Talk:Pay Our Military Act

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pay Our Military Act article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Pay Our Military Act appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 October 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Pay Our Military Act provided appropriations to pay members of the U.S. military in spite of the country's recent federal government shutdown?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pay Our Military Act.

Wikipedia

Law

	Law portal 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Government Mid‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance).

DYK nomination

Proposed deletion

For reasons that I am unclear on, someone recently proposed deleting this article because "there is a general consensus that bills that are not enacted don't get articles." There are several problems with this. First and foremost, this bill did in fact already become a law. It is a law. Therefore, it passes that criteria. Second, who decided that - what general consensus, where, and when? If ten people agreed five years ago that that would be their rule, we don't have to follow it. Finally, bills have long shelf lives. If this bill had not been enacted, it would still be inappropriate to delete, at least until Jan 2015. Until that time, any bill still has a chance to pass. Thanks.HistoricMN44 (talk) 03:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a confusion. First, I think the proper guidance for whether something gets an article is actually WP:Notability. Second I would point out Equal Rights Amendment as a disproof, an example of unpassed things which are still notable. Markbassett (talk) 21:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]