Template talk:USStatute

Linked dates

MOS:UNLINKDATES states, "The linking of dates purely for the purpose of autoformatting is now deprecated." This is as of August 24, 2008. I agree that it has some problems, and I agree with the policy as generally applied. However, I believe an exception should be made for this template.

• All US Statutes can be properly described in an American format: MMMM DD, YYYY.
• All US Statutes can be properly described in the Gregorian calendar.
• Without linked dates, ALL the dates will look bad: "(False Claims Act Amendments of 1986 (Pub.L. 99-562, 100 Stat. 3153, enacted 1986-10-27)"
• The (many) readers who don't have dates-preference set won't be hurt by linking, they won't be affected at all.
• The few readers with the dates-preference will be helped.

Until this is resolved, it should remain linked.—GoldRingChip 10:34, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

• I've changed my mind.—GoldRingChip 10:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Date templates

Would it not be better to use one of the date templates, such as {{date}} or {{start date}}? They also emit microformat tags extending the usefullness of this template. Int21h (talk) 04:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

No such exemption, now or in 2018

In 2018 the following text was added to the documentation "In particular, notice the "exemption clause" that allows this template, along with its external links, to be used in an article's body." At the time the note at WP:EL was:
Links to Wiktionary and Wikisource can sometimes be useful. Other exceptions include use of templates like {{external media}}, which is used only when non-free and non-fair use media cannot be uploaded to Wikipedia." and it's currently:
"Links to Wiktionary and Wikisource can sometimes be useful. Other exceptions include use of templates like {{external media}}, which is used only when non-free and non-fair use media cannot be uploaded to Wikipedia. Templates that link to sources (such as – but not limited to – {{ISBN}}, {{doi}}, {{PMID}}, and {{Ref RFC}}) do not normally appear outside of a references list or a list of works created by the subject of the article."
This isn't a template link {{external media}}, which creates a separate box outside of text, and it doesn't create a link to a sister project. So I don't see how this ever had an exemption (a word not used at EL now or in 2018). The current wording would suggest this is more like the other templates that link to sources, which the current wording says shouldn't be used in the normal body of the article.
There might be some exceptions were it's appropriate to include an external link such as this template, but this template has no exemption from the standard rules. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 18:50, 2 September 2026 (UTC)