This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
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 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.
Minor at present. Unless it has impact beyond one estate. 68.162.221.100 (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
If the ruling actually legalizes same-sex marriage (even if it's just 1 county) it's definitely worth noting. Even if it doesn't we should probably still mention it.. Prcc27 (talk) 23:35, 18 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
It's sufficiently covered. Far more media attention than activity on the ground. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 02:08, 20 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
