Talk:Dirty Tricks (scandal)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by SL93 in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Dirty Tricks (scandal) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 12 May 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
edit- 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 SL93 (talk) 20:16, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the "Dirty Tricks" campaign run by British Airways against Virgin Atlantic involved BA staff working behind locked doors to illicitly obtain information about Virgin by pretending to be Virgin? Source: Independent
ALT1:... that British Airways' "Dirty Tricks" against Virgin Atlantic led to "The Mother of all Libel Battles"?Source: The Guardian
- Reviewed: George Johnstone (British Army officer)
- Comment: Please feel free to propose any other hooks
Converted from a redirect by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 07:58, 23 April 2021 (UTC).
Reviewing...New enough, long enough and referenced. The story is covered widely. Hooks in article and followed by inline citations to sources with hook information. QPQ provided. The proposed hook is too long. How about a hook about Virgin staff receiving a BA bonus. @The C of E: thoughts?? Whispyhistory (talk) 10:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Whispyhistory: It is short enough under rule C8 of WP:DYKSG which says the dots don't count. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- It's also unclear as written: "them" does not have a proper referent in the sentence. --JBL (talk) 16:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
- @JayBeeEll: Fixed that. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
... Sure, length okay. Thanks for clarifying. @The C of E:
- @Whispyhistory: It is short enough under rule C8 of WP:DYKSG which says the dots don't count. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:24, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- The proposed hook is in the article and is followed by a citation containing hook information.
- Regarding ALT1 and "led to "The Mother of all Libel Battles""....The article quotes one newspaper. "The libel trial was expected to last 3 months, was looked forward to as the mother of all trials" ....but... "BA decided to climb down and effectivetively capitulated" .... "when the BA case collapsed in January 1993 Branson also decided to settle and not push on" in this.
- Reference 1 is dated 1962.
- Reference about "dirty tricks" and BA being "flag carrier"...here (a suggestion).
- If you want to consider.... "BA was initially willing to make a modest offer"... according to this and this and in this.... it says it was "dramatized". Whispyhistory (talk) 17:15, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
This gentleman was involved and I think this needs to be added. I'll make a note to get to it, but raising here in the meantime in case someone else gets a chance. Mark83 (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2021 (UTC)