Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Murder of Yvonne Fletcher/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Murder of Yvonne Fletcher

edit
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

Yvonne Fletcher was a bright and popular young police officer who was shot in the back by a gunman firing from a first floor window of the Libyan embassy in London. It marked the start of an eleven-day siege, six Britons being held hostage in Tripoli for nine months and a break in diplomatic relations between the UK and Libya that lasted until 1999. The police investigation has never closed, and they have strong suspicions on the identify of the gunmen and the co-conspirators, some of their evidence can not be released in court because of national security. It's a shabby story for Fletcher's family, who have never been able to see Yvonne's killer brought to justice. This article has been over-hauled recently and—unless reviewers advise otherwise—a further review at FAC is an option after PR. All constructive comments are welcome. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Nikkimaria

edit

Image review from SNUGGUMS

edit

Hopefully this helps. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:57, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Eddie891

edit

Well... Here goes.

That's about it. Overall, a very good article. G'Day. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:37, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Tim riley

edit

Once again you bring us a tragic narrative, and I think you have done it full justice. Getting the tone right cannot have been easy. I have only a few minor drafting points.

  • Lead
    • There is a clunky false title in the last paragraph. It would be better to say something like, "the decision by the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, to…". (Some would prefer lower case "prime minister", but I know capitalisation of such job titles is a very grey area.)
  • Background
    • The first para makes much of YF's ineligibility to join the police because of her height, but in the next para she is, without explanation, eligible and accepted. Did the rules change?
This remains unexplained at present, and I doubt if I shall be the only reviewer to notice it. Tim riley talk 09:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oops - meant to say that I needed to go back to the sources on that one. Checked in the interim, and none give any indication as to why the Met bent their rules to look at her. I've tweaked to cover the point, which now reads "Despite the height restriction, in March 1977 Fletcher was accepted..." - SchroCat (talk) 10:22, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relations between Britain and Libya
  • Shooting: 16–17 April 1984
  • Siege: 18 – 27 April 1984
  • Gaddafi regime: 1985–2011
    • "did not try to re-open diplomatic relations with Libya for several years, and relations remained poor" – The repetition of "relations" isn't ideal, though I can't think of a perfect alternative. Perhaps "restore diplomatic ties" the first time? A bit journalistic, I admit. If you prefer to stick with the present wording I shall not object.
    • To my mind, the fatuous mischief-making by Channel 4 is given far too many words. I think you could boil the present 289 words down to two or three sentences. The Libyans later admitted they did it, for goodness' sake!
Later: on rereading, I think mention of this meretricious and discredited concoction should not only be drastically pruned but also relegated in toto to a footnote. It is unworthy of a place in the main narrative. Tim riley talk 23:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone with your first option and dropped much of the detail to a footnote and retained the remainder. If others raise the point here or at FAC I'll trim further and drop it all to the FN. (The previous version gave us 690 words in its own special section, which was way too much weight). - SchroCat (talk) 08:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's all from me. Please ping me when you go to FAC. Tim riley talk 22:55, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Everything now in good order, as far as I'm concerned. Looking forward to supporting at FAC. Tim riley talk 10:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John

edit

Comments from KJP1

edit

Beginning a read through and will add comments as I go. It looks very strong. KJP1 (talk) 09:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "On 17 April 1984 Yvonne Fletcher, a Metropolitan Police officer, was fatally shot in the back from the Libyan embassy on St James's Square, London by an unknown gunman." - I find this a little confusing. It is the "in the back" and "fatally shot" bits which I find problematic. Perhaps, "On 17 April 1984 Yvonne Fletcher, a Metropolitan Police officer, was fatally wounded by a shot fired from the Libyan embassy on St James's Square, London by an unknown gunman."
  • "a documentary broadcast on Channel 4 television" - given the discussion above about the, now discredited, documentary, does it still warrant a mention in the lead?
  • "Two years after Fletcher's murder, the events..." - is it not "the event", namely Fletcher's murder?
  • "some of the evidence could not be released in court because of national security." - Perhaps, "some of the evidence could not be released into court due to national security concerns."
  • "As at 2017 no-one has been convicted for Fletcher's murder." - Perhaps, "As at 2018 no-one has been convicted of Fletcher's murder."

Background

Relations between Britain and Libya
  • "From 1979 there had been no Libyan ambassador appointed to the United Kingdom" - Given that Gaddafi had been in power since 1969, I wonder if a little explanation is needed as to why the change in diplomatic representation was made. Perhaps a footnote linking to Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and explaining that it was as a result of Gaddafi's "Declaration of the Establishment of the People's Authority"?
  • "the bourgeois habits of several of the People's Bureaux, particularly the office in London." - Can the bureaux themselves have "bourgeois habits"? Perhaps, "the bourgeois habits of staff at several of the People's Bureaux, particularly those attached to the office in London."
Vienna convention and diplomatic protection
  • "It was put into UK law in the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964" - Perhaps, "It was incorporated into UK law in the Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964".

Shooting: 16–17 April 1984

  • "Libyan dissidents in Britain—members of the Libyan National Salvation Front (LNSF)—decided to stage a demonstration outside the People's Bureau on St James's Square in response." - For flow, I'd probably flip the "in response" to "In response Libyan dissidents in Britain—members of the Libyan National Salvation Front (LNSF)—decided to stage a demonstration outside the People's Bureau on St James's Square."
  • "to complain about the forthcoming demonstration, and asked that it be stopped" - "to complain about the forthcoming demonstration, and ask that it be stopped"?
  • "showed banners and placards" - perhaps, "carried banners and placards"?
  • References 26/27 - these have puzzling little tags that read 'Event occurs at 5:45–6:05' and 'Event occurs at 6:20–6:55'. I got confused as we are at 10.18 am in the events being described. Are these the timings of the programmes?
  • "she advised her colleagues to "Keep calm"" - perhaps, to avoid repetition as her colleagues are mentioned earlier in the sentence, "she advised them to "Keep calm"". Also, does the K of "Keep calm" needed capitalisation and does the quote need a cite?
  • "armed police took position facing the People's Bureau and on surrounding rooftops" - perhaps "armed police took up positions facing the People's Bureau and on the surrounding rooftops"?
  • "The garage entrance at the rear of the People's Bureau was not sealed off until at least ten minutes after the shooting, and some of those inside exited the premises in that time" - as the significance is the failure to seal that exit, perhaps, "The garage entrance at the rear of the People's Bureau was not sealed off until at least ten minutes after the shooting, and some of those inside exited the premises through the garage in that time"?
  • "... Geoffrey Howe, the Foreign Secretary, in China, responsibility for handling the crisis fell to Leon Brittan, the Home Secretary" - I don't know what the Bevins article actually says, but why would responsibility have gone to Howe, had he been in the UK? It was a domestic security incident, albeit with a clear foreign policy aspect, and I would have thought it would have been a Home Office responsibility, wherever the Foreign Secretary might have been. Whitelaw had responsibility, as HS, for the Iranian Embassy siege.
    • There are a few of sources that have raised Howe's name in this respect, which is why it was included. It may have depend on Thatcher's view of the relative merits of the two men, but none of them clarify the point sufficiently. - SchroCat (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The post-mortem was undertaken in the evening of 17 April" - given we've had two intervening paragraphs, perhaps, "The post-mortem on the body of Yvonne Fletcher was undertaken in the evening of 17 April"?

Siege: 18 – 27 April 1984

  • Nothing here. Moving on.

Aftermath: 27 April 1984 – 5 February 1985

  • "Terry Waite—the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy—visited Libya in an attempt to negotiate the men's release" - given that two had already been freed, perhaps, "Terry Waite—the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy—visited Libya in an attempt to negotiate the release of the remaining men"?
  • "The four remaining hostages were released after nine months in detention, on 5 February 1985." Following on from the above, to avoid repetition of "remaining" and "released" perhaps, "The four hostages were freed after nine months in detention, on 5 February 1985."

Subsequent developments

Gaddafi regime: 1985–2011
  • "In 1986 Thatcher agreed to the use of Royal Air Force bases for use by American aircraft involved in the bombing of Libya" - don't think you need the double "use" and suggest just, "In 1986 Thatcher agreed to the use of Royal Air Force bases by American aircraft involved in the bombing of Libya".
  • "In 1991 the Lockerbie bombing further damaged British–Libyan relations" - I think the editor above has a point. You could either change it, or make clear the further souring of relations came after the first, lengthy, investigation when Libyan involvement was clearer. What's the actual wording in Black's article?
  • "The Dispatches documentary by the Channel 4 programme" - "by the Channel 4 television station"?
  • "Ghanem said that Libya had made the admission and paid compensation to bring peace and an end to international sanctions" - I don't get "bring peace"? We weren't at war.
  • "Although they were able to undertake some steps during their four-day investigation" - am unclear as to what the "steps" were. Interviews?
  • "British detectives were able to interview their main suspect for in June 2007 following the normalisation of political ties with the country" - "for" what? The killing/murder? And perhaps, "the normalisation of diplomatic relations between the UK and Libya"?
  • "witnesses who had observed him firing the weapon from the embassy window" - "a weapon" or are we talking about a specific gun?
  • "to face charges of conspiracy to cause death." - I don't think conspiracy to cause death is a charge, "to face charges of conspiracy to murder." Not suggesting the link's essential.
  • "Both had escaped out of many the back door of the embassy" - the "many"s a hangover from something and I think it's the "garage" door referred to previously.
  • "In a letter to Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, the Police Federation said they were "appalled and disgusted" by the decision." - Does the Federation quote have a source? Is it Cite 80?
Post-Gaddafi era: 2011–2017
  • "Abdulqadir al-Baghdadi, had been killed in in-fighting amongst Gaddafi loyalists" - perhaps, to avoid the "in in-", "Abdulqadir al-Baghdadi, had been killed during in-fighting amongst Gaddafi loyalists"?

Legacy

  • "After receiving sizeable donations, Winner set up the Police Memorial Trust on 3 May to set up memorials to honour all British police officers killed in the line of duty". - Perhaps to avoid the double "set up", "After receiving sizeable donations, Winner set up the Police Memorial Trust on 3 May to erect memorials to honour all British police officers killed in the line of duty"?

That's my lot. For consideration, but not necessarily for action. Fascinating, and as well written as ever. Look forward to seeing it at FAC. KJP1 (talk) 11:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil

edit

Have made some light edits, but overall this is gripping stuff. I see it has received detailed and insightful review above and the benefit is evident on the page. Can only *just* about remember the affair, and this was a pleasure to read. Look forward to its eventual appearance at FAC. Ceoil (talk) 22:56, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brief comments from BB

edit

Very competently researched and written. It has been thoroughly reviewd here, and I have only a few additional comments:

  • "From 1979 there had been no Libyan ambassador appointed to the United Kingdom, but instead a "Revolutionary Committee" was in control; the Libyan embassy in London, at 5 St James's Square, was renamed the 'People's Bureau' ". Not entirely clear as written; I suggest a slight alteration, thus: "From 1979 there had been no Libyan ambassador appointed to the United Kingdom. A "Revolutionary Committee" was in control of the country; the Libyan embassy in London, at 5 St James's Square, was renamed the 'People's Bureau' ".
  • "On 18 April, Miles was allowed the leave the British embassy to meet representatives of the Libyan government..." – something syntactically amiss there.
  • "In 1991 the warrants issued to two Libyan men for the Lockerbie bombing further damaged British–Libyan relations" – I'd say "1988 Lockerbie bombings"

Excellent work. Brianboulton (talk) 22:03, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fletcher/archive1&oldid=1138564065"