The result of the debate was KEEP. - Doc ask? 00:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is not an appropriate encyclopaedia article. I believe it counts as original research, because clearly it is not reporting someone else's detailed breakdown of the act, but carrying out its own. While a clause by clause explanation of legislation would be appropriate in a legal textbook, an encyclopaedia should summarise information about an act rather than carry out an analysis of it. Worldtraveller 23:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was KEEP. - Doc ask? 00:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
This article is not an appropriate encyclopaedia article. I believe it counts as original research, because clearly it is not reporting someone else's detailed breakdown of the act, but carrying out its own. While a clause by clause explanation of legislation would be appropriate in a legal textbook, an encyclopaedia should summarise information about an act rather than carry out an analysis of it. Worldtraveller 23:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC) reply