Talk:Gregg v. Georgia

message: from the article: but because the system by which it was being applied at the time was not "arbitrary and capricious.", the "not" shouldn't be there, surely? Notjim 14:17, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct - I just re-checked the text of the majority opinion, and the "not" was not in the text.  Someone'd alreay fixed this, but just thought I should mention it...--Tim4christ17 10:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk start

message: It seems to me that one of the most obvious things missing from this article is a description of the facts of the case(s) and links to articles about the perps/plaintiffs. There's a Troy Leon Gregg article that I think should be prominently linked, but I can't see a natural place to work in his name in the current text. --Trovatore 03:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Need descriptions of crimes, links to principals

message: 1. Who was involved in  this case?
2. Why did this case come about?
3. What does this case establish?
4. In the case, is there any precedent involved (are any other casees refrenced that happened before)?
5. Are there any constitutional amendements that the case can be attached to?
any help is much appreciated, Thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.85.9.189 (talk) 17:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions for a history project 

message: In the introduction, the case is described as having "…set forth the two main features that capital sentencing procedures must employ in order to comport (i.e. comply) with the Eighth Amendment…".
'comport' is a highly uncommon word, to such an extent that somebody has considered it necessary to link it to the wiktionary definition and provide an explanation in brackets immediately afterwards. It doesn't appear to be a quotation, and a far more common word expressing the same thing not only exists, but is already provided. Wouldn't it make more sense to simply say 'comply' in the first place? 78.49.58.126 (talk) 09:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally agree with you.  But somehow I feel like there's a better, third word, on the tip of my tongue, that I can't quite come up with.  No objection to your changing it to "comply" in the mean time. --Trovatore (talk) 07:27, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  question about wording in introduction 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gregg v. Georgia. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080421124552/http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions.php to http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:19, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The case names in the introduction appear to have been... stylized. 2604:CB00:5AC:2B00:90B5:FBC8:B621:D833 (talk) 11:09, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction case names