This template 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 template is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress 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.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This template 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.
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I propose we change the link to use federalregister.gov (FR2) instead of the GPO because it is an HTML website, which provides the benefits of the world wide web by providing hyperlinks to other Code of Federal Regulations, United States Code, Federal Register and related documents both within the text and as metadata, which of course the PDF does not (cannot?) do. It always links to the same GPO PDF currently linked to. The proposed change is in the {{Federal Register/sandbox}}. Int21h (talk) 10:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
I have done it. Int21h (talk) 20:58, 30 July 2013 (UTC)Reply
In fact, PDF documents can hyperlink to any URL, but such links would be vanishingly unlikely to be as convenient as proper web links, and it would also be very inconvenient to update them. In closing, I am a nitpicker. —SamB (talk) 21:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
Finding old FR pages would be much easier with datesedit
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The Internet archive has some microfilm scans of older FR issues, but they don't have the start/end page numbers listed outside the files, only the dates. Thus, it would be helpful if this template would accept dates (and the documentation would encourage they be provided for older volumes), so one would actually have some hope of finding the relevant material without subscribing to any of the relevant paysites. —SamB (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Library of Congress has a Federal Register collection with volumes 1-58 (e.g., it excludes volume 59). It appears rather complete. I propose we link to each of these volumes in the hope that readers can count integers and use a little logic, rather than the current situation of giving the appearance that the documents aren't readily accessible online at all. I have updated the sandbox to show this, albeit volume 59 is not in this collection, we may be able to land them at the GPO Federal Register collection landing page. It's better than nothing--read: it's better than what we have now. int21h (talk · contribs · email) 00:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
.svg)