Template:Cite court
.
Format based on information from the article Case citation.
Usage
Copy a blank version to use. All parameter names must be lowercase. At this point, all fields are optional; however, this is subject to change as the template matures.
Horizontal list |
---|
{{cite court |litigants= |vol= |reporter= |opinion= |pinpoint= |court= |date= |url= |access-date= |quote=}} |
Vertical list |
{{cite court |litigants= |vol= |reporter= |opinion= |pinpoint= |court= |date= |url= |access-date= |quote= }} |
Examples
{{cite court |litigants=Parker v. D.C. |vol=478 |reporter=F.3d |opinion=370 |pinpoint=401 |court=D.C. Cir. |date=2007 |url=http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200703/04-7041a.pdf |quote=As such, we hold it unconstitutional.}}
- Parker v. D.C., 478 F.3d 370, 401 (D.C. Cir. 2007) ("As such, we hold it unconstitutional.").
Description of fields
All fields are optional!
- litigants
- List of litigants, such as "Miranda v. Arizona"; also known as the title of the case. If a Wikipedia article using this exact string exists, a link will automatically be created. Alternately, if an article exists but another name is desired for display, a wikilink may be specified; i.e., "[[Case article|This v. That]]". Note: This parameter should likely not be optional. This presently cannot be specified as title, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- reporter
- The abbreviated term for whatever reporter is being referenced; i.e., "U.S." for the U.S. Supreme Court's "United States Reports". Important: "reporter" in this context means an official law publication, not a journalist. This presently cannot be specified as work, which is inconsistent with other citation templates. Do not wikilink.
- vol
- Volume of the reporter. Only used for US case citations (and those given in the same format); otherwise, just include the information as part of reporter in the format given by the source. This presently cannot be specified as volume, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- opinion
- The opinion number, often the number of the first page of the case. Only used for US case citations (and those given in the same format); otherwise, just include the information as part of reporter in the format given by the source.
- pinpoint
- Identifies a specific part of a decision, typically by page or paragraph number. This presently cannot be specified as at, page, or pages, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- court
- The name or (optionally) standard abbreviation for the court being cited (e.g. "3d Cir." or "M.D. Ala." or "Allahabad High Court, India"). If the abbreviated form would be a red link, use the long one (even if it is also a red link for now). See here for a list of courts in the United States. In order for court to appear, date must also be specified. Note: This parameter also should likely not be optional.
- date
- The year or full date in which the court rendered its decision. Note: This parameter also should likely not be optional, or the court parameter will break.
- url
- A Web address for the court document(s). For example, for a U.S. Supreme Court case, the URL to FindLaw is
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol={{{vol}}}&page={{{page}}}
. It may be permissible to use the URL of a Web page that provides summary information about the case, if the case documents are not available; however, an article about the case should be cited with {{Cite web}} or {{Cite news}}. This template is for citing a legal document and its wording directly. - access-date or accessdate
- The date that you viewed the URL, not the date of the case. This presently is not displayed, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- via
- Name of the website (republisher) if the URL does not go to the site of the reporter above. This presently is not displayed, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- lang
- Two-letter ISO 639-1 language code for the language in which the document is written, if it is not English (leave this parameter out if it is). This presently is not displayed, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- archive-url or archiveurl
- URL to a backup copy of the document at Wayback.Archive.org or some other archival site. This presently is not displayed, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- archive-date or archivedate
- Date of the above archival. This presently is not displayed, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
- url-status
- live if the original URL no longer works; dead or blank otherwise; controls what is done with the archive-url. This presently is not functional, which is inconsistent with other citation templates.
TemplateData for Cite court
Cite a court judgment
Parameter | Description | Type | Status | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Litigants | litigants | List of litigants. If a Wikipedia article using this exact string exists, a link will automatically be created. Alternately, if an article exists but another name is desired for display, a wikilink may be specified; i.e., "[[Case article|This v. That]]".
| String | suggested |
Court name | court | The standard abbreviation for the court being cited
| String | suggested |
Reporter | reporter | The abbreviated term for whatever reporter is being referenced
| String | optional |
Volume | vol | Volume of the reporter | Unknown | optional |
Opinion number | opinion | The opinion number, often the number of the first page of the case. | String | optional |
Pinpoint citation | pinpoint | Identifies a specific part of a decision, typically by page or paragraph number. | String | optional |
Date | date year | The year or date in which the court rendered its decision. | Date | optional |
URL | url | A web site or other online article with information on the case. | URL | optional |
Quote | quote | A quote from the judgment | String | optional |
The above documentation is transcluded from Template:Cite court/doc. (edit | history) Editors can experiment in this template's sandbox (create | mirror) and testcases (create) pages. Please add categories to the /doc subpage. Subpages of this template. |
Welcome
Welcome to the CKN Knowledge in Practice Centre (KPC). The KPC is a resource for learning and applying scientific knowledge to the practice of composites manufacturing. As you navigate around the KPC, refer back to the information on this right-hand pane as a resource for understanding the intricacies of composites processing and why the KPC is laid out in the way that it is. The following video explains the KPC approach:
Understanding Composites Processing
The Knowledge in Practice Centre (KPC) is centered around a structured method of thinking about composite material manufacturing. From the top down, the heirarchy consists of:
- The factory
- Factory cells and/or the factory layout
- Process steps (embodied in the factory process flow) consisting of:
The way that the material, shape, tooling & consumables and equipment (abbreviated as MSTE) interact with each other during a process step is critical to the outcome of the manufacturing step, and ultimately critical to the quality of the finished part. The interactions between MSTE during a process step can be numerous and complex, but the Knowledge in Practice Centre aims to make you aware of these interactions, understand how one parameter affects another, and understand how to analyze the problem using a systems based approach. Using this approach, the factory can then be developed with a complete understanding and control of all interactions.
Interrelationship of Function, Shape, Material & Process
Design for manufacturing is critical to ensuring the producibility of a part. Trouble arises when it is considered too late or not at all in the design process. Conversely, process design (controlling the interactions between shape, material, tooling & consumables and equipment to achieve a desired outcome) must always consider the shape and material of the part. Ashby has developed and popularized the approach linking design (function) to the choice of material and shape, which influence the process selected and vice versa, as shown below:
Within the Knowledge in Practice Centre the same methodology is applied but the process is more fully defined by also explicitly calling out the equipment and tooling & consumables. Note that in common usage, a process which consists of many steps can be arbitrarily defined by just one step, e.g. "spray-up". Though convenient, this can be misleading.
Workflows
The KPC's Practice and Case Study volumes consist of three types of workflows:
- Development - Analyzing the interactions between MSTE in the process steps to make decisions on processing parameters and understanding how the process steps and factory cells fit within the factory.
- Troubleshooting - Guiding you to possible causes of processing issues affecting either cost, rate or quality and directing you to the most appropriate development workflow to improve the process
- Optimization - An expansion on the development workflows where a larger number of options are considered to achieve the best mixture of cost, rate & quality for your application.