Template:Did you know nominations/Ben Roberts-Smith

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by Launchballer talk 08:27, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Ben Roberts-Smith

(

)

Ben Roberts-Smith speaking at the 2015 National Flag Raising and Citizenship Ceremony

... that Ben Roberts-Smith is a recipient of the Victoria Cross for Australia, who was found in a civil defamation trial to have committed war crimes (including murder) while deployed to Afghanistan? Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20240508130634/https://www.theage.com.au/national/ben-roberts-smith-case-former-sas-soldier-committed-war-crimes-20230314-p5crv4.html
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hana Meličková

Improved to Good Article status by TarnishedPath (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 8 past nominations.

TarnishedPath^talk 03:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC).

Comment: Seems to run afoul of WP:DYKHOOKBLP. Bremps... 08:22, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
General eligibility:
New enough:
Long enough:
Other problems:

Policy compliance:

Adequate sourcing:
Neutral:
Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems: - n

QPQ: Done.

Overall: The issue is WP:DYKBLP; Hooks that unduly focus on negative aspects of living persons should be avoided. This hook is almost definitely a violation of this policy, so unfortunately a new one is needed, @TarnishedPath:. jolielover♥talk 08:25, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@jolielover, given that both aspects mentioned in the hook (the award of the VC and the war crimes finding) are what Ben Roberts-Smith is notable for, I don't see how mentioning the war crimes finding "unduly focus on negative aspects of living persons" (my emphasis). Please reconsider. TarnishedPath^talk 08:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath: Even if they are mostly known for the crime, unfortunately, this hook definitely can't run due to BLP concerns. Several sources in the article mention he is Australia's most decorated soldier, could a hook be written to talk of that instead? jolielover♥talk 08:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Ps, if absolutely necessary I will think up a new hook, but this is what they are most notable for so I'd rather not. Curtesy ping @Bremps. TarnishedPath^talk 08:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

- I wouldn't want to usurp the reviewer but mentioning a civil trial instead of a criminal trial is what concerned me, due to lower standards of evidence. Bremps... 08:35, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Ok, I get where you are coming from. Would

ALT1 ... that after Ben Roberts-Smith was awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia, he lost a civil trial after they were accused of war crimes and they then sued for defamation?

Be suitable? Pinging @jolielover and @Bremps. TarnishedPath^talk 08:49, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Best not mention the crimes at all jolielover♥talk 09:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

It's an ongoing case before the Aussie Supreme Court, so I'd be hesitant. Bremps... 09:05, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

ALT2 ... that after Ben Roberts-Smith was awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia, he was referred to as Australia’s most decorated living soldier?

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20221227131008/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/03/world/australia/ben-roberts-smith-defamation-trial.html

Pinging @jolielover? TarnishedPath^talk 09:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@TarnishedPath: Really small nitpick, but the framing makes it seem like a cause-and-effect relationship, whilst the source doesn't explicitly say it. What about:

ALT3: ... that Ben Roberts-Smith is Australia's most decorated living soldier?

source: https://web.archive.org/web/20221227131008/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/03/world/australia/ben-roberts-smith-defamation-trial.html jolielover♥talk 10:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

@Jolielover, I'm not sure if that statement is true anymore. It was certainly true at the time of the award of the VC, however I'm not certain that it still is. I had heard that it had changed, however I can't find any sourcing and unfortunately google searching defaults back to us. I'm not going to argue too much against ALT3, but I think ALT2 is the one which I can say is 100% correct. TarnishedPath^talk 10:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I'd consider the hook alright since like you said there aren't newer sources saying otherwise, and there have been cases of hooks that weren't true at the time of them appearing on the main page (this year's april fools set had one like that). Nevertheless, I'll request a second opinion. jolielover♥talk 13:06, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Just add the year. ALT4: ... that in 2011, Ben Roberts-Smith became Australia's most decorated soldier? Bremps... 16:48, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm not happy with the idea of an article that's this negative having a hook that feels so positive. It feels dishonest, and maybe even a bit whitewash-y. DS (talk) 18:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

- Alternatively we could WP:IAR to halt the process until the Aussie Supreme Court has a verdict either way, which seems to be soon. Bremps... 19:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't think we can assume that a verdict will be soon. The appeal alone has been going on for almost two years now. I'd be happy to go ahead with ALT4. TarnishedPath^talk 23:14, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @jolielover, @Bremps and @DragonflySixtyseven, the full bench of the Federal Court of Australia has just made a ruling upholding Justice Besanko's orginal 2023 ruling that Roberts-Smith had committed war crimes, including murder, when he served in Afghanistan. See https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/may/16/ben-roberts-smith-loses-appeal-defamation-ruling-case-war-crimes-afghanistan-ntwnfb for details. Thoughts on whether we should now go with my original hook? TarnishedPath^talk 00:48, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Go for it. Bremps... 01:16, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

ALT5:... that Ben Roberts-Smith won the Victoria Cross for Australia, was named Father of the Year, and was found by a judge to have committed at least four murders? DS (talk) 02:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

@DragonflySixtyseven or:

ALT5a:... that Ben Roberts-Smith won the Victoria Cross for Australia, was named Father of the Year, and was found in a civil defamation trial to have committed at least four murders? TarnishedPath^talk 02:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm good with ALT5a. @Bremps:? @Jolielover:? DS (talk) 16:58, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

I prefer the alt 5a that I proposed above, however another option based on recent reporting is:

ALT6: ... that Ben Roberts-Smith is Australia's most highly decorated combat soldier from the war in Afghanistan?

source: https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/war-memorial-to-update-roberts-smith-panels-but-display-will-remain-20250518-p5m063.html

TarnishedPath^talk 01:07, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

ALT6 is unacceptable whitewashing. DS (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

I think that ALT5a is the best one, however this doesn't seem to be moving so I've provided options. TarnishedPath^talk 07:18, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Everything else has already been checked, so we're good to go with ALT5a.

DS (talk) 01:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Per this discussion, I have pulled the hook and am marking it for closure. Real-world circumstances beyond DYK's control suggest that running this article at this time will be more trouble than it's worth. We do not want an Andrew Tate 2.0. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:43, 3 June 2025 (UTC)