Wikipedia:Peer review/Portland Spy Ring/archive1

Portland Spy Ring

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

The Portland Spy Ring was one of the controversies in the Macmillan government at the start of the 1960s. It was one of a series of spy scandals that rocked the British establishment throughout the decade, and a coup for the Soviets, providing their submarine fleet with details of British technological advances that they copied. A trip to FAC is the aim at the end of this process. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks pretty good to me; certainly the prose is at FAC level. (t · c) buidhe 10:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Buidhe, that's very kind of you. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

I think it would be helpful to give dates of birth and death at the start of the sub-sections on each individual, e.g. Konon Molody (1922-1970).
"he contracted his fellow agent Rudolf Abel ". What does contracted mean here? Do you mean contacted?
What is an illegal agent? It links to Mole (espionage), which does not explain - or even mention - the term.
Molody must have been a brilliant linguist if he could pass as a Canadian? Maybe worth commenting on if there is a source?
"He assisted the couple when they dug out the rubble in the cellar for a hidden radio to contact Moscow." Presumably dug it out so as to leave the radio there, but it could be clearer.
You do not explain how he had access to secret documents as a pay clerk in Poland.

Unfortunately neither do the sources! - SchroCat (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I find the chronology regarding Houghton confusing. Under 'Background', you say "He took a job at the AUWE on his return.", but do not specify the date. Then you say "According to MI5 and the KGB, Houghton made the first move in his recruitment". As you have been referring to him in England, I had to read this several times before I realised you mean he made his first move in Poland. Then you describe him meeting Gee, but only explain in the next section that he returned to Portland in 1953. I think I am clear on the chronology now, but the way you jump around it took a lot of working out.

I'm moved it around a little bit: how does it look now? - SchroCat (talk) 19:34, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I get the impression that Houghton's motive was money. Is there evidence to clarify?

Nothing overt, unfortunately. His initial comments to the Poles were anti-American idealism, but the money was a huge driver for him. I'll go over his autobiography again to see if he makes it any clearer. - SchroCat (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You say that Gee was told at first that she was working for the Americans. Presumably she later realised that she was a Russian agent, but you do not cover this.

That's all a bit fudged (partly so she could continue to claim that in court - there's nothing terribly clear about her knowing she was working for the Russians. - SchroCat (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dudley Miles (talk) 16:38, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Dudley. All mostly dealt with here, but there are still a couple of points I couldn't sort - I'll dig over the sources again once I take this to FAC. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Harry

The opening sentence isn't quite doing it for me. I presume they weren't convicted spies when the ring was active, and there are no dates.
Do you need two separate footnotes after "illegal agent"?
on one visit and able to meet KGB officers as he travelled doesn't quite make sense; you could add a "was" but I'd split the sentence
Someone at FAC might accuse you of over-using semicolons (something I'm guilty of myself!)
£20 a week on drink in various local pubs, paid cash for a Renault Dauphine and £150 for a radiogram and this didn't raise an eyebrow?!
- Doesn't appear to have been - security really was very slapdash! - SchroCat (talk) 12:31, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The documents gathered by Houghton and Gee was passed to Lonsdale, who then handed it on get your plurals to agree!
Russian spy working for the navy Might be worth specifying which navy; it could be British, American, Polish or even possibly Russian here
I would move footnote I (Peter Wright) into the prose.
a branch of the Midland Bank on Great Portland Street is it important which bank or which street it was on?
Lonsdale's background, which provided a copy of his passport his background provided it?
with MI5 watchers and Special Branch detectives following them throughout the journey suggest losing the "with"
I would move footnote J into the prose and possibly place it near the first mention of special branch; I was about to point out that MI5 don't have powers of arrest
copies of 4 confidential AUWE → four
- If I do that, then I'll have to spell out the "three hundred and ten photographs" - SchroCat (talk) 11:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
altered for the occasion, with temporary raised benches unless the benches were used to alter it, the "with" is ungrammatical
How relevant is footnote L? It seems a little trivial to me.
Evidence was heard from over twenty witnesses, including senior members of MI6 and GCHQ Not 5 or Naval Intelligence?
I would suggest moving footnote M into the prose and weaving it into a prose description of how the ring is portrayed in popular culture rather than having a list of appearances.
- Unfortunately there is no description of how it was portrayed, just that it is. - SchroCat (talk) 11:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's it from me. Should do fine at FAC. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these Harry: I'll work my way through them over the next day or so. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]