- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Pacific States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Oregon
- ... that in Pacific States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Oregon, decided 110 years ago today, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the initiative process? Source: Miller, pg. 34: "As a practical matter, Pacific States protected state and local initiative and referendum processes from legal challenge on federal constitutional grounds, an outcome widely interpreted to bestow constitutional legitimacy on the new devices. Individual initiatives or referenda could face legal challenge, but the constitutional validity of the processes themselves was now secure."
Created by Extraordinary Writ (talk). Self-nominated at 07:15, 6 February 2022 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough
|
|
|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
Overall: 
Thank you for the interesting article. Learned a lot while reading it. New and long enough, article and hook are sourced and earwig gives me violation unlikely. As to me DYK is good to go and I hope there is a slot available for the 19th February. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
To
T:DYK/P6
Thank you for the interesting article. Learned a lot while reading it. New and long enough, article and hook are sourced and earwig gives me violation unlikely. As to me DYK is good to go and I hope there is a slot available for the 19th February. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:55, 6 February 2022 (UTC)