can talk soon. CookieMonster755 (talk) 04:12, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * After being blocked, I am back. So glad to be back at work. CookieMonster755 (talk) 23:50, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

US Congressional term end dates
Dear all,

there is a disagreement whether congressional terms end on the 3th or 4th of March. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics. Input is appreciated.

Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 07:19, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

RE:Timeline of drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution
Last year I revamped the Timeline of drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution article and have been refining it since. Several weeks ago I nominated the timeline as a featured list candidate. I would be grateful for any comments and suggestions on how to further enhance the article. Thanks. Drdpw (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject United States - 50,000 Challenge
--- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:12, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Invite to help edit a batch of Fourth Amendment related pages
Hello all, very nice WikiProject you have here! I'm working on the following Fourth Amendment pages:


 * Terry stop ("Stop and frisk", "Pretextual stop", "DUI roadblock", etc)
 * Consent search
 * Traffic stop
 * Terry v. Ohio
 * Whren v. United States
 * Reasonable suspicion
 * Exclusionary rule
 * Warrantless searches in the United States

As you all well know, Terry v. Ohio (1968) is probably the most important Fourth Amendment decision by the Supreme Court. Fourth Amendment law is pretty challenging and I'd like to get these pages so that the average citizen can read and understand them. It's also a very timely issue...for examples:
 * the ACLU just got a settlement with the city of Milwaukee over stop-and-frisk practices
 * New York City's Right to Know Act requires it's police to inform people of their rights before performing a consensual search

I am putting up lists of case law, citations, etc in the Talk pages (right now, just "Terry stop", "Consent search", "Traffic stop" and "Warrantless searches") and hope to continue working on them over the next few weeks. They are all in various states of neglect and lots of work needs to be done. It would be great if we can get a few pages up to WP:GOOD quality.

Thanks! Seahawk01 (talk) 02:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

New article on the Engagements Clause of the Constitution
I have created a stubby new article on the Engagements Clause of the Constitution of the United States. Naturally it needs further work. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
 * – Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

United States Bill of Rights listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for United States Bill of Rights to be moved to Bill of Rights. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:30, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

United States Constitution listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for United States Constitution to be moved to Constitution of the United States. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 16:59, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:25, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt (2019) listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt (2019) to be moved to Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 08:32, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Better sources needed for recent changes
Please see the request from and  for reliable sources to back recent additions about the Constitution at. – Fayenatic  L ondon 08:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Constitution of the United States has an RFC
Constitution of the United States, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. &mdash;&hairsp; Freoh 21:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Full Faith and Credit Clause listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Full Faith and Credit Clause to be moved to Full faith and credit clause. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 21:17, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.