| Revision as of 23:02, 19 June 2012 editWilliamJE (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers132,561 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:10, 19 June 2012 edit undoSavidan (talk | contribs)53,757 edits →WP:REDNOTNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| ::There is no source for these cases being a series. What they are cases you feel should be grouped together. Well that's your belief, not fact.] 23:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | ::There is no source for these cases being a series. What they are cases you feel should be grouped together. Well that's your belief, not fact.] 23:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :::Both lists and templates may and often should contain articles that do not exist yet, for the purposes of completeness. The grouping of these cases is based on relatively objective criteria. The fact that they are (1) criminal cases, (2) that interpret the ] are relatively objective facts that are easy to verify and not subject to any reasonable dispute. You can find the citations for the cases at ], on which this template is based. ] 23:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:10, 19 June 2012
WP:REDNOT
This policy does not apply here. It says: "Do not create red links to articles that will likely never be created." There is no reason to believe that articles about Supreme Court cases will likely never be created. Articles about Supreme Court cases, for all areas of law, and all eras, are created every day. There is an entire WikiProject devoted to this effort, and no such article has ever been deleted as non-notable. While red-links are sometimes omitted from navboxes, WP:REDNOT has an explicit exception. "An exception is red links in navboxes where the red-linked articles are part of a series or a whole set." These articles are part of a set, namely the set of Supreme Court cases that apply the Due Process Clause to criminal proceedings. That some sub-set happens to be entirely empty is irrelevant (just as, in a list of all presidential elections in a country, it would be irrelevant that one particular decade or century was all red). The red links are necessary to give the reader the context of the full set. It is misleading to omit the entire sub-set from the set. Misplaced Pages is a work in progress. Redlinks encourage article creation. They are not a cancer to be eliminated for mere aesthetic reasons. Savidan 20:04, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Templates are navigation tools for going from one article to another. How can from one article to another when the the article don't exist?
- There is no source for these cases being a series. What they are cases you feel should be grouped together. Well that's your belief, not fact....William 23:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- Both lists and templates may and often should contain articles that do not exist yet, for the purposes of completeness. The grouping of these cases is based on relatively objective criteria. The fact that they are (1) criminal cases, (2) that interpret the Due Process Clause are relatively objective facts that are easy to verify and not subject to any reasonable dispute. You can find the citations for the cases at List of United States Supreme Court cases involving constitutional criminal procedure, on which this template is based. Savidan 23:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC)