Talk:Cambridge Five
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cambridge Five article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
Daily page views
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
editThis article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 January 2019 and 2 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cala971.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
editThis article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alwhela1.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Missing book
editThe article mentions several fiction books on the subject but misses one by P Kerr: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Kerr The Other Side of Silence. London: Quercus, 2016. ISBN 978-1-78429-514-1, set in 1956
the book mostly discuss Burgess and McLean and there is a transcript of an extensive "debriefing" of Burgess DBelin (talk) 12:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
A small question of number
editOn looking at the lead, I felt it could benefit from some copyediting [1]. Fwiw, I was some surprised to find the sing/pl choice for "none" [of them] so controversial. After thinking a bit more critically about the sentence in context, I've tried this, though I can imagine that might be a bit controversial too (as it may implicitly call into question the completeness of our current knowledge). Fwiw, 86.186.168.233 (talk) 21:24, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
My profuse apologies.
editI wrote 'were' in place of 'was', thinking it something that had gone unnoticed, rather than intentional. Out of curiosity, what is the implied semantic difference? Euphemios (talk) 06:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)