Jump to content

Talk:Portland spy ring

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articlePortland spy ring is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 17, 2023Peer reviewReviewed
April 10, 2023Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2020 and 4 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Adrian829.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

[edit]

I'm undertaking a rewrite of the article in my userspace and will transfer it all across when it's completed. I'd welcome any comments once it's been moved over. Feel free to drop me a line with any questions or queries in the meantime. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article title

[edit]

Why the upper-case S and R in the title? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it depends whether "Portland Spy Ring" is a proper noun (or used as such by the sources) or just a descriptive title for a spy ring operating on Portland. If the former, title case is appropriate; if the latter, sentence case is preferable. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, it needs changing in the article. Which currently - excluding one case when quoting - goes with four uses of Portland spy ring and one of Portland Spy Ring. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:04, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gog, Harry, Sorry, I missed this thread when it was first posted and have only just seen it. The title was like this when I started work on the article, and I didn’t consider it at all when doing the re-write.
I’ve gone over the sources I used as well as running some wider internet searches, and the results of this non-scientific trawl show absolutely no consensus of approach by any of them! We go from everything capitalised (shouty newspaper headlines) to PSR, PSr and Psr. There is no rhyme or reason is the usage, just what is likely house style. I don’t have a personal opinion on the format or even a feeling as to which ’feels’ right to be in line with the MOS. I would guess this means it should probably be Psr. Are you two (or any other page watchers) in agreement with a change to that format, or have I missed something? Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 06:11, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I could see an argument that it's a proper noun and I can see the argument that it's a descriptive title. I don't really mind as long as it's done consistently within the article and the title. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hearings dates

[edit]

The article mentioned that the hearings started on February 7 and ended on January 10. Was the ending date supposed to be February 10? DHN (talk) 02:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]