Template talk:Oregon legislation

	Oregon portal This template is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Expansion

Possible additions: SAIF, Public education (see Pierce v. Society of Sisters), abortion -Pete (talk) 20:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should Cannabis in Oregon be added, or is this geared towards specific pieces of legislation and health/human rights, etc.? Another Believer (talk) 01:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I added it, and removed Oregon Medical Marijuana Act -- I think that since one links pretty clearly to the other, and in the interests of keeping the navbox uncluttered, we don't need both. How does that sound? (Just a suggestion, I'm open to other ideas.) -Pete (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great! Another Believer (talk) 04:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should Methamphetamine in Oregon be added, or would it start looking cluttered if every possible drug-related article about Oregon were added? Certainly there is more to say about Cannabis than Methamphetamine. Just mentioning it for the sake of discussion. Another Believer (talk) 22:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should consider writing a short Controlled substances in Oregon article, linking to the three, and then putting that in the navbox? -Pete (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of something along that line, though I was not sure if that were possible. I'm afraid I am still getting used to the way things are done here (I tend to stick to simple edits and individual articles that interest me). Do you foresee any additional drug-related articles being created? If it is just the three, that wouldn't be too cluttered. But should additional articles be created... Another Believer (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Controlled substances in Oregon exists, should it be added to the template? --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm mixed. Its subject isn't as obviously related to legislation as Cannabis which is clearly against federal law. I suppose it has a place there though. I await someone else's viewpoint. —EncMstr (talk) 22:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should probably replace both Cannabis in Oregon and Alcohol in Oregon in the template. Controlled substances are "controlled" specifically because they involve legislation. Whether it's prescription drugs and how they're regulated, or methamphetamine, or tobacco and related tax proposals, it's related to legislation. In my view it would be best to have the central article linked in the template, and let those interested in specific areas branch off from there. -Pete (talk) 22:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009-12-12 Slight Expansion

I added a link to the Boardman Coal Plant article under the heading of 'Coal power' in the environment row. I thought it would fit well considering all the attention the plant has been receiving in recent years and because it is the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions in Oregon! Source: http://www.sierraclub.org/coal/or/pr/pr2009-10-02.aspx Hope it won't be a problem. Cheers! TimeClock871 (talk) 09:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

I'm not aware of other navboxes with captioned pictures. While Duniway is undoubtedly important in the broader context of legislation in Oregon, her presence in the infobox seems peculiar with some of the topics linked in the box that have little or nothing to do with her. What's the deal? --BDD (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 10 days later, I feel safe removing it. If you disagree, drop me a line, or just revert. It's not a big deal. --BDD (talk) 16:57, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BDD, I responded (and I think somebody else did too) to your note on the WikiProject Oregon talk page, but forgot to reply here. Thanks again for the notification. -Pete (talk) 19:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]