Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Carl Hans Lody/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 06:12, 26 October 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Carl Hans Lody

edit
Nominator(s): Prioryman (talk) 14:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is my (first) contribution to Wikipedia's commemoration of the First World War. It concerns an affair that was something of a cause célèbre at the start of the war but has since been somewhat forgotten, other than occasional flashes of interest - it was covered briefly by the BBC earlier this year. It concerns the brief and unsuccessful career of the first German spy to be shot in Britain during the war (and the first person executed in the Tower of London for 167 years). I've been able to make use of archive material and contemporary news reports to document the story of Carl Hans Lody in, I think, probably greater detail than anyone has managed before in print. The centenary of his death is coming up on 6 November 2014; I'm hoping to request that this should be the featured article of the day. Given the short timeframe, I've taken the unusual step of bringing this article directly to FAC. I've aimed to write it from the outset as an FA-quality article, drawing my experience as the author of numerous Featured and Good Articles. Prioryman (talk) 14:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • some passing thoughts from Auntieruth55:
    • in addition to the above from Bencherlite...There are a couple of red links in there, and I think, generally, that we should at least have a brief explanation or a stub for those. Not trying to make up a lot of work for you, but it would require very little, actually.
    • appropriate punctuation between paragraphs and indented quotes when you have his description as a south German....
    • some word order examples:
      • On 8 May 1914, the director of 'N', Fritz Prieger, Fritz Prieger, then director of 'N', (consistency with previous mention of the first director)to
      • travel restrictions were imposed that prevented foreigners leaving without travel documents to travel restrictions prevented foreigners from leaving Germany without proper documents (travel is repetitive, also, it's a wordy sentence). Also, in this section you mention the security features, etc., but I think that most American passports until the 1920s did not have photographs. Since you make a point of saying that there were no security features (such as those we use today), you might clarify this.
    • I thought, generally, that it was an excellent article. Probably you'll want to continue tweaking it, to reduce some wordiness and other readability issues such as those I've described.
    • I'll look forward to re-reading it later. auntieruth (talk) 19:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - (all Done) just a few points (lead), i haven't read the whole article yet.

  • ", including Americans – real or otherwise – " - misses an ending comma. However i think the whole clause could be removed. It's enough to say, that foreigners in general came under suspicion.
  • "Nearly twenty years later, the government of Nazi Germany declared him to be a national hero and [became the subject of memorials]" - the second part needs a new subject (last subject was the government itself).
  • "During World War II, however, his gravestone in East London was destroyed by Luftwaffe bombing." - this little piece of irony seems trivial and out of place as final lead sentence (after all even the British acknowledged his courage).

Review from Cliftonian

edit

Support. I think this meets the standards. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  19:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Cliftonian
Gave this a full-through in the morning as a preparation for a thorough review.

Infobox

  • Do we know when/where/by whom this photograph of Lody was taken? If not, we should probably remove the caption beneath the picture—just saying "Carl Hans Lody" doesn't really add anything, it's clear who this is
  • I don't think we have to use the "birth name" field if it is the same as the name at the top (my understanding is that this is for middle names or names that have been changed).
  • Many readers will not know what a Oberleutnant zur See is. I think a footnote next to it giving the equivalent British and American ranks would be a concise and unobtrusive way to remedy this
  • Perhaps put that his Iron Cross, Second Class was posthumous?
  • I believe we usually put the country along with the city in the infobox, even if it's clear. I don't see how putting "Berlin, Germany" and "London, England" would hurt.

Lead

  • Don't think we need the first comma after "Inglis"
  • "but was orphaned" I'm not sure about this usage of "but"—the second part of this sentence doesn't disagree with the first
  • Two sentences in the first paragraph start "After ..." Recommend adding some variation
  • The lead is a little too detailed in places (for example I'm not sure it's necessary to specify his wife came from Omaha, NE).
  • "Americans – real or otherwise –" I agree with the above comment that "real or otherwise" is not necessary. The point is that Americans and other foreigners were under suspicion.
  • "He decided to travel to Ireland" → "He travelled to Ireland". Also put a comma after "Ireland"
  • "to an address in Stockholm" perhaps "to a Stockholm address"?
  • "that was known to be" by whom? Suggest rewording to "that the British knew to be"
  • "All of his subsequent communications with that address were intercepted by Post Office censors." Don't need "All of" and I don't think we need "Post Office" either ("intercepted by censors" is clear enough in my opinion)
  • "without using invisible ink, code or any other means of concealment" just saying "without any means of concealment" is enough I think
  • "decided to allow him" → "allowed him"
  • "in an investigation that lasted less than a day." → "in less than a day."
  • "He did not attempt to deny that he was a German spy, and his bearing was widely praised as forthright and courageous by the British press and even by the police and MO5(g) officers who had tracked him down." Suggest splitting this long sentence after "German spy":
  • "He did not attempt to deny that he was a German spy. His bearing was widely praised as forthright and courageous by the British press, and even by the police and MO5(g) officers who had tracked him down."
  • " and became the subject of memorials, eulogies and commemorations in Germany" you need to add "he" before "became" to make this sentence make sense. I would also substitute a semicolon for "and".
  • Perhaps end by saying that his gravestone was destroyed by Luftwaffe bombing, but that his body remains buried in East London?

That's the first lot, continuing —  Cliftonian (talk)  15:22, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Early life and career

  • I copy-edited throughout here.
  • Does Boghardt speculate as to why the Stolzes may not have liked the match? Likewise does he give any details regarding their whirlwind romance? What attracted them to each other?

Beginning of espionage career

  • Copy-edited.

Scotland

  • Copy-edited.
  • ""Burchard" was later identified as a German agent" by whom?
  • Why on earth did he sign a letter as "Nazi"?! I thought this might be vandalism but it seems he indeed did. How extraordinary. Explanation for this would be great.
  • Ah, thanks for reminding me about that. It's a familiar version of "Ignatz". Not surprisingly it's a usage that has fallen into disfavour. I've added an explanatory footnote (I meant to do that earlier but forgot). Prioryman (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Journey to Ireland and capture

  • Copy-edited.

Legal complications

  • Copy-edited.

Trial

  • Copy-edited.
  • "He had sought in both "to convey to a belligerent enemy of Great Britain, namely Germany" information relating to the UK's defences and preparations for war." I suggest reviewing this sentence as it doesn't make sense.
  • I changed this to "In both letters, the charge sheet stated, Lody had sought "to convey to a belligerent enemy of Great Britain, namely Germany" information relating to the UK's defences and preparations for war." Prioryman (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "of foreign appearance" suggest clarifying who described this man as such

Execution

  • Copy-edited.

Reaction

  • Copy-edited slightly here.
  • We refer here to "Iron Cross, second class", with lower case letters, and in the infobox with upper case letters. Either in fine but we should be consistent.
  • Why was there reluctance on the part of the German authorities to recognise Lody?

From spy to national hero

Burial

  • Looks more or less good I think.

I hope all this helps. Great article. I may come back later for another run through. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Cliftonian:: All done now, I think. Prioryman (talk) 18:57, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit
  • File:Carl_Hans_Lody.jpg needs a US PD tag, and if the author is unknown how do we know they died more than 70 years ago?
  • As I've said above, it appears to be by an anonymous police photographer. "If the work is anonymous or a collaborative work (e.g. an encyclopedia), it is typically in the public domain 70 years after the date of the first publication." [2] Since it was first published in 1914 that criterion is satisfied. I've also added a US PD tag. Prioryman (talk) 19:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cas Liber

edit

Right, reading through now.....queries below....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why is Charles A. Inglis italicised?
  • I think that's a holdover from the pre-expansion version of the article. De-italicised now. Prioryman (talk)
  • Lody replied that he was "honoured by your trust in me" - de-quote and put in third person, could leave "honoured" in quotes I guess.
  • Chief of Naval Intelligence not to send him to the UK - would they have called it that then? Not "(Great) Britain"?
  • Only five years previously, the UK did not have a dedicated counter-espionage organisation - see preceding
  • Lee might have been less soothed if he had known that the police had already recommended "that Inglis should be dealt with by court martial and shot as a spy, if found guilty, and Lee also. - Although I do like the turn of phrase and engaging prose, I do wonder whether it is a bit too embellishing of material and veers into OR about whether he'd be less soothed or not. Does the material make that inference? Might be safer along the lines of , "However he was unaware that....". The second bit can be rephrased and de-quoted.

More later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:42, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall and engaging read in a "ripping yarns" kind of way - tentative support on comprehensiveness and prose as I couldn't see any other clangers outstanding, but obviously some other folks will have to agree.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:56, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Comments from Harry Mitchell

edit

Support. This is excellent work. Just a few quibbles:

  • Is "First World War" not more common in Blighty than "World War I"? At least it is in my experience.
  • retire from working as a sailor sounds a bit clunky to me; is there a better way of phrasing it?
  • Do we know how he could afford to live in a luxury hotel?
  • an assumption that was to prove unfounded Do we really need that? Surely any reader would know that a four-year war was not won by a single naval battle?
  • Steinhauer's concerns were well-founded. Is that what the source says? It just strikes me as synthesis, and I'm not sure it adds much.
  • Lody embarked on his mission "so hastily that he did not even have time to learn a code that might have assisted him to get his messages through." Was that because he was ordered to depart quickly or was that recklessness on Lody's part?
  • Again the sources don't say, but I've read elsewhere that the German naval intelligence service was chronically badly organised - not exactly a model of Teutonic efficiency. It could well have been that they simply were too incompetent to give him the training he needed. Prioryman (talk) 21:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • in some respects it was a strange choice Are those your words or the source's?

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Crisco 1492

edit
  • I echo H's concern about World War I - in my experience, First World War is more common there.
  • who wished to employ him to spy in southern France, to which he agreed. - You don't actually have a noun for him to agree to ("to which" would, in my experience, require a noun)
  • the war - I know it would be hard to miss this, but it's possible that a reader may not know you mean WWI
  • At 7 am on 6 November 1914, - do we need to be this specific in the lead?
  • His father was a lawyer in government service, who served as mayor of Odersberg in 1881, and the following year as deputy mayor of Nordhausen, where the Lody family lived at 8 Sedanstrasse (today Rudolf-Breitscheid-Strasse). - so many clauses. Can we break this down a bit?
  • Unable to work any more as a sailor, - yes, you just told us that. What does this add?
  • Omaha Daily Bee newspaper - do we need "newspaper" here?
  • The marriage was not a success; the couple lived together for only two months. - "The marriage ... success" feels like editorializing. A two month cohabitation is obviously not a success.
  • As the local Omaha Daily Bee newspaper put it - we were just told this was a newspaper. If you keep the occurrence of "newspaper" above, this one should be cut
  • Arthur Tapken, N's first director, had been Lody's commanding officer during his naval service in 1900–01. - "his" is ambiguous, possibly meaning Tapken since he was the last subject (even though you intend it to mean Lody)
  • said that he was at his disposal. - I'd find a way to avoid the second "his". The (rank's) disposal?

Skipping ahead...

  • the exact time of his execution. - does "exact" add anything here?
  • Carl Hans Lody died for us 6.11.1914 in the Tower of London - the original German being...? It surely wasn't in English, after all.
  • to be run each 6 November at the time of his death. - to be rung, you mean?
  • Lody was further memorialised in 1937 when the newly launched destroyer Z10 was christened Hans Lody. - This two-sentence paragraph is really short. Can it be merged anywhere?
  • Why so much weight dedicated to Heuer's play, but so little to Fuch's? And is a Dundee review really good for a German play? (also, "and on 21 February 1937 a play called Lody, by Walter Heuer, premiered on Germany's National Heroes' Day." is rather clumsy; why repeat the date of the premiere?)
  • Heuer's play is the subject of several reviews but I've not seen any of Fuchs' book (which I've looked at; it's a turgid piece of Nazi propaganda). The play was reviewed in several UK newspapers, with the Dundee review being the most comprehensive, so it evidently had a good deal more notability than the book. Prioryman (talk) 07:51, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm sure it's covered by contemporary German newspapers but unfortunately I don't have access to those. It's mentioned briefly in a few modern German books I can see on Google Books but nothing substantive. Prioryman (talk) 22:21, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The young Bertolt Brecht – 17 years old at the time - young and 17 years old are redundant. Cutting one would be best
  • During World War II, however, - What, exactly, does "however" contrast? The new memorial can't really be tied to the bomb, can it?
  • at 6 pm on 27 August. - again, why is the time relevant?
  • all mails or all mail?
  • taking the 2.20 pm train from King's Cross to Edinburgh. - again, why the focus on times?
  • "a Sunday" - Why is this pertinent?
  • court-martialled - is this the right term? I mean, both were civilians, right? And Lee was American
  • It's the right term. All the other German spies caught during the war were civilians (some of them non-Germans) and they were court-martialled too. 07:51, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
  • if he is a spy or takes up arms ... and he becomes a person without legal - is the ellipses yours? If so, I'd cut "and" and use a [then] instead.
  • In hindsight, it is doubtful whether the charge and eventual sentence were lawful. - according to whom?
  • It was an opportunity that was taken in the First World War when the highly successful Double-Cross System was implemented. - our article says it was the Second World War
  • Friday 30 October and Monday 2 November. - again, why include Friday and Monday? Is it really pertinent?
  • My counsellor is an attorney of some standing - don't think you've named him yet, and I'd probably mention it earlier than the closing arguments
  • . . . - why the triple periods, rather than an ellipses ...
  • he was an officer in the Imperial German Navy - Maybe I misread, but wasn't he a former officer at this point?
  • Why was no court martial ever brought against Lee?
  • the 3rd Battalion, the Grenadier Guards - must you give the full title here, on the second and third mention?
  • Tower's Chaplain - what's with the capital C? It's being used here as a general noun
  • Even his captors were themselves captivated; - what does "themselves" add to this sentence? It would be understood even without the word
  • Only the certainty would not be as merciful to our own spies made them refrain. - are you missing a word here?
  • The Admiralstab recommended at the end of 1914 that he should be awarded a posthumous Iron Cross, Second Class, and argued that the recruitment of naval agents would be assisted if espionage could be rewarded with such a prestigious medal. The Kaiser agreed, though not without some reluctance. - when was the IC awarded, or was it not given? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:14, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apparently it was awarded in secret and didn't become public knowledge until after the war. I've not (yet) found any reference to exactly when.
  • @Crisco 1492: Thanks for your help with this review - hopefully I've now addressed all the points you raised. Prioryman (talk) 22:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dank

edit

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 18:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Auntieruth55

edit

Support with a few glitches...

  • (1) In lead: "His subsequent communications with that address were intercepted by censors. Lody had received no training in espionage and wrote all of his communications in plain English or German, without any means of concealment." This needs better wording: Untrained in espionage, his un-coded communications were intercepted by censors... In fact, I would start that para with the statement about his training (lack of it), because that is basically what it is about.
  • (2) minor glitches in first section: Louise's tour took in several European....Louisa's tour included (took in is idiomatic). suit reinstated when Lody agreed not to contest it. Which Odersberg do you mean? The one in Hesse?
  • (3) "On his return to Germany, Lody settled in Berlin, living in what he described as "well to do circumstances". He stayed in the Adlon, the city's most fashionable luxury hotel, while his sister Hanna lived with her doctor husband in the prosperous suburb....." "while his sister lived...." should it be and his sister? minor thing, it's just that it sounds like he lived there as long as his sister lived in the prosperous suburb, and that these two things are related.
  • (4)First paragraph of beginning espionage career.... went back a long way...again, idiomatic, and really, is 13-14 years a long way? Also, need explanation of HAL (put HAL in parens after Hamburg America Line). admiralty regarding such employees as Lody as ideal recruits. Really? Even though he had not a jot of espionage training? regarded such employees as Lody as ideal recruits even though they had no espionage training: many spoke fluent and idiomatic English, had connections throughout Europe and the United States and, in the case of Lody, had American connections. ???
  • Someone who's just been recruited won't have had espionage training, pretty much by definition. the point (which I've made clearly enough, I thought) was that employees of shipping lines had a lot of prior knowledge which was useful for the German naval intelligence service. I've reworded a few bits here which hopefully will address the other issues you've raised. Prioryman (talk) 21:01, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (5) "He left Berlin on 14 August, travelling via Denmark in the guise of an American tourist to the Norwegian port... traveling via Denmark to the Norwegian port, disguised as an American tourist...
    • looking out for =watching for
    • "hired him a bicycle"  ? He hired a bicycle, she rented a bicycle to him.
    • Yours truly Nazi.  ? this needs some explanation doesn't it? His undercover name was Charles Inglis, so why is he using the nickname of Ignatius or Ignatz?
  • (6) where Lody was challenged by an immigration official; ... an immigration official challenged Lody...?
  • (7) British and German publics .... but you refer to the NYTimes? neither a German nor a British press.
  • (8) hagiographic biographical account, Lody – Ein Weg um Ehre, needs translation.
  • Sources these are fine, although I'd prefer to see a listing at list of books that you've used, if not all, instead of simply the notes.
  • Red links I'm not sure of current practice on this, but there seem to be a few that should either be stubbed, or at least explained. Especially the one on Nachrichten-Abteilung, there isn't even a section in it in the Imperial German Navy article. would you be able to fill that in based on what you know?
I like the article very much. It is thoughtful, neutral and well cone. These are probably fairly minor, and I would be happy to support. auntieruth (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coord notes

edit

Have I missed a source review for formatting/reliability? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Source review (based on this version)
  • ""First as Tragedy, Second as Farce": Executing German Spies at the Tower of London During World War One" - "Access date needs URL" error message showing up. Also, title should use single quotes, as you are already using quotes to identify this as a journal article
  • Standardize whether you use 13 or 10 digit ISBNs (13 digit is recommended by WP:ISBN)
  • Standardize whether or not you give locations for newspapers (compare Thüringer Allgemeine and the Fn 6's Daily Bee)
  • Standardize whether or not you abbreviate states (compare FN 5 and 8)
  • Standardize whether you use D-M-Y or M-D-Y date formats
  • Standardize whether or not you give locations for book publishers (compare FN 6 and 36)
  • FN 83: State/province?
  • FN 93: Page numbers?
  • Hmmm - I just changed those to be that way. If I give the first instance of "Omaha Daily Bee (Omaha, Nebraska)" then I don't need to state in every subsequent reference that it's from Omaha, Nebraska, do I? Similar to how if you use a book for a reference, you give the full bibliographic details in the first instance and then just the title subsequently? Prioryman (talk) 07:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have, in the past, stated the place of origin in all instances, this being because if someone removes the first newspaper cite, we then lose the city information, and it appears more consistent. Mind you, I wouldn't argue this too extensively... after all, style is personal. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Carl_Hans_Lody/archive1&oldid=1075705971"