Wikidata:Property proposal/United States Statutes at Large citation
United States Statutes at Large citation
[edit]Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Organization
| Description | citation of an Act of the United States Congress to the United States Statutes at Large |
|---|---|
| Represents | United States Statutes at Large (Q909723) |
| Data type | External identifier |
| Template parameter | "cite statutes at large" in en:Template:Infobox_U.S._legislation |
| Domain | instances of Act of Congress in the United States (Q476068) |
| Allowed values | \d+-\d+ |
| Example | Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Q1111004) → 104-327 |
| Formatter URL | http://legislink.org/us/stat-$1 |
- Motivation
"Statutes at Large" is one of the main citation methods for acts of the US Congress as originally passed. It actually has two fields, volume and page number; while normally when writing we use e.g. "104 Stat. 327" as the format, I think just putting a dash in between is an easier data entry format, and it works well with the formatter URL. It would be nice if there was some way to make Wikidata convert 104-327 to 104 Stat. 327 at display time, but I'm not aware of how to do that, if that is possible. Also note that the link to legislink.org is not an official US government link, but it is a helpful community service which actually redirects to the official US government link, which has a rather unfriendly URL format. It is already in use by English Wikipedia in the template en:Template:USStat. SJK (talk) 01:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Discussion
Support this sounds useful. Do we have similar links for laws in other countries? ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: Other countries use similar legislation citation formats. In Commonwealth countries, the contemporary norm is based on year and sequential numbering of acts within the year, although different countries do things slightly differently – the UK uses the format "2017 c. 1", Australia uses the format "Act No. 1 of 2017", etc. Also, at least the UK and New Zealand use three different numbering sequences within the same year for three different types of acts (public, private and local). Before 1963, the UK used a different format, based on monarch, years of reign, and then act number within those years of reign, e.g. 10 & 11 Eliz 2 c 34 (for some monarchs, including Elizabeth II, two years were used, since the parliamentary year and the years of her reign overlapped.) The old pre-1963 system is still used in citing historic legislation. I think what this demonstrates, is the best results will be attained by using multiple properties to do this (one per a legislation citation format) not trying to use the same property for different citation formats of different countries. In terms of linking, the question has to be looked at on the basis of each citation format, but legislink.org does New Zealand public and private acts too (but not New Zealand local acts for whatever reason, I think that's an oversight). SJK (talk) 08:07, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- @SJK, ArthurPSmith:
Done ChristianKl (talk) 07:42, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
