United States v. Progressive, Inc. 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Freedom of speech on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech articles
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 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WisconsinWikipedia:WikiProject WisconsinTemplate:WikiProject WisconsinWisconsin articles
These sects of these two related articles have some good sourced info that could be incorporated here into this article, as well. ;)—Cirt (
talk)
18:48, 16 February 2012 (UTC)reply
Removed newly added info from sect, Background
Removed newly added info from sect, Background. Let's please not get into the habit of adding info without page numbers in cites, let's maintain a high standard for new info added to this page, please.—Cirt (
talk)
05:04, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Page numbers are desireable but not a requirement. I do not think it is even reasonable to have them everywhere. I am an editor of a scientific journal and we never require page numbers (nor they are required in a dozens or so journals where I have published). Not to mention that some sources such as online books do not have page numbers at all. Nor they are common in encyclopedias. Please do not impose your own rules. If you wish to add page numbers, go for it, but please do not delete sourced material. -
BorisG (
talk)
12:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
The article is currently undergoing a major revamp. Inline citations are absolutely required for verification at higher assessment levels, and these require page numbers. (See
WP:CITE) It is unreasonable to ask the spot checkers at FAC to find a single fact in a whole book or article. Since you have the pages in front of you there should be no difficulty providing the page numbers.
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
19:14, 4 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Suggest we junk it or move it to the talk page. It's not really doing anything at the moment, and eventually we'll substitute it with Notes and References sect.—Cirt (
talk)
06:20, 12 March 2012 (UTC)reply
The courthouse photo is nice, but I would prefer the magazine cover in the infobox. It tells the reader what the case was all about.
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
19:33, 12 March 2012 (UTC)reply
I'm gonna have to respectfully disagree here. The tradition for most Wikipedia articles about U.S. court cases is to have the seal of the court in the info box, for a federal court case. This picture is a temporary holding place for that seal of the federal court.—Cirt (
talk)
21:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Although the court is correct, I do not think the case took place at the pictured courthouse, but at Warren's courthouse in Milwaukee. can you verify this.
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
23:46, 3 April 2012 (UTC)reply
Date format should be USA. I notice so far the text uses both conflicting USA and UK date formats. This case is entirely about USA material, so it should use USA date format.—Cirt (
talk)
21:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)reply
No worries. I will make sure that they are consistently in mm dd yyyy format. It is not UK format, but US military format, which is always used in our US military articles.
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
01:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)reply
That would be right. The last one on the list, New York Times Co. v. United States, will almost certainly disappear too. FAC doesn't like See Also sections, but we need one to hold all the portal boxes...
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
11:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
This article is supposed to be about United States v. The Progressive, but it seems to be getting over-burdened by background info. Maybe we can trim some sects down, with links in those sects to more info on the respective parent articles?—Cirt (
talk)
23:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)reply
I am not going to touch the parent articles, but I will trim a paragraph out of each subsection. In the meantime, feel free to fill in the Prior Restraint Section
Hawkeye7 (
talk)
01:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
Yup, currently doing research on that sect, reading through sects of some great books pertaining to that sect. ;)—Cirt (
talk)
05:05, 20 March 2012 (UTC)reply
So if Wikipedia is not censored, does that mean that if someone happened to know the details behind the Teller-Ulam design they could add that information to either this or the Teller-Ulam design article; assuming the reference was from a peer reviewed journal? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
CensoredScribe (
talk •
contribs)
19:27, 15 September 2013 (UTC)reply
I cleared up some confusion about which letter was published by the Daily Californian (it was the Argonne letter, not the Hansen letter). In adjusting the footnotes I used the page numbers from the online pdf version of the DeVolpi, et al. book, which are different from the hard copy page numbers.
HowardMorland (
talk)
05:01, 19 August 2016 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on
United States v. Progressive, Inc.. 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.