While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
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
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement
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.
I was about to boldly move it to Fictional sting operations of the ATF myself, but then you suggested an even shorter alternative. :) I think both our suggestions are better than the present title and would support a move to either. I suppose the lack of a single common name in the literature means we can call the article pretty much whatever we want as long as it's concise, unambiguous, reflective of the actual content, and in keeping with similarly titled articles here. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of a shorter title if workable. The title has to be neutral (which all the above are) but also readily understood by a reader/descriptive (which they aren't really because "AFT" just isn't meaningful to many/most English speakers globally, it doesn't convey anything generally).
My concern is that many/most English speakers (i.e., every English speaker in the UK, India, Australia, and generally outside North America) is pretty unlikely to know what "ATF" is, as this is an acronym for a US DoJ body that isn't high profile outside North America itself. (As an analogy, if we titled some article just HMRC entrapment cases would most readers know this was about the UK tax (IRS) service or know what the article was about?). So while concise, I'm concerned that the proposals don't meet our need to have a clear explanatory title. Concise is good, but can we do anything on this concern to find a good compromise? FT2(Talk | email)17:05, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Those all have the same issue - they are all US-centric and assume the reader (who may be English speaking from many countries) knows US public body acronyms. "BPR&D perjury controversies" and "DANIPS misconduct controversy" wouldn't mean much to a US reader. Nor would an article on "AQIS scandal 2013" or "ACLEI fake charge disputes"? Those are all also law enforcement agencies in English speaking countries (India and Australia respectively). I just think that however concise and understandable to a US resident, a title like "AFT fictional sting operations" is just as opaque. Part of a title is to ensure the topic will be understandable to a general English reader, not just one who goes further and opens the article. How can we achieve that? FT2(Talk | email)15:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We can't. In cases like these you need to decide between concision and precision. Since article titles are rarely encountered out of context, the concision can usually be given a bit more weight. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
