Talk:Somerton Man/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Kaciemonster (talk · contribs) 20:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll get started on the review right away. I should have it up either tomorrow or the day after :) Kaciemonster (talk) 20:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

It's going to be an extra day :( Sorry Kaciemonster (talk) 23:42, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Ok! So I've worked through every section up to Post-inquest, and I have some notes. There's still a lot to work on here, and I don't want to overwhelm you. There are more instances of text in the article that aren't supported by the citations used than I'm comfortable with, so I want to do a more thorough investigation of the citations than I'd be able to do if I posted a full review for you today. I'm also seeing some issues with how the article sections are structured, but I'm going to focus on some of the main things I'm seeing right now. @Anarchyte: Has anyone else been actively editing this article recently that you're aware of? Might be nice to ping them here to see if they'd be interested in giving feedback. Kaciemonster (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Just a quick update! I'll be back tomorrow with more review and comments on some of your feedback :) Sorry about the delay, I got unexpectedly busy. Kaciemonster (talk) 18:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Going through the sources has taken me longer than expected, but I'm almost done and should have it up tonight. Kaciemonster (talk) 14:54, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I had hoped to get the rest of my review out all at once, but I still need to go through some of the cited sources. As is, I don't think this article meets GA criteria. With some work, I think it definitely would, though. I'm thinking of requesting a second opinion to get a fresh set of eyes on the article and review. My plan right now is to finish up the cited sources, then give my suggestions for a restructure. I don't want to fail the article without giving you feedback and a chance to improve it. I'd also like to apologize for the delay in getting this out to you. I'm sorry, sincerely. Kaciemonster (talk) 00:35, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Victim

• First two sentences: "The body was discovered at 6:30 a.m. on 1 December 1948 on Somerton beach which is near Glenelg about 11 kilometres (6.8 mi) southwest of Adelaide, South Australia. The police were called and they found the body lying on the sand with its head resting on the seawall, with its feet crossed and pointing directly to the sea."
  • Reword for clarity: "On 1 December 1948 at 6:30 am, the police were contacted after the body of a man was discovered on Somerton beach near Glenelg, about 11 kilometers (6.8 mi) southwest of Adelaide, South Australia. The man was found lying in the sand with his head resting against the seawall, his legs extended, and feet crossed."

• "The police noted no disturbance to the body and observed that the man's left arm was in a straight position and the right arm was bent double." I can't find this information in the cited source.

@Kaciemonster: I think the news paper has it worded differently, I'm pretty sure it's this: "The man was lying on his back against the sea wall. The legs were crossed, and death appeared to have occurred while the man was sleeping". Although, I still think some of this sentence was made up or wrongly sourced. I'll reword that sentence so it's based off the reference. --Anarchyte 01:54, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• "The bus stop for which the ticket was most likely used was around 1,100 metres (3,600 ft) north of the body's location." This is tagged as citation needed. Is there a source available for this? I'm not sure if it's really relevant, and it can probably be removed.

I suspect the "most likely stop" would be an assumption on the basis the man is not a local, and the "main" Glenelg stop is near the corner of Moseley St and Jetty Rd.... 162.145.32.67 (talk) 01:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Anonymous 7/07/2015

Autopsy

• Citation for the block quote?

I can't tell for sure, but I think it's been referenced using the 11th reference (at the end of the sentence prior to the quote). --Anarchyte 02:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Could you add in the cites for this one and the one below, please? Since they're both direct quotes they need to have citations. Kaciemonster (talk) 00:45, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• "The pathologist Dr. Dwyer concluded: "I am quite convinced the death could not have been natural ...the poison I suggested was a barbiturate or a soluble hypnotic"." Citation needed for this sentence.

It's referenced by [1]. --Anarchyte 02:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

• "As the body was not identified, it was embalmed on 10 December 1948."
  • Might read better as "The body was embalmed on 10 December 1948 after the police were unable to get a positive identification."

Media reaction

• "The News, an afternoon tabloid, featured their story of the man on its first page, giving more details of the dead man."
  • Might read better as "The News, an afternoon tabloid, featured their story on the first page and gave more details about the dead man."

Identification

• "On 3 December 1948, E.C. Johnson walked into a police station to identify himself as living and was eliminated as a possibility for the dead man's identity." E.C. Johnson hasn't been mentioned before in the article, and if he was a potential ID for the body should probably be mentioned.

The reference calls him E.C. Johnson, can't change that. --Anarchyte 02:09, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh! I wasn't suggesting that we change his name, we should clarify WHY he went in to the police station to identify himself. I see that in the Media response section there is a block quote that reads: "A body, believed to be of E.C. Johnson, about 45, of Arthur St, Payneham, was found on Somerton Beach, opposite the Crippled Children's Home yesterday morning. The discovery was made by Mr J. Lyons, of Whyte Rd, Somerton. Detective H. Strangway and Constable J. Moss are enquiring." So maybe just clarify that he identified himself as living after The Advertiser reported that the body was believed to be him. Kaciemonster (talk) 00:41, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Brown suitcase

• "A new twist in the case occurred on 14 January 1949, when staff at Adelaide railway station discovered a brown suitcase with its label removed, which had been checked into the station cloakroom after 11:00 a.m. on 30 November 1948."
  • Reword, "On 14 January 1949, staff at Adelaide railway station discovered a brown suitcase with its label removed, which has been checked into the station cloakroom after 11:00 a.m. on 30 November 1948."

• Note: This section never indicates when and how the police determined the suitcase belonged to the Somerton Man.

• "Another seaman, Tommy Reade from the SS Cycle, in port at the time, was thought to be the dead man, but after some of his shipmates viewed the body at the morgue, they stated categorically that the corpse was not that of Tommy Reade."
  • Needs to be reworded and belongs in a different section

• "Derek Abbott, who studied the case, believes that the man may have purchased the train ticket before showering. The railway station's own public facilities were closed that day and discovering this and then having to walk to the adjacent city baths to shower would have added up to 30 minutes to the time he would have expected to take, which could explain why he missed the Henley Beach train and took the next available bus." This section and the note attached to it need cites.

Inquest

• "A coroner's inquest into the death, conducted by coroner Thomas Erskine Cleland, commenced a few days after the body was found but was adjourned until 17 June 1949." Source for it being adjourned until 17 June 1949?

• "An editorial called the case "one of Australia's most profound mysteries" and noted that if he died by poison so rare and obscure it could not be identified by toxicology experts, then surely the culprit's advanced knowledge of toxic substances pointed to something more serious than a mere domestic poisoning." Should this go in the Media reaction section?

The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam

• "When the code was analysed by the Australian Department of Defence in 1978, they made the following statements about the code:
  • There are insufficient symbols to provide a pattern.
  • The symbols could be a complex substitute code or the meaningless response to a disturbed mind.
  • It is not possible to provide a satisfactory answer."
    • Can probably be condensed into a single sentence instead of a bulleted list.

• "Feltus, who had handled the cold case, interviewed Jestyn in 2002 and found her to be either "evasive" or "just did not wish to talk about it," she also stated that her family did not know of her connection with the case and he agreed not to disclose her identity or anything that might reveal it." Break into 2 sentences.

Let me know if you have any questions! Kaciemonster (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Post-inquest

• "The body was then buried at Adelaide's West Terrace Cemetery, where The Salvation Army conducted the service." - Instead of "the body was then buried" it should specify when the body was buried, since the article isn't written chronologically.

 Done Anarchyte 04:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

• "On 22 November 1959 it was reported that an E.B. Collins, an inmate of New Zealand's Wanganui Prison, claimed to know the identity of the dead man." - This should either be elaborated on if this particular attempted identification is significant or removed if it isn't.

It cannot be elaborated further because the only mention is this: "Article published in the 'Sunday Mirror' (Sydney) on 22nd November, 1959, in which E.B. COLLINS of Wangnaui Prison, New Zealand, claims to have knowledge of identity of this subject". Anarchyte 04:28, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

• A lot of the content in this section would probably be better off in other sections, but that's more of a structural issue, which I will do separately.

Spy theory

• First paragraph - Is the purpose of this first paragraph to link Boxall to the Somerton Man? I see that his identity was mistaken earlier as the identity of the Somerton Man, but I'm not sure what spy connection this paragraph is trying to make between the two.

Unsure what you mean by this. Anarchyte 04:32, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

• Second paragraph - This paragraph is entirely original research and should be removed.

 Done Anarchyte 04:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Abbott investigation

• Tense change between the second and third paragraphs

 Done Anarchyte 04:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Timeline

• I think this entire section should be removed. Is it adding something that we wouldn't be able to do by just restructuring the article?

Eh, I'd get a second opinion on that. I think some of the information in the section couldn't be written into the article without feeling out of place. Although, I agree the section looks untidy. Anarchyte 04:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Marshall case

• "Jestyn gave Alfred Boxall a copy of the Rubaiyat in Clifton Gardens two months after Marshall's death. Clifton Gardens is adjacent to Ashton Park. Joseph Marshall was the brother of the famous barrister and Chief Minister of Singapore David Saul Marshall." Source making these connections?

Removed this section, seems pointless. Anarchyte 04:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

H.C. Reynolds

• This seems more related to the identification of the Somerton Man. I'm not sure it really belongs in Possibly related cases.

 Done Moved. Anarchyte 04:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

In popular culture

• Source for the first bullet point? Kaciemonster (talk) 00:35, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done Anarchyte 04:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Citation Check

Ok, this is everything up through Post-inquest, but I'm sort of hitting a wall. I think this article is going to take a while to bring up to GA quality, and what I found below while checking the cited sources is one of the reasons why. The way I see it, we've got a couple of options, and I'd like to hear your thoughts.

1. I could fail the article, and when it's been improved it can be nominated again. I think that this is one of the better options, just because I think it's going to take a really long time to get it up to GA status.
2. I could put the GA review on hold until it's been improved. I don't think this is a terrible option, but we've already put a lot of work and time into the article and although it would result in an improved article in the end, I can't guarantee that it would result in a passed GA review.

@Anarchyte: Your thoughts on this would be much appreciated. Kaciemonster (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Victim

• He was "180 centimetres (5 ft 11 in) tall, with hazel eyes, fair to ginger-coloured hair, slightly grey around the temples, with broad shoulders and a narrow waist, hands and nails that showed no signs of manual labour, big and little toes that met in a wedge shape, like those of a dancer or someone who wore boots with pointed toes; and pronounced high calf muscles like those of a ballet dancer. These can be dominant genetic traits, and they are also a characteristic of many middle and long-distance runners."
  • I can't find this quote in either of the sources cited within the quotes or on the page of the coroner's inquest that was cited in the note cited after the sentence.

I can. In reference 12 it says "The deceased ws 5' 11", well built, broad shoulders and square, well developed limbs, etc.." and in reference 4 it says "with fair hair slightly gray over the temples". Anarchyte 07:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Specifically, the problem with this one is that it's a quote starting at 180 and ending after runners. I can't find that quote in the sources cited. Kaciemonster (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

• He was dressed in "quality clothing" consisting of a white shirt, red and blue tie, brown trousers, socks and shoes and, although it had been a hot day and very warm night, a brown knitted pullover and fashionable grey and brown double-breasted jacket.
  • The source cited doesn't seem to describe the quality of his clothing or the appropriateness of his clothing for the weather.

I removed the "quality clothing" and "although it had been a hot day and very warm night" bits. Anarchyte 07:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

• All labels on his clothes had been removed, and he had no hat (unusual for 1948) or wallet.
  • No mention in the cited source.

Added references. Anarchyte 07:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

The source for "and he had no hat (unusual for 1948) or wallet" doesn't mention a hat or a wallet at all. Kaciemonster (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

• Clean-shaven and with no distinguishing marks,
  • Cited source makes no mention of whether or not the man had any distinguishing marks.

Removed "with no distinguishing marks". Anarchyte 07:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

• His teeth did not match the dental records of any known person in Australia.
  • No mention of Australia.

Reworded. Anarchyte 07:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done Finished section! Anarchyte 07:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Looks good! I left a couple of notes above. Kaciemonster (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Autopsy

• A citation is needed for the block quote. You might want to check out WP:CITE and the other guidelines on citing sources. Direct quotes need attribution.

• The pathologist Dr. Dwyer concluded: "I am quite convinced the death could not have been natural ... the poison I suggested was a barbiturate or a soluble hypnotic".
  • A citation is needed for this quote.

• Although poisoning remained a prime suspicion, the pasty was not believed to be the source of the poison.
  • Can't find a mention in the cited source.

• Other than that, the coroner was unable to reach a conclusion as to the man's identity, cause of death, or whether the man seen alive at Somerton Beach on the evening of 30 November was the same man, as nobody had seen his face at that time.
  • Can't find in the cited source.

Identification

• That same day, The News published a photograph of the dead man on its front page, leading to additional calls from members of the public about the possible identity of the dead man.
  • It looks like the source used halfway through is the primary source. Is there a secondary source that The News led to more people calling about the possible identity?

• On 5 December, The Advertiser reported that police were searching through military records after a man claimed to have had a drink with a man resembling the dead man at a hotel in Glenelg on 13 November.
  • Cited source doesn't reference the 13 November date.

• A search concluded that there was no T. Keane missing in any English-speaking country
  • Not in the cited source.

• and a nationwide circulation of the dry-cleaning marks also proved fruitless. In fact, all that could be garnered from the suitcase was that since a coat in the suitcase had a front gusset and featherstitching, it could have been made only in the United States, as this was the only country that possessed the machinery for that stitch.
  • Can't find a mention of the dry-cleaning marks or the front gusset on the coat.

• The card, a document issued in the United States to foreign seamen during WWI, was given to biological anthropologist Maciej Henneberg in October 2011 for comparison of the ID photograph to that of the Somerton man.
  • I don't see anything in the source about the card being issued to foreign seamen during WWI.

• "Together with the similarity of the ear characteristics, this mole, in a forensic case, would allow me to make a rare statement positively identifying the Somerton man."
  • This quote needs a citation.

• The ID card, numbered 58757, was issued in the United States on 28 February 1918 to H.C. Reynolds, giving his nationality as "British" and age as 18.
  • The card number and the month and day listed look like they're coming from the picture of the card, and can probably be removed.

Brown suitcase

• On 14 January 1949, staff at the Adelaide railway station discovered a brown suitcase with its label removed, which has been checked into the station cloakroom after 11:00 a.m. on 30 November 1948;
  • Most of this information is not in the cited source.

• In the case were a red checked dressing gown; a size seven, red felt pair of slippers; four pairs of underpants; pyjamas; shaving items; a light brown pair of trousers with sand in the cuffs; an electrician's screwdriver; a table knife cut down into a short sharp instrument; a pair of scissors with sharpened points; and a stencilling brush, as used by third officers on merchant ships for stencilling cargo.
  • Cited source doesn't mention the size or material of the slippers, the underpants, the trousers, or what the stencilling brush was used for.

• Also in the suitcase was a thread card of Barbour brand orange waxed thread of "an unusual type" not available in Australia—it was the same as that used to repair the lining in a pocket of the trousers the dead man was wearing.
  • The source doesn't mention the thread being Barbour brand orange waxed thread, and doesn't mention it being unavailable in Australia.

• All identification marks on the clothes had been removed but police found the name "T. Keane" on a tie, "Keane" on a laundry bag and "Kean" (without the last e) on a singlet, along with three dry-cleaning marks; 1171/7, 4393/7 and 3053/7.
  • No mention of the removed identification marks in the clothes or the Keane labels.

• Police believed that whoever removed the clothing tags purposefully left the "Keane" tags on the clothes, knowing Keane was not the dead man's name.
  • This is accurate, but the source also says that they might not have been removed because they were overlooked.

• It has since been noted that the "Keane" tags were the only ones that could not have been removed without damaging the clothing.
  • This could use a source, and the note after the sentence needs a source.

• They believed he then showered and shaved at the adjacent City Baths before returning to the train station to purchase a ticket for the 10:50 a.m. train to Henley Beach, which, for whatever reason, he missed or did not catch.
  • Source cited states that he shaved at the railway station and doesn't mention when the train was leaving.

• After returning from the city baths, he checked in his suitcase at the station cloak room before catching a bus to Glenelg.
  • Can't find this in the cited source.

• Derek Abbott, who studied the case, believes that the man may have purchased the train ticket before showering. The railway station's own public facilities were closed that day and discovering this and then having to walk to the adjacent city baths to shower would have added up to 30 minutes to the time he would have expected to take, which could explain why he missed the Henley Beach train and took the next available bus.
  • Can't find this in the source cited. There's also a note after the sentence that isn't supported by the cited reference.

Inquest

• A coroner's inquest into the death, conducted by coroner Thomas Erskine Cleland, commenced a few days after the body was found but was adjourned until 17 June 1949.
  • Name of the coroner in the source is reported as T. Cleeland. Do we have a source for his full name? Source also doesn't mention that the inquest was adjourned until 17 June.

• He stressed that this was purely speculation as all the witnesses believed it was "definitely the same person" as the body was in the same place and lying in the same distinctive position.
  • I can't find "definitely the same person" on the pages cited in the source.

• Cedric Stanton Hicks, Professor of Physiology and Pharmacology at the University of Adelaide, testified that of a group of drugs, variants of a drug in that group he called "number 1" and in particular "number 2" were extremely toxic in a relatively small oral dose that would be extremely difficult if not impossible to identify even if it had been suspected in the first instance. He gave the coroner a piece of paper with the names of the two drugs which was entered as Exhibit C.18.
  • Can't find in the source.

• The names were not released to the public until the 1980s as at the time they were "quite easily procurable by the ordinary individual" from a chemist without the need to give a reason for the purchase.
  • A source is needed for this.

• (The drugs were later publicly identified as digitalis and ouabain, both of which are cardenolide-type cardiac glycosides).
  • There is a note immediately before this sentence that basically says the same thing, but the note has a source. My suggestion would be to remove this sentence, and either keep note 5 as is or just put it in as a sentence with the source.

The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam

• Around the same time as the inquest, a tiny piece of rolled-up paper with the words "Tamam Shud" printed on it was found deep in a fob pocket sewn within the dead man's trouser pocket.
  • The source only says that a scrap of paper with the words "Tamam Shud" printed on it were found in the man's clothing.

• Public library officials called in to translate the text identified it as a phrase meaning "ended" or "finished" found on the last page of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.
  • The source states that it's translated as "to end" or "to finish".

• There is some uncertainty about the precise time the book was found in the car. One newspaper article refers to the book being found about a week or two before the body was found. Feltus on the other hand reports that the book was found "just after that man was found on the beach at Somerton". The timing is significant as the man is presumed, based on the checked suitcase, to have arrived in Adelaide the day before he was found on the beach. If the book was found one or two weeks before, it suggests that the man had visited previously or had been in Adelaide for a longer period, or that the book was put in the car by someone else.
  • There needs to be a source for this paragraph.

• The theme of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam is that one should live life to the full and have no regrets when it ends. The poem's subject led police to theorise that the man had committed suicide by poison, although there was no other evidence to back the theory.
  • Can't find this in the cited source.

• The book was missing the words "Tamam Shud" on the last page, which had a blank reverse, and microscopic tests indicated that the piece of paper was from the page torn from the book.
  • Based on the cited source, I think all we really need from this sentence is to say that the tests indicated that the piece of paper was from the page torn from the book. The first half of the sentence isn't in the cited source, but I don't really think it's all that necessary to keep.

• In the back of the book were faint pencil markings of five lines of capital letters with the second line struck out. The strike out is now considered significant with its similarity to the fourth line possibly indicating a mistake and thus, possible proof the letters are code:

WRGOABABD MLIAOI WTBIMPANETP MLIABOAIAQC ITTMTSAMSTGAB.

• • The cited source only supports the first sentence. The code in the source uses M instead of W and doesn't include the line that was struck out. It also doesn't mention the struck out line or its significance.

• In the book it is unclear if the first two lines begin with an "M" or "W", but they are widely believed to be the letter W, owing to the distinctive difference when compared to the stricken letter M. There appears to be a deleted or underlined line of text that reads "MLIAOI". Although the last character in this line of text looks like an "L", it is fairly clear on closer inspection of the image that this is formed from an 'I' and the extension of the line used to delete or underline that line of text. Also, the other "L" has a curve to the bottom part of the character. There is also an "X" above the last 'O' in the code, and it is not known if this is significant to the code or not.
  • Unsourced, but seems like useful information if we can find a source.

• Code experts were called in at the time to decipher the lines but were unsuccessful.
  • Can't find this in the source cited.

• belonging to a former nurse who lived in Moseley St, Glenelg, around 400 metres (1,300 ft) north of the location where the body was found.
  • The source doesn't mention where she lived or the distance of her home to where the body was located.

• she owned a copy of The Rubaiyat but in 1945, at the Clifton Gardens Hotel in Sydney, had given it to an army lieutenant named Alfred Boxall who was serving in the Water Transport Section of the Australian Army.
  • Source where she names Boxall as the army lieutenant?

• According to media reports the woman stated that after the war she had moved to Melbourne and married. Later she had received a letter from Boxall, but had told him she was now married.
  • Boxall not mentioned in the cited source. Note 8 also needs a source.

• Shown the plaster cast bust of the dead man by Detective Sergeant Leane, the woman could not identify it.
  • The source states that she identified it as Boxall, and doesn't mention the Detective Leane showing it to her.

• In his 2002 video interview, Paul Lawson, the technician who made the body cast and was present when the woman viewed it, refers to her as 'Mrs Thomson' and noted that after looking at the bust she immediately looked away and would not look at it again.
  • The source for this is a youtube video of what looks like a news interview and should be removed.

• Boxall was now working in the maintenance section at the Randwick Bus Depot (where he had worked before the war) and was unaware of any link between the dead man and himself.
  • Source doesn't mention that he was unaware of the link between him and the dead man.

• The woman now lived in Glenelg but denied all knowledge of the dead man or why he would choose to visit her suburb on the night of his death. She also asked that as she was now married she would prefer not to have her name recorded to save her from potential embarrassment of being linked to the dead man and Boxall.
  • Not supported by the cited source. All is says is that she wished to remain anonymous.

• The police agreed, leaving subsequent investigations without the benefit of the case's best lead.
  • Can't find in the cited source.

• This was possibly a "pet" nickname and was the name she used when introduced to Boxall.
  • Source for this?

• Feltus, who had handled the cold case, interviewed Jestyn in 2002 and found her to be either "evasive" or "just did not wish to talk about it".
  • This needs a source.

• Her real name was considered important as the possibility exists that it may be the decryption key for the code.
  • Can't find this in the cited source.

Post-inquest

• The South Australian Grandstand Bookmakers Association paid for the service to save the man from a pauper's burial.
  • This sentence needs to be reworded so we aren't plagarizing the source.

• About the same time, the receptionist from the Strathmore Hotel, opposite Adelaide railway station, revealed that a strange man had stayed in Room 21 around the time of the death, checking out on 30 November 1948. She recalled that cleaners found a black medical case and a hypodermic syringe in the room.
  • Cited source doesn't say that it was around the same time, or that the cleaners found the medical case.

• There have been numerous unsuccessful attempts in the 60 years since its discovery to crack the letters found at the rear of the book, including efforts by military and naval intelligence, mathematicians, astrologers and amateur code crackers.
  • The source only mentions naval intelligence and amateur code crackers. It's also a source from 1949, so I don't think it can be used to source "60 years".

• In 2004, retired detective Gerry Feltus suggested in a Sunday Mail article that the final line "ITTMTSAMSTGAB" could stand for the initials of "It's Time To Move To South Australia Moseley Street..." (the former nurse lived in Moseley Street which is the main road through Glenelg).
  • The section in parenthesis isn't found in the source.

• A 2014 analysis by computational linguist John Rehling strongly supports the theory that the letters consist of the initials of some English text, but finds no match for these in a large survey of literature, and concludes that the letters were likely written as a form of shorthand, not as a code, and that the original text can likely never be determined.
  • The cited source is someone's personal blog on blogspot. Is there a reliable source for this?

• Three months prior to the death of the man, on 16 August 1948, an overdose of digitalis was reported as the cause of death for United States Assistant Treasury Secretary Harry Dexter White. He had been accused of Soviet espionage under Operation Venona.
  • Was this linked to the Somerton Man?

• The case is still considered "open" at the South Australian Major Crime Task Force.
  • This source is from 2007. Do we have an updated source for this?

Removed. Anarchyte 10:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Kaciemonster (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2015 (UTC) @Kaciemonster: I'm busy IRL at the moment, I'll slowly finish this. Anarchyte 10:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Alright, in that case I'll put the article on hold. Kaciemonster (talk) 13:45, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Result

It's been over 10 days since the nominator last worked on the article, so I'm going to fail this. I would recommend going through the article to make sure the content reflects the cited sources. Once that's been done, this article would probably be pretty close to GA quality and could be nominated again. Kaciemonster (talk) 12:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC)