A fact from Defense Production Act of 1950 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 May 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Hi all. It would be useful to have a table with all the various reauthorizations that have occurred including year and pl numbers. I probably won't get to this for a few weeks. A CRS report will probably have it. Cheers --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Defense Production Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Probably not. It's a different law in a different jurisdiction, not covered in this article. If there were an article on it, it would be worth a "see also" and/or a disambiguation hat, but there's no reason an article on US legislation should cover the legislation of another country that covers similar ground. TJRC (talk) 15:18, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Though let’s be friendly and avoid language like nonsense. I’ll put something appropriate in place. And if no one else does, I’ll put a small article in place for the Canadian act later today. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 14:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very big story with lots of detail from the New York Times just now. I may not get to this for a while, so I’ll put it here. "The Defense Production Act has been invoked hundreds of thousands of times in the Trump years."
One of the references specifically states that "Trump didn't order meat-processing plants to reopen," but the article strongly implies he did, stating, "The order gave the USDA extraordinary powers to have firms maintain production." Which is it? Did Trump force plants to reopen using the Defense Production Act or didn't he? Can someone who is well-versed on this subject please clarify the issue in the text of the article? Thank you. 66.91.36.8 (talk) 13:30, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
