Talk:Dettmer v. Landon

Neopaganism High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neopaganism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neopaganism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeopaganismWikipedia:WikiProject NeopaganismTemplate:WikiProject NeopaganismNeopaganism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Attribution

Material on this page was originally located at 799 F.2d 929 - United States Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit (1986), which now redirects here - Wikipedia rarely features trial court decisions, and in this case there is no need for separate articles on the trial court and appellate court decisions, so I have merged them into one article under the correct name. Cheers! BD2412 T 13:03, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That seems reasonable to me. One article, as opposed to zero, or two, seems like a fine way to go. Jkelly 15:23, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I like BD's change to how they are accessed here. --P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 22:27, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]