Talk:R v Powley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | R v Powley is currently a Law good article nominee. Nominated by CSGinger14 (talk) at 18:03, 7 April 2026 (UTC) This article is ready to be reviewed in accordance with the good article criteria. Any editor who has not nominated or contributed significantly to this article may review the article and decide if it should be listed as a good article. To start the review process, click start review and then save the page. See the instructions. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
 | This article lacks an infobox. You may wish to add one, so that the article resembles the standard display for this subject. This talk page may contain the banner of a relevant project, that provides the standardized infobox for this type of article. See also Category:Infobox templates, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes. |
 | The following reference(s) may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
Thoughts on Background section
Hi folks. I'm trying to get this article up to GA standards, and am wondering if anyone thinks it's necessary to include information on the origins of the Métis alongside info on the case itself. Given that there's a link to the Métis articles, and a fair deal of information on the history of the Sault Ste. Marie community already present in the Powley Test section, it seems unnecessary, but I wanted a second opinion. Hope everyone is well, and will look forward to a response.
Best, CSGinger14 (talk) 07:58, 7 April 2026 (UTC)