Template:Did you know nominations/James Bruce Lockhart


 * 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)

James Bruce Lockhart

 * ... that Lockhart career in the Foreign Office was a cover for his real work with the Secret Intelligence Service? Source: "Last words: Robert Morris and James Bruce‑Lockhart" in The Sunday Times dated 9 December 2018: "his ostensible career in the Foreign Office masked his real work with the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6)"
 * Reviewed: Ventnor (ship)

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


 * Reviewing


 * 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. Symbol confirmed.svg Papamac (talk) 09:48, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Just a drive-by comment: Is there any reason why the hook doesn't use his full name? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:50, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * , 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 . Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:05, 10 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg	Adding icon while discussion is ongoing: see Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:08, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I still disagree that the full name should not be used in this case as I still don't really find the reason to be a strong one, but consensus appears to be against me at this point (even if it seems that it's more to do with "respect the nominator's wishes" than anything else), so I am now restoring the tick. Symbol confirmed.svg Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:11, 11 May 2019 (UTC)