Talk:His Last Bow (short story)

POV check
The commentary section seems one-sided and overly critical, more of an editorial than commentary. Specifically, the section seems to violate Neutral point of view in the following ways:

- Asserting opinion as fact, e.g. "Sherlock Holmes' conduct has no rational reason within the framework of the story".

- Not asserting facts about competing opionions.

- No references/citations about the "facts" in the commentary section.

Suggestions:

- Replace opinions with facts about opinions IAW Neutral point of view. For example, include quotes/summary from a review of the story with such an opinion.

- Include facts about competing opinions IAW Neutral point of view. For example, include quotes/summary from a review that is more positive about the story.

- Cite references for the above.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.209.144.202 (talk • contribs) 12:05, July 7, 2006

I have re-written the section, taking the above into account. I hope now the "POV check" can be taken off.Adam keller 13:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

There has been no reaction whatever from whoever put that up, whatever his or her name. I am now going to remove it. If, whoever you are, you feel unsatisfied you can always put it up again (and write here your reasons). Adam keller 10:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Only instance of car travel?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this the only story where Holmes is depicted riding in a car rather than a Hansom cab? If I'm correct, then this is worth mentioning, as the horse-drawn Hansom cab is so closely identified with Holmes. It has much more of an era-change feel to it than the "Case Book" stories.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.254.36 (talk • contribs) 23:53, July 15, 2006


 * It was the only instance of Holmes and Watson in a car!!

The name Altamont
Altamont was the middle name of Conan Doyle's father.

Original research
Starting from the paragraph beginning "Over and above all that..." on down to the end of that section, it reads like a personal analysis of "what [ACD] should have done"; if that is the opinion of critics, they should be mentioned. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 05:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That problem still seems to exist. -- Beardo (talk) 00:13, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Propaganda
The propaganda section is self-referential! As if German aggression wasn't the cause of the war... 208.111.234.39 (talk) 06:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

External Link?
I'm going to guess that the link to "Sherlock in Chicago" was put there by the author of that piece; it has nothing to do with the topic and should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.50.240 (talk) 23:02, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Link has been removed. Boomcoach (talk) 18:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Analysis
Many other story pages have sections about the themes of the story.

174.22.8.153 (talk) 04:09, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Surprise ending?
A reader coming across the story (at least without knowing its author) might well take it as a standard spy story and be surprised when Holmes turns up. The fact that Altamont is Holmes is not revealed until near the end; moreover, its title, "His Last Bow", does not conform to the standard template for Sherlock Holmes stories. However, I see that the original Strand cover trumpets "Sherlock Holmes outwits a German Spy", which is a shameful spoiler. jnestorius(talk) 17:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)