Template:Did you know nominations/James Bruce Lockhart

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following 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 Yoninah (talk) 20:48, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

James Bruce Lockhart[edit]

(
)

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 08:28, 6 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Reviewing
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Some issues should be addressed. His death date in the Times obituary is 27 October 2018 but in the article is 20 March 2018. Information should be included. ie read modern languages at Cambridge, had a flair for languages which he maintained throughout life. This was of value in his SIS work as exemplified by his knowledge of Russian in the Vienna posting. . He was top in the Foreign Office Greek exam. The fact that he joined SIS in 1973 should also be included. All of that is available in his Times obituary. An infobox would enhance the article. Papamac (talk) 11:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the review, Papamac. Fair points, I have added those pieces of information. My mistake, I like to check death dates from the Probate Index, and in fact 30 March was the date of probate. Infoboxes can give pages a lift, but for an intelligence agent, whose main work is obscure, if you ask me one here would be misleadingly boring. Moonraker (talk) 02:05, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Looks good now. Point taken about Infobox. OK to go. Papamac (talk) 09:48, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, one reason is that I like to keep hooks short and simple, another is that spies are surely more credible with short names. If someone wishes to expand this one, be my guest, but I'm not sure anything useful is achieved? Moonraker (talk) 10:56, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
As far as I know, hook subjects only being referred to by last name is so uncommon that in the two or so years I've been doing DYK-related activities I think your hooks are the first time I've encountered them (apart from April Fools hooks). I'm not sure if they're against the rules, but to be on the safe side I suggest you use the subject's full name in the hook (not just for this nomination but all your others as well, as I see you have another open nomination right now with similar circumstances). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
In the past, short names have been used many times, most often in multiple nominations, like the other one you are referring to now. I remember a hook with ten new articles nominated in it, where space to stay within the maximum length was hard to find. This is a case where in my view a short name is better. So long as there is no rule on the point, you can have your opinion, and I can have mine. Moonraker (talk) 11:42, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Even if we use the full name in the hook, it's still only 128 characters, which by no means is a long hook. There's no harm in using the full name in this case. In any case, I'll leave a message on DYK asking for more opinions on this. Courtesy ping reviewer Iainmacintyre. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:05, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/James_Bruce_Lockhart&oldid=899256195"