Talk:Securitas depot robbery

Securitas depot robbery 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 appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 5, 2022.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 10, 2022	Good article nominee	Listed
September 10, 2022	Peer review	Not reviewed
October 18, 2022	Featured article candidate	Promoted
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 22, 2012, February 22, 2016, February 22, 2021, February 22, 2022, and February 22, 2023.
Current status: Featured article

Kent Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England 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.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Kent tasks:

Here are some Kent related tasks you can do:

Clean up an article: Here are automatically generated lists of articles needing cleanup sorted alphabetically and by category.
Edit the Top and High importance articles.
Refine/polish: Ashford, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Canterbury
Expand:: List of churches in Kent, Maidstone Borough Council
NPOV: K College
Citation needed: Unreferenced Kent articles
Cleanup/Copyedit: Kingdom of Kent
Expert attention: Channel Tunnel, Bromley Civic Society
Stubs: see Kent geography stubs articles

Note: These articles may overlap with those on other related lists. If you would like to make a change, either do so yourself, or make a suggestion.

British crime (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime articles

Crime and Criminal Biography: Organized crime Low‑importance

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Organized crime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Bank of England robbery was copied or moved into Securitas depot robbery with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

References vs External links[edit]

Do we need to ref. stuff in this article? I removed "mentions company name" from the Bloomberg link - beasue this could get very messy "mentions time of abduction" etc... However if some brave soul wants to go to the <ref> format, then I don't see a problem. Rich Farmbrough. 23:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not generally in favour of all that, as long as you are easily able to find the source you got the info from if challenged. But as this issue unravels over the next few days I'm sure someone will end up taking care of it - 'cos this is going to be big.

Are you one of those people who can't stand it when people talk using terrible grammar? If so, I'd be delighted if you could pass the proverbial fine-toothed comb of grammar through my user page. Thanks! 23:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is plagiarism![edit]

This article is a very slightly paraphrased version of the BBC article cited at the bottom. Unless I'm very mistaken, this is plagiarism and illegal, not to mention against Wikipedia policy.--Eitan1989 01:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, I just read this and the BBC article before seeing your note and came to that conclusion. Someone rewrite =P. - Estel ^(talk) 10:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time format[edit]

I've put all times in 12 hour format (X:XX xm) at the moment because three out of four entries were already so. Personally I'd prefer to use 24 hour format. Is there any documented consensus within the community about either style and where to use them? ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ ► 02:29, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it back (hope you don't mind) to reflect common British usage. To avoid any misunderstandings, I've left the leading zeros in place, and added some description of the time of day. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 10:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A249[edit]

sorry the A249 doesn't go anywhere near Tonbridge, it goes from sheppy to maidstone. A26, A227, A21 etc maybee but that - 160.5.247.213 02:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC) (Pickle_UK not logged in)[reply]

Don't forget he lives in Herne Bay. By the timing it sounds like he was just on his way home when they nabbed the poor sod. I'll see if I can clarify. ◄ИΞШSΜΛЯΞ ► 03:20, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firewall?[edit]

Have these bank robbers seen the new Harrison Ford movie, Firewall? Their methods were very similar (kidnap bank manager's family, etc.) JackO'Lantern 03:12, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This method is not exclusive to this movie, being a plot point in Bandits, for instance. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 07:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its the plot to the NI Northern bank robbery 160.5.247.213 10:33, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edited to change Stockport (a town in the NW) to Stockbury (a village in Kent)

The only similarity to Firewall is that the family of a bank exec was kidnapped. In this real-life incident, they were not held hostage to force the exec to do anything, there was no electronic transfer of funds, there was a physical robbery with people being bound, etc. The differences far outnumber the similarities; that section should probably be removed. -Big Smooth 23:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Currency[edit]

Could we just have the value in £, and provide a link to £ for people to convert the values? Think it would look neater, but maybe that's not a priority. Just a thought. 57.66.51.165 11:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been confirmed that the amount stolen was actually in the area of £50 million, I have not altered this information as I do not know how to translate £'s into foreign currencies exactly. Can someone please see to this, and alter the front page also? BritBoy 19:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry I have done it myself (Dollar and Euro figures are rounded to 1 decimal place). I have altered the page accordingly, deleting all out of date links.BritBoy 19:23, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anywhere where it has been confirmed it was this amount. I've edited the article accordingly but not to the point of reverting. Please include a reference! (I note that previous references have been removed)

If estimated ammount stolen has a range of £25 million then the accuracy of any conversions should by quite innacurate. You cant make information more accurate by changing the currency. --82.38.56.218 08:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the amount should be listed second in usd, based on the exchange rate at the time of the crime. i mean, the usd is like a lingua franca defacto standard of money, but it's fluctuating against other forms, so it's a tough issue.

That's a good point, actually, and something which should be made into a general rule. Sockatume 01:08, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the USD is a defacto standard of money? um.. only in the USA, I think you'll find. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.93.173.35 (talk) 13:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Securitas depot robbery. 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: 18 January 2022).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Report at Errors[edit]

This is scheduled to run on the main page in 13 hours' time but there are concerns raised at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Could page watchers please have a look and resolve the issues raised? Schwede 66 08:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up that's an OTD blurb error I think and I've replied. Mujinga (talk) 09:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits[edit]

These two recent edits by 2a00:23c6:3081:4501:bca7:302b:1aa:97a5 may well be true but they need better sourcing. Firstly, Murray's lawyer says in the "Cage-fighter Jailed Over £53m Kent Securitas Raid" BBC source that they will appeal the sentence; secondly you can't give a garbled reference for a TV show without a time stamp since this is a featured article and referencing standards are higher than normal. Happy to discuss further if you want to 2a00:23c6:3081:4501:bca7:302b:1aa:97a5. Mujinga (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]