Talk:Aldrich Ames/Archives/2016/August
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Eyes only 17:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I did insert a link pointing to the disambiguation page "eyes only", because that page is the only location that defines the meaning of "eyes only." What are other alternatives? Bo Basil (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Isn't it short for the proper expression & clearer For your eyes only? Hmm, maybe not; Further Research Required
--Jerzy•t 17:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
"... who was convicted of espionage against his country"
Wow, and right there in the lead no less. Doing my best to stick to WP policy issues, and keep personalities and value systems and even intellectual integrity out of this.
OK, that's an implicit error of fact. Espionage is a crime. It can be a treasonous act, and prosecutable as treason, if you're a citizen, but he was convicted of espionage, and not for betraying his own country. We could (and, FAIK, do) have a section on his motivations or his ethical self-conception or self-justification, but putting it in the lead sent both is misleadingly confusing and lacks the significance, or contribution to smooth expression, that lead material should possess. The change i'm making shouldn't require explicit description here; if it does, consult the diff for yourself.
--Jerzy•t 17:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)