Template:Did you know nominations/John Crane (government official)


 * 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: rejected by Allen3 talk 08:34, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues

John Crane (government official)

 * ... that John Crane, an Assistant Inspector General who worked to protect Pentagon whistleblowers, lost his job and became a whistleblower himself after he raised concerns about their treatment with his superiors?
 * ALT1: ... that Pentagon whistleblower John Crane was inspired by the example set by his grandfather, a German army officer who stood up to [a] pistol-waving Adolf Hitler during the 1923 Beer Hall Putsch?

Created by Evolauxia (talk) and Cgingold (talk). Nominated by Cgingold (talk) at 16:59, May 30, 2016‎ (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg  This article is new enough and long enough. However neither of the hooks proposed will do because they each contain more information than is included in the article. You will need to either propose some more mundane hook mentioning only facts contained in the article, or expand the article a little to include the interesting facts you mention in your proposed hooks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have struck the original hook because at 209 characters, it's above the 200 maximum allowed for DYK. ALT1 is 194 characters, and I'm not sure why there are brackets in the "[a]"—they should almost certainly be eliminated. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:38, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Cwmhiraeth, were the edits by Evolauxia on June 2 sufficient to address the issues you raised, or is more work needed here? Evolauxia, in the absence of Cgingold, it's important for you to post here when you have made edits to fix issues raised here so we know to proceed with the review. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, but the evidence comes from an interview given by John Crane rather than a third party source. It is repeated in the article on the grandfather, Günther Rüdel, but that information was added by Evolauxia this month. Under the present aura of blame and recrimination, I think I will let someone else decide if that is a reliable source. If not, we need a new hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Need a new reviewer to decide on whether the source is appropriate (and reliable enough) for the ALT1 hook, and who can decide what to do with the "[a]" since brackets are not allowed. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:34, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

ALT2: ... that the story of his grandfather standing up to a pistol-waving Adolph Hitler during the 1923 Beer Hall Putsch inspired Pentagon whistleblower John Crane? (Don't add the links for this hook: everyone would go to the Beer Hall or grandfather and not the article we're trying to sell them on. Force 'em to click through.)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg This is not there yet, I'm afraid. Most things are okay; new enough, long enough, and neutral. No copyvios that I can find. However, there are two issues. First, a number of unsourced statements in the article. Especially considering this is a BLP, that is problematic. Second, I am not satisfied with the source for the hook. It's good enough to be in the article, perhaps; but the guardian article is not really reporting this in its own words; it is reporting from the affidavit written by the grandfather. We could do something like "Crane drew inspiration from a story he heard about his grandfather..." but that would be rather clunky, and less interesting. I'd be happy to hang around this review page and see this through, but some substantial work is required first. Vanamonde93 (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No question that the Guardian is only a quasi- but Der Spiegel sure as hell is. Its article with 4 authors should have been able to track down any German refutation of the story and they report it straight in their own words. That's not really an issue, although you're welcome to go with

Now, that said, you're absolutely right that a BLP needs to have the rest of its citations filled in. Per the guideline, that needs to happen before this puppy sees the front page. — Llywelyn II   17:10, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd be far more comfortable with ALT2. My concern is not so much that Der Spiegel is not a reliable source; it certainly is. Perhaps I was being over-cautious, but it does seem as though both papers are hedging by referring to an affidavit. And of course, there's the rest of the sourcing. if you'll fix those, I'll pass this. Vanamonde (talk) 17:45, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Again, I'm not an editor at Der Spiegel but they are a and they explicitly state the event as actually occurring which occasioned a later affadavit, not as something merely claimed by an affadavit. You can really let that part go. —  Llywelyn II   13:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Nominator Cgingold has not edited on Wikipedia since June, and co-creator Evolauxia has not responded to recent talk-page pings about the substantial sourcing issues. This was originally nominated at the end of May and it's now the middle of August; I'm marking this for closure as unsuccessful, though if edits to fix the issues are made before this is closed, please let us know. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:30, 16 August 2016 (UTC)