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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health 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.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
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.
Let me be clear about my tagging, the only sources are primary at this stage, and surely someone else, like the NY Times or other major publication has something to say about it. I don't question that it is notable and should be included, but there needs to be perspectives from various media worked into the article to keep it in compliance with WP:NPOV. This is particularly true (in my opinion) when it comes to legislation, as we aren't just here to parrot laws. Dennis Brown (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
