Template:Did you know nominations/Krinsky v. Doe 6
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 09:52, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Krinsky v. Doe 6 edit
- ... that an anonymous poster on Yahoo message board successfully quashed a subpoena to reveal his identity by claiming a First Amendment right to anonymous speech?
- Comment: This court case may be relevant for people who wonder if it is possible to stay anonymous even after being identified as part of a court case.
Created/expanded by Justinesherry (talk). Nominated by Stromhylden (talk) at 19:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Seems to me, at a read-through, that this could maybe do with some more sources if possible. I'd be very surprised if this wasn't covered in some manner in the newspapers—The New York Times has a good online archive which might provide a good place to start. It seems solidly-enough written, just some things could do with further support from third-party sources where possible, and headings such as "Initial ruling" aren't cited at all. Larger newspapers, Google News, or even a search through Google Books for instances of the case outside of court transcripts, would all be good ways to expand on the slim sourcing here. On a trivial note, though, I was pretty surprised to see that this happened in 2008, it just smacked of that whole late-90s internet boom at first for some reason (possibly because it makes Yahoo still seem relevant). GRAPPLE X 04:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I went in and added some news article references, and fixed the missing ref you mentioned. Is this sufficient? Or, if not, can you give me some pointers/guidelines on providing extra background references beyond the primary sources that I can take a look at? Thanks! Justinesherry (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Looks better now, good enough to sign off on. I'd stick a link to First Amendment to the United States Constitution in the hook, though. Other than that we're good to go. GRAPPLE X 01:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I went in and added some news article references, and fixed the missing ref you mentioned. Is this sufficient? Or, if not, can you give me some pointers/guidelines on providing extra background references beyond the primary sources that I can take a look at? Thanks! Justinesherry (talk) 01:13, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
