This doesn't actually link to the range of sections, rather it links to the first and last one, only. This is non-optimal, but it doesn't seem like our source will let us link to a range. It should be noted, though. Also, this should probably use two §'s, not one, as that's the usual way to refer to more than one section. JesseW (talk) 04:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- Agree it should have two section symbols or none. Agree it's imperfect by not linking the entire range. Not an unusual problem: even in subscription databases you can't enter a range of sections and receive a doc the entire range. Yukongiraffe (talk) 11:06, 1 January 2017 (UTC)