SRTuricum

Rudolf von Scheliha

Hi @SRTuricum: You seem to be trying to change facts, that are outwith consensus. Everything in that article is correct and up to date. I have been over it twice, the 2nd time to add more content. They simply no evidence to say he wasn't receiving money from soviet intelligence and getting more for it. So don't revert it, or you'll be up for edit warring. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 19:10, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Scope creep: In its public proceedings, the 8th Chamber of the Administriational Court in Cologne, Germany in the case Marie-Louise von Scheliha vs Federal Republic of Germany with reference number 8K 5055/94 under judge Kohlheim, dated 25th October 1995, the court acknowledged that Rudolf von Scheliha has acted out of ideological motives. The court was convinced by the plaintiff that Rudolf von Scheliha was not passing on information for payment ("Bezahlter Landesverrat"). The defendant's representative declared that it fully rehabilitates Rudolf von Scheliha and that the statement made by the Federal Office of the Exterior (Auswärtiges Amt) on Sept 10th 1993 is to be the basis for the historical view of Rudolf von Scheliha's career. Not only is there plenty of evidence that Rudolf von Scheliha wasn't receiving money from Soviet intelligence (including the biography by Ulrich Sahm which you are quoting but may not have read because it is in German), but there also is a ruling by the highest German court in the matter. Thanks. SRTuricum (talk) 19:34, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

They are likely wrong but I will take a look at it. Thanks for brinking it up. The article needs some info. I think, as they just a court and can only go on what evidence they had available, which likely didn't military intelligence reports, it is likely the verdict was wrong, although I can't be sure and new information is turning up all the time. British intelligence was quite sure at the end of the world war 2, along with American intelligence that he was taken payments. There is several sources that collobrate in various books on thr subject, Trepper's own bio. I'll take a look at it tommorrow. scope_creep^Talk 23:12, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

@SRTuricum: Where is the actual documentation that discusses it? Can you point me to it. I will check that ref. scope_creep^Talk 23:59, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @SRTuricum: I'm trying to find some help to get that court case. I've left a couple of help requests with two groups who may help, but it would progress this very quickly if you could find it yourself and point me to it, so I can check it. I really can't do anything without it. scope_creep^Talk 12:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi @SRTuricum: Just a quick update although I know you haven't been in for several years in case your passing. I found the info you mentioned. I'm sorry I doubted you. Once I started looking there was plentiful information on both the trial and nature of the histography. I've updated the article, added the cologne administrative court details and removed the money aspect. Its not finished but its getting there. If you drop in, drop by to see if there is anything else I've missed. I created an article on his wife as well. Hope that helps. scope_creep^Talk 08:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

References

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, SRTuricum. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Rudolf von Scheliha, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 00:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)