Talk:Carl Hans Lody

Legal precedent

The article mentions that the Lody case was picked up later in defining "war treason":

A later revision of the Manual of Military Law rejected the view that a spy commits a war crime and alluded to the Lody case in suggesting that war treason was not an applicable charge in such cases.

Out of interest, does Simpson give a date for when this interpretation came about? I have a copy of the Manual from WWII (1929 edition reprinted with amendments 1939; actual printing date ~1943). It seems quite firm that some forms of espionage were still interpreted as war treason, which it defined as a war crime (albeit with a defensive footnote saying that general usage now interprets "war crime" more narrowly than the legal definition) Andrew Gray (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes - he gives 1958 as the date of the change. Prioryman (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

"served with the Imperial German Navy for a year "

Maybe it should be pointed out that this was compulsory for any healthy German mariner of the time. (Also men from inland Germany but with work experience on riverboats, shuttle duty, as lake fishermen and similar professions were automatically drafted into the navy rather than the army.) Except that the usual service was longer (IIRC 3 yrs, but I would have to look that up...) so either he was dismissed due to health reasons or he may have served as an Einjährig-Freiwilliger. Just saying, the article should not convey the impression that serving in the navy was a free choice for him. Especially when it's saying that he wanted to pursue a career as officer, it might easily come across that way.
Source: Das kleine Buch vom Deutschen Heere. Ein Hand- und Nachschlagebuch zur Belehrung über die deutsche Kriegsmacht. (The little book of the German army. A hand- and reference-book for instruction about the German military.) Lipsius & Tischer, Kiel, 1901. Reprint Weltbild Verlag 1998. --BjKa (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Infobox?

Why is a military one being used when his claim to fame is for his execution as spy and a criminal?

Surely infobox criminal should be used because that is from where his notability arises? Having an uninteresting military career shows the current infobox has nothing to do with the article's point of notability. He was a spy when he was captured and died for one. He was a criminal tried for War treason, a crime not a military act. 86.180.176.235 (talk) 22:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Talk about Overquoting

This article, which was recently promoted to FA-Class, has 22 quotes, some of which are long! Isn't this a violation of WP:OVERQUOTE? Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 01:42, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Carl Hans Lody/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

==Not ready for B== Although this is a well written article, it needs more structure and contextualization in the broader picture of British pre-war spy hysteria. It seems to be based largely on original sources, which, although wonderful to include, could be better used as supporting materials, and the article itself could draw on more secondary sources. Much has been written on the pre-war spy hysteria which could provide a framework into which to insert the Lody story. --Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 10:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)