Jump to content

Talk:Sidney Reilly

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Controversial figure status

[edit]

Given the variety of books about Sidney Reilly and the contradictory evidence concerning his life and exploits, I have added the controversial tag to this talk page. Be wary not to delete or purge statements from the article, but instead append more information that contrasts or contradicts the statements, facts or supositions given. We may prefer having a collage that includes and caters to all the different viewpoints and opinions; otherwise, the article will eventually become bogged down in edit wars over what is the truth behind every little incident or was he really in such and such a place or was he in fact somewhere else, etc. -- Flask 10:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I unlinked Andrew Cook as it went to the wrong page.

Henry Troup 20:50, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The link goes to Charles Fothergill (May 23, 1782 – May 22, 1840) who was dead before Reilly was born. 144.136.178.130 (talk) 05:50, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

D'Arcy affair

[edit]

The whole section on the D'Arcy affair is *completely* contradicted in Daniel Yergin's book "The Prize" sbandrews (t) 13:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Thwaites

[edit]

Simpson (1992) p.334 says that Reilly was recruited by British Intelligence in World War I New York by Lieutenant-Colonel Norman G. Thwaites. Simpson cites West (1986) p.215. I have repeated this in the Robert Liversidge article. Any views or thoughts? Cutler 17:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Simpson, A. W. B. (1992). In the Highest Degree Odious: Detention without Trial in Wartime Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-825775-9.
  • West, N. (1986). GCHQ: The Secret Wirless War 1900-1986. London.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
Reilly wasn't 'recruited'. He offered the British his services, and the British accepted.

Italics

[edit]

Can anyone see a reason for Ozone Preparations Company and Rosetta Street to be italicized? I can't. Alpheus (talk) 05:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SIR Ian Fleming

[edit]

Fleming was never knighted: he died too soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.48.118 (talk) 10:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a model for Bond

[edit]

The claim on this page that Reilly served as a model for Flemming's character contradicts what the page James Bond says, precisely the opposite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnkintaro (talk • contribs) 09:17, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The James Bond article on Wikipedia contradicts itself many times in various places. In an image caption, the article states, "Sidney Reilly, The Ace of Spies, is often considered the archetypal muse for Bond." And yet this assertion is contradicted in the same article by another unsourced statement. Such problems are the result of tampering by multiple editors. As for the claims in this Sidney Reilly article, I cited the source and that source claimed Sidney Reilly was a model for Bond. -- Flask (talk) 19:05, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image Image:Williammelville.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:09, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Cook stands out

[edit]

Looks like Andrew Cook generally contradicts all the historians before him, while he is the latest and probably least informed. He seems to be bent on representing Reilly as a cartoonish mega-villain. Also his account of the Battle of Port Arthur is completely different of the mainstream accounts. 114.78.215.177 (talk) 03:31, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Richard Deacon is equally as contradictory as Cook. It would be fair to say that all the Reilly historians are contradictory. In my opinion, Cook provides a much needed counter-balance to the numerous claims of Lockhart. Hopefully, as more historians examine Reilly, we will have more viewpoints to add to the article. -- Flask (talk) 05:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The Gadfly

[edit]

Passing thought - could Errico Malatesta, 'an acquaintance of an acquaintance' of the Voynichs be a source? Jackiespeel (talk) 17:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He

[edit]

Any chance someone with more time than I have could copy-edit the whole article and insert some personal pronouns where needed, so the name "Reilly" doesn't appear and re-appear multiple times in every paragraph? The name only has to appear ONCE early in each paragraph, then "he" and "his" will do fine for the rest of the par, provided no other names appear, in which case use "Reilly" one more time to avoid confusion. 58.164.116.135 (talk) 03:45, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reilly and the position of British nationality law pre-1914 and '15

[edit]

I have quickly realised that I had erred, earlier this morning, in that the status of the British subject before the years 1914/15 could in fact be acquired in the United Kingdom, by means of naturalization, by means of the issuance of a certificate of naturalization, by the Home Secretary, without requiring the applicant for naturalization to seek the enactment of a private and personal Act of the British Parliament. [1] There however seems no record of such Home Secretary's certificate of naturalization ever being issued under or containing the name of Sidney or Sidney George Reilly, anywhere, certainly not in TNA/PRO, in Kew, Richmond, TW9, according to their online catalogue of records. -- Urquhartnite (talk) 06:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If, the stated, "He claimed to be the son of an Irish merchant seaman, an Irish clergyman ... " were true (Reilly is an Irish surname), then he automatically held status as a British subject through descent from an Irish father pre-1922, hence no naturalisation papers would be needed, nor found, and he would have only needed to apply for a British passport to be granted one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.55.0 (talk) 08:22, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

George Alexander Hill

[edit]

gets a reference in this article but no link to his bio which is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Alexander_Hill 100.15.117.207 (talk) 00:53, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sidney Reilly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sidney Reilly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stealing weapon plans

[edit]

Andrew Cook does not merely concede that four individuals named Karl Hahn were employed at the Krupp works in Essen in either of the two years in which Lockhart claimed the theft occurred. He points out that of these four, two were employed several years after Reilly's supposed heist, and only one at the originally claimed date of 1904, based on Thyssen-Krupp's extensive personnel archives. He also points out that all four were still working at the plant in 1925, the time of Reilly's disappearance or death. Furthermore, the fact that Cook accepts the existence of a factory fire brigade at the Essen works is hardly support for Lockhart's claims, as it's a matter of record in multiple places that such a unit existed. It's akin to saying that Cook conceded the existence of Krupp in the first place hints to doubt on his part.

This entire section is far too reliant on the wildly credulous claims made by Lockhart in his writing, which has been shown to be naive, at best. In fact, the first two paragraphs cite Lockhart alone, which is hardly conclusive given that the other authors appear to belong to the camp which trusts Lockhart's account more or less implicitly. More qualifiers and better referencing is needed here to avoid giving credence to what is, essentially and by all appearances, a fantasy. WhampoaSamovar (talk) 22:53, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reilly and Autism

[edit]

Reilly's success as a spy may have been due to a disability he never knew he had - high level autism. If this is so, he could only find any true piece in death, as he could only think in pictures and would have been haunted by whatever he had discovered in his travels to his dying day. 50.101.76.222 (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very incorrect description of how Autism is experienced by those who have it. Autism is not the extreme condition previously understood, but rather a collection of differently expressed and experienced phenotypes which can be arrayed along a spectrum of desired coordinates. Most frequently, the coordinates utilized are those that describe social interactions, although it may also be understood in an expression of the severity of other manifestations.
Using the most consensus spectrum, it is unlikely that Reilly had any form of Autism, as the primary manifestations are in the form of difficulties with communication, underlaid by a lack of appreciation of social cues and communications, leading to difficulties understanding and being understood by others. One common manifestation is the inability to detect when someone is lying or dissembling, resulting in people with autism being readily manipulated by others, and unable to dissemble to others for their own gain.
This is literally the opposite of Reilly's manifested character. If one were to look for some modern definition of psychopathy to describe him, it is more likely he would be a sociopath, as he was manifestly charming, a frequent and convincing liar and pursued his personal goals with a high degree of disregard for the price that would be paid by others. Flyawaygregory (talk) 20:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sidney_Reilly&oldid=1228893382"