Jump to content

Talk:Rudolf Abel/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

45 year sentence?

The body of the article says that Fisher was sentenced to 30, 10 and 5 year terms of imprisonment to run concurrently. If this is accurate, then it is misleading to say in the lede that he was sentenced to 45 years. --catslash (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes that is correct, 45 years. It is referenced/cited in Capture and later section. Adamdaley (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Name?

I think his name at birth was William Fisher. I don't see the point of this roman transliteration of a Russian transliteration of William. Yes, that's what the Russians called him for the short length of time he was in Russia before going to the USA, but so what? He was later more famous as Rudolf Abel (see the stamp). Either call him William Fisher or Rudolf Abel, not this.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Error in sentencing wording

It is incorrect to state that Abel was sentenced to 45 years in prison. He was sentenced for three crimes each with a separate sentence of 30, 10, and 5 years. These sentences were to be served concurrently. This means that he was sentenced to 30 years in prison. If the separate sentences were to be served consecutively, then it would be correct to state that he was sentenced to 45 years in prison. The bottom line is, if he served his full sentence how long would Abel have stayed in prison. 30 years or 45 years. In his case, 30 years. Throckmorton Guildersleeve (talk) 13:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

In the opening it states 45 years imprisonment (a total of imprisonment for the three counts). I guess I could reference the length of imprisonment after each count. Adamdaley (talk) 06:00, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Africai edits

In recent edits by Africai to include James B. Donovan's involvement as defense lawyer for Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher (aka Rudolf Ivanovich Abel), I have made the following observations:

  • Reference No. 56 quote "Assignment of James B. Donovan as Counsel, United States of America vs. Rudolph Invanovich Abel, Order of United States District Judge Matthew T. Abruzzo". This reference number does not point to a newspaper article or book (in print or digital). Therefore should (and will) be taken out altogether.  Done
  • Reference No. 57 quote "Donovan, (1964) p. 15–16." was added in response to the sentence "Fisher chose James Britt Donovan, a well known lawyer from New York and former assistant trial counsel at the Nuremberg Trials for his defense" which can be found in Donovan's hardcover book "Strangers on a Bridge: The Case of Colonel Abel" (1964) Atheneum House Inc. New York. in light of Africai's original paragraph re-write made at 13:01, March 14, 2013, this will be changed to "Donovan, (1964), p. 22–26." (which now becomes Reference No. 56) the paperback edition of James B. Donovan's book "Strangers on a Bridge: The Case of Colonel Abel" (1964) Atheneum House Inc. New York. LCCN 64-14248  Done
  • Reference No. 58 quote "Abel, Spy Suspect, Accepts Donovan; Russian Has Long Talk With Former O.S.S. Counsel Who Will Defend Him Returned to Detention Cell" points to a digital copy of a New York Times article, published in print August 22, 1957, by Mildred Murphy. Verification can only be obtained by paid subscription. This New York Times article will be moved to the External links section and the {{subscription required}} template will be placed at the end of this to indicate a paid subscription is required to access the article.  Done
  • It should be noted the spelling of Rudolf is Germanic in origin and is predominately used in Czech, Dutch, German and Scandinavian. It can therefore be presumed this is the spelling Abel would use. The spelling variant in English is Rudolph. For consistency in the article I chose to use the Germanic spelling.  Done

Should Africai contribute further information to articles, care should be taken the material submitted is covered in the original referencing. If further referencing is required please note that the newly added referencing will interfere with the numerical sequence referencing of that article. Please refer to the article's talkpage and discuss improvements prior to editing the article. Should you need any advice or help please feel free to contact me on my talkpage. Adamdaley (talk) 07:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits by Rms125a@hotmail.com

I note your interest in Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher article and believe the edits you have made not to be constructive. Perhaps you could use the talkpage to assertively explain in which way your edits improve the previous version of the article. Semantics? I have restored the article with a minor fix to reference number 56. Adamdaley (talk) 05:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I think most of the editing you didn't like is not a big deal. I did make some minor reverts back as I think they are preferable, but this is mostly a question of style, not substance. Yours, Quis separabit? 17:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

speednat edits

There are certain things one looks for when editing an article, in this case Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher:

1. Has the editor discussed the changes on the talkpage prior to editing the article?
2. Has the editor made constructive or improved changes to the article?
3. Has the editor used the same English throughout the article? In this case "American English". See the talkpage for the "American English" template.
4. Has the editor used the referencing style already existing in the article? For an example:
Example: <ref name="Example, 1989, p. xxx">Example (1989), p. xxx.</ref>
5. Has the editor added any further books or external links that they have used for the additional information? See the Bibliography section for the formatting.
6. With your addition of "Vilyam August Fisher" in the Infobox, the spelling of Wiiliam is incorrect. As for the referencing (Reference Number 3) for "William August Fisher" both in the Infobox and article opening paragraph, your inclusion of the Encyclopedia Britannica (2010), I cannot verify this source therefore it will be removed. The next reference (Reference Number 4), in the book of Haynes/Klehr (2006), page 165, there is no reference to "August" and therefore incorrect.  Done
7. I have added two additional codenames for William Fisher to the Infobox, with referencing to Vin Arthey (2004) book on page xvi.  Done
8. The book (Reference Number 5) by Katherine A.S. Sibley, (2004). Red Spies in America. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. ISBN 0-7006-1351-X. I do not have this book and has been ordered from Amazon.com. This reference will be placed on hold and will be added at a later date. On hold
9. The sentence you added concerning Fishers' father, I do not consider it relevant. Therefore will be removed from the main article.  Done
10. I have made a small correction to Reference Number 58.  Done

I would like to add that of the twelve "Fisher" books in my possession the Arthey, Vin. (2004). Like Father Like Son: A Dynasty of Spies. St. Ermin's Press in association with Little Brown. London. ISBN 1-903608-07-4. does refer to William August Fisher and his name became Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher when the family to the Soviet Union. Page 73. This was a one-twelve-references in which case I decided to go with the eleven other books. Adamdaley (talk) 03:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page as this is not the forum for a discussion such as this. In fact on second thought, I moved the entire "conversation" to your talk page because of the aforementioned proper place for a discussion as this. speednat (talk) 05:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
I am amazed at your ego. I do not have to run things by you or anyone else to edit on Wikipedia. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with Wiki etiquette:
1. If you read Help:Editing you will notice that only on major edits is it suggested that you discuss them on the talk page. First point is whether adding a birth name is a major edit, second point is it is still a suggestion as there are no rules.
2. Self-explanatory, obviously they are constructive edits and I believe my history speaks for itself.
3. If I am using anything other than American English please point it out as well I am American.
4. Granted, on this point, I did not use the same reference style but rather than deleting all of the useful edits, one can try to be non-confrontational and either fix them or hey here's a thought... use my talk page and let me know and I would have gladly fixed it.
5. I am not sure what your point is!!
6. Let me quote you here "I cannot verify this source therefore it will be removed." Are you for real. So if you do not have the book then it can't be used. See point about ego in beginning.
7. Thank you. I guess.
8. See point 6.
9. If that was your only objection to my edit and your only change, I would leave it alone and not make a big deal out of it, but since the big deal has already been made, see point about ego.
10. Thank you again. I guess. speednat (talk) 05:38, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Speaking of number's of books with information, all of the books I read that state a "birth name" concur with William ...Fisher. Granted one did miss the August portion. On a side note it seems like you are a little too involved in the article. Maybe you need to take a step back, if you can't allow other people to make changes to articles that you are watching. speednat (talk) 05:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
One more point, then I am done for a few days, as I am not going to waste too much time on this. What do other editors that care about this article think? Please can some other parties state their opinions. If I am wrong, I will gladly tuck my tail and walk away. speednat (talk) 06:18, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
G'day all, I have previously worked on this article as a reviewer (I think at A-class), although I don't claim to be knowledgable on the subject at all. That said, it seems to me that this is simply a case of sources having information that conflicts. This, unfortunately, happens quite a bit in the area I work in mainly (military history). When that happens, I think it best to include both perspectives within reason. In this case, I think it probably would be ok to include mention of the other name that some authors list for him, even if all sources don't agree. For instance a quick sentence in the early life section would probably do it, such as: "Some authors, such as INSERT NAME, record Fisher's birth name as "William August Fisher", and state that it was changed to "Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher" when the family to the Soviet Union..." Or something similar if that is what the sources say. That would seem to me, to be a good compromise. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
In the next 48 hours, I'll be updating the article with AustralianRupert's suggestion of placing a note of the variation of Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher, since I have received Katherine A.S. Sibleys' book: (2004). Red Spies in America: Stolen Secrets and the Dawn of the Cold War. University Press of Kansas. ISBN 0-7006-1351-X; Along with other formatting changes. Adamdaley (talk) 00:58, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
The note was added last week, with corrected reference, thanks though. speednat (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I do acknowledge a note was placed in the article concerning his birth name. Since then I've made several improvements to the article. Especially to the Early life and the KGB service. I've also added: Sibley, Katherine A.S. (2004). Red Spies in America: Stolen Secrets and the Dawn of the Cold War. University Press of Kansas. ISBN 0-7006-1351-X – which was placed "on hold" several weeks ago; It now has been moved to the Further reading section. Adamdaley (talk) 08:18, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Уильям Фишер августа

Whoever put this 'native' name in 'Russian' obviously doesn't speak the language as this does not even look like a name to any native Russian speaker like myself. Google Translate cannot help you in this case, believe me. Besides, if Fisher was born in the UK to UK residents and his birth name was English he could not have been officially given a 'Russian' variant of the name so it's pointless to include one in here as any 'Russian' name you could ever come up with would be your own invention (and, BTW, there could be several variants/translations, but NOT 'Уильям Фишер августа'), but not reliable, encyclopaedic and referenced information. --Garik 11 (talk) 13:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

That makes sense to me. Why would a British-born person have a Russian name on birth certificate, they wouldn't. Now, that doesn't mean that later in life they didn't change their name to a Russian version. But to include the Russian in the birth name section seemed odd to me too. speednat (talk) 16:19, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
You are right, although I never referenced the "Russian translation" of Fisher's name, nor did I claim Fisher ever had a Russian name on his UK birth certificate. I refer to the first paragraph in "Early career" where I explained and referenced his name change. Feel free to delete and/or the correct "Russian" spelling. Are there any reliable references stating Fisher not only consulted on "The Dead Season", but appeared in the movie? Adamdaley (talk) 07:47, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Code names in article

Giving the agents codenames as "MARK" and "ARTUR" seems to run counter to the manual of style on using all capitals. If its for emphasis it should be italics. GraemeLeggett (talk) 22:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 20 December 2014

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) --Mdann52talk to me! 20:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)


Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher → Rudolf Abel – Wikipedia should use the most WP:COMMONNAME for the title. Even the article itself says that the person is "better known by the alias Rudolf Ivanovich Abel". Google Books search returns 49 results for "Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher" [1], 36 for "Vilyam Fisher" [2] and 11,700 hits for "Rudolf Abel" [3]. Similar situation is with Google News: 223 hits for "Rudolf Abel" [4], 35 for "Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher" [5], and 26 for "Vilyam Fisher" [6]. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Oppose – I do oppose the changing of Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher (...the current article name) to Rudolf Abel. As anyone can see I have done a lot of work for the article. All the names, aliases and codenames have been mentioned in relation to Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher and there is no confusion. Also you and for anyone else can clearly see from the article history that there has been no motion to move the article from its current name to a former deceased friend of Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher. Adamdaley (talk) 05:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Adamdaley, I am not talking about the confusion. The article is well written, and there is no confusion. I am talking about the WP:COMMONNAME which is a Wikipedia policy we should follow ("[Wikipedia] prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources."). Do you have any evidence to prove that English-language reliable sources prefer to use "Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher" and not "Rudolf Abel"? For more than 10 years, since the very first revision of this article [7], it includes the sentence that the subject is "better known by one of his many aliases, Rudolf Abel". And no one ever tried to remove this. That means that we have a consensus that he is best known as "Rudolf Abel". Now we just should follow the COMMONNAME policy, it's not so complicated. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:20, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
WP:COMMONNAME is not a policy; it's strategy in support of WP:RECOGNIZABILITY, which is one of the 5 title WP:CRITERIA. Dicklyon (talk) 07:32, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Actually, WP:COMMONNAME is a policy. See the top of the page: "This page documents an English Wikipedia policy". Vanjagenije (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Support Move No different than the article on Margaretha Geertruida "Margreet" Zelle MacLeod being at Mata Hari. --Lineagegeek (talk) 23:14, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Support Move agree to the argument Lineagegeek made. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:20, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Support move to Rudolf Abel, per nom. Dicklyon (talk) 08:12, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Archiving

I've tried to fix the archiving setup so that we get numbered archives instead of monthly ones since there isn't enough traffic for monthly archives. That doesn't seem to have worked, for all I can tell; the archviebox claims that there are no archives while Talk:Rudolf Abel/Archive 1 definitely exists. I'll try to keep an eye on this page, but if anybody else sees where I went wrong, a fix would be appreciated. Huon (talk) 21:27, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixed, the bot maintains a separate index of archives. Huon (talk) 21:31, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

DefaultSort and Persondata

Should the DefaultSort and Persondata be upgraded to reflect the change of article name from Vilyam Genrikovich Fisher to Rudolf Abel? Adamdaley (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Per WP:NAMESORT (The sort key should mirror the article's title as closely as possible...) and per WP:PERSON#Name_and_titles (The person's most commonly known name should be in the NAME= field). Vanjagenije (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Birthplace discrepancy

According to the FBI at "Rudolph Ivanovich Abel (Hollow Nickel Case)", Abel was not born in the UK, but rather:

"Mark" [Collins or simply "MARK"] made another admission—that he was a Russian citizen, Rudolf Ivanovich Abel, born July 2, 1902 in the Soviet Union. Although he refused to discuss his intelligence activities, the photo studio and hotel room which he occupied were virtual museums of modern espionage equipment. They contained shortwave radios, cipher pads, cameras and film for producing microdots, a hollow shaving brush, cuff links, and numerous other "trick" containers.

We need to address this discrepancy, particularly since this FBI page already in among this article's footnotes. --Tenebrae (talk) 19:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no discrepancy regarding Vilyam "Willie" Genrikhovich Fisher's birthplace and birthdate. You are confusing the "real" Rudolf Ivanovich Abel with a story fabricated by Fisher when questioned by the FBI in 1957, that he was a Russian living under false identities and gave his real name that of a deceased friend and KGB colleague, Rudolf Ivanovich Abel. The Centre, Fisher knew, would realize he had been arrested as soon as it saw the name Abel on the front page of the American newspapers. The name "Abel" stuck. Adamdaley (talk) 01:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Capture

The last sentence in the fourth paragraph is inaccurate:

During this period Fisher stated that his real name was Rudolf Ivanovich Abel and that he was a Soviet citizen, although he refused to discuss his intelligence activities. By stating his real name, Fisher was trying to send a covert signal to Moscow to let them know that he had been captured.

According to "The Spy of Cadman Plaza" by Nathan Ward, published in the New York Times on April 24, 2009:

When he was caught in 1957, he identified himself as Rudolph Ivanovich Abel; that was the name of a dead K.G.B. colonel.

So if Abel was trying to send a signal to Moscow, he was not doing so by stating his real name. I am adding a sentence prior to and recrafting the last sentence as follows: "Rudolf Ivanovich Abel" was the name of a deceased KGB colonel.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/nyregion/thecity/26spy.html |title="The Spy of Caman Plaza" |last1=Ward |first1=Nathan |date=24 April 2009 |website=www.NYTimes.com |publisher=The New York Times Company |access-date=18 October 2015}}</ref> By stating this name, Fisher was trying ... A.T.S. in Texas (talk) 06:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Born in the United Kingdom to Russian émigré parents, Fisher moved to Russia in the 1920s and served in the Soviet military before undertaking foreign service as a radio operator in Soviet intelligence in the late 1920s and early 1930s. He later served in an instructional role before taking part in intelligence operations against the Germans during World War II. After the war, he began working for the KGB, which sent him to the United States where he worked as part of a spy ring based in New York City.

Appeal to US Supreme Court

Any information?--Jack Upland (talk) 10:45, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Information on the Supreme Court would be relevant to James B. Donovan's Wikipedia page. Adamdaley (talk) 03:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Are you saying it's not relevant here?--Jack Upland (talk) 03:20, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Linguist?

A skilled linguist - a native English speaker, as well as Russian and German from his parents and French from Monkseaton Grammar School - he got a job as a translator." says Arthey Speaking four languages or being good at learning languages doesn't make someone a linguist. And linguists are lousy translators, generally speaking. --92.214.172.62 (talk) 19:29, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Fisher/Abel never learnt to speak "French". Adamdaley (talk) 03:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Recent Changes.....

Rudolf Abel article (formally entitled Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher), an "A-Class" article since July 22nd, 2012. Has successfully met the five criteria of the Military History "A-Class" Assessment. See link for more information: [8]. With the release of the movie, the "Bridge of Spies", it appears some people feel compelled to make unnecessary edits on Rudolf Abel. It is important to note that any "edits" concerning references can either affect the referencing, or result in an error being placed in the references section. I am prepared to welcome any constructive edits, however the deletion of an entire section, referring to Reino Häyhänen is not only a mystery to me. Häyhänen is critical to the eventual capture of Rudolf Abel in 1957 by the FBI. Adamdaley (talk) 02:21, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

And the influence of Häyhänen on Abel's capture is preserved. What was included was a lot of cruft having nothing whatever to do with Abel. Put it on Häyhänen's page, where it belongs. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 03:57, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Trekphiler – As Fisher was ordered to reactivate the "Volunteer" network in the United States, why wouldn't the codenames of the said network be relevant? Adamdaley (talk) 06:48, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Because you're naming the people, who have their own pages. Notice, where they aren't linked to, I've left them in. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 18:49, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
In 2010, I came across an unfinished page entitled Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher. After purchasing, reading and cross referencing fourteen books, I finished the page. This was never intended to be "Rudolf Abel's" page, as the aforesaid did not exist until Fisher was captured and provided the FBI with this alias. Fisher would never have achieved notoriety had it not been for Häyhänen's involvement and eventual defection. I do not agree the passages you chose to delete had no relevance. No other contributors appear to have a problem with this page. There are ways to communicate civilly without labelling another's work as "JUNK". Adamdaley (talk) 08:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
More power to you for finishing the page. That doesn't mean all the assorted trivia having nothing whatever to do with Fisher isn't still junk. That Fisher became notorious because of somebody else does not mean Häyhänen's troubles or stupid behavior belongs on this page. Since they're his actions, they belong, if anywhere, on his own page. More to the point, I see no valid rationale whatever for including the codenames of people who have their own pages & comments about Cohen who has her own page. I don't see you explaining, & since you want it in, it's incumbent on you. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 05:52, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
G'day, all, I think in some ways Trekphiller has a valid point. Some of the information could be better placed in other articles; this would help keep the narrative more tightly focused on Abel (starting a page on Hayhanen is a good step in this direction, I think). That said, I certainly wouldn't label the work as "junk". Such sentiments are not conducive to fostering a collaborative work environment. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:40, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
I disagree. This isn't an overly long page. Häyhänen's story is vital to Fisher's story. I don't understand Trekphiler's compulsion to delete this stuff.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Trekphiler – With your recent edit on November 26, 2015 on Rudolf Abel, do you think you have made a positive contribution towards the overall article? Adamdaley (talk) 03:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
I hope so. I'm not opposed to any mention of Häyhänen; I get how important his screw-ups were. What's not on-point to Fisher is everything else about Häyhänen, the Cohens, the lives of the people whose identities were stolen, & the codenames. Taking that out, IMO, sharpens the focus on the subject of the page, namely Fisher. What I can't understand is the mania for including it when it has nothing at all to do with him. The issue isn't page length, it's being on-topic. TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 19:26, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
All Hallow's Wraith – Your reference has changed the referencing style of the article. If you want to contribute, then I suggest you make the referencing in the same style. His parent's names are in the Infobox referenced. Adamdaley (talk) 23:54, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

All Hallow's Wraith – You clearly have not noticed the consistency of the spelling of "Fisher" throughout the article. There was a consensus among the fourteen books that the spelling of "Fisher" was the most favorable spelling rather than "Fischer". Adamdaley (talk) 06:54, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't oppose changing the last name spelling. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:58, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Which paragraph version should be kept?

Which version of the opening paragraph should be kept in the early life section? Please have your say below All Hallow's Wraith paragraph. Please remember that Rudolf Abel's parents are referenced in the Infobox. Adamdaley (talk) 07:23, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Adamdaley version:
Fisher was born William August Fisher on July 11, 1903, in Benwell, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, the second son of Heinrich and Lyubov Fisher. Revolutionaries of the Tsarist era; his father was an ethnic German from Russia and his mother was of Russian descent.
All Hallow's Wraith version:
Fisher was born William August Fisher on July 11, 1903, in Benwell, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, the second son of Lyubov Vasilyevna (Zhidova) and Heinrich Matthäus Fisher. Revolutionaries of the Tsarist era; his father was an ethnic German from Russia and his mother was of Russian descent.

Why would something that's in the infobox not also be included in the text? At least in this case? I don't understand. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 07:44, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

They would have been married, that is why I worded it the second son of Heinrich and Lyubov Fisher. If they want to know their full name it's in the infobox. No need to be overally complicated since it's Vilyam Fisher's/Rudolf Abel's page. Normally when you write a letter to a married couple you address it too, Mr and Mrs not Mrs and Mr. Adamdaley (talk) 08:06, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
The WPBIO convention appears to be AHR's version. I'd change "ethnic German from Russia" to "etnnic German" (since "German from Russia" is "ethnic German"). I'd also delete both parents' middle names as OT & fix the punct. (It should be "Tsarist era, his father an ethnic German", unless the "revolutionaries" is a complete thought, which it isn't now.) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 00:17, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
It's not what should be changed within the paragraph. It's what version should be kept. I have assumed that Heinrich and Lyubov got married and took the last name of Fisher. As for their middle and last names at birth can stay in the infobox is my opinion. The rest of that paragraph the ethnic country and whatnot can stay as it is. I would like other people to have their say in this. Such as Nick-D, Sturmvogel 66, AustralianRupert, Peacemaker67, Anotherclown, Auntieruth55, Dank, Hawkeye7, MisterBee1966, Nikkimaria, TomStar81, Kirill Lokshin, Roger Davies, Ed!, Ian Rose – as well as any others that I haven't included here. Adamdaley (talk) 02:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
I prefer the second version, as it has more detail, providing his father's middle name and his maternal grandfather's full name. His mother's name is the normal Russian form with patronymic. It is usual in biographical articles to include the mother's maiden name in some form. It's true that the formal address of a married couple in the UK back then was "Mr and Mrs Adam Daley", but that form has fallen into disuse. We don't normally use it here because we like to retain as much information in the encyclopaedia. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 – What I mean is with the Mr and Mrs is: Heinrich and Lyubov Fisher. NOT Lyubov and Heinrich Fisher. Adamdaley (talk) 04:52, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
I know what you're saying, but it is anachronistic. Today, wimmin getting married often (but not always) change their surnames by deed poll to match their husband's; but this was not the case in late Victorian times. In Russia, she would have remained Lyubov Vasilyevna; in Britain, she would have assumed her husband's name, and become Mrs Heinrich Fisher. If you think it should be otherwise, you'll need a source. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:18, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
I favor the first option because to me it looks right, however I am open to changing it if the conventions of the time support a different style. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:57, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

The question is whether it should be included in the infobox or the text instead. If it's in the infobox, why wouldn't it be in the text? The text has more detail than the infobox, not the other way around. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 01:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I think you are eager to change things before we get a fair result. At the same time, I'll see if I can find two sources for Heinrich and Lyubov Fisher. But let's wait for more responses. Especially from Peacemaker67 and Auntieruth55. Adamdaley (talk) 02:55, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
If something is in the infobox, it must be in the text (and is usually cited to a source there). Don't make assumptions about people's marital status, go with how it is described in reliable sources. Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 03:36, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
G'day, I agree with PM here, if something is included in the infobox in principle it should be within the text. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 04:45, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
IMHO, the entire paragraph needs a rewrite. No one is born with a name: the name is given. etc. auntieruth (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Fisher was born on July 11, 1903, in [[Benwell]], [[Newcastle upon Tyne]], [[United Kingdom]],<ref name="Whittell, 2010, p. 9">Whittell (2010), p. 9.</ref> the second son of Lyubov Vasilyevna (Zhidova) and Heinrich Matthäus Fisher. His father was an ethnic [[History of Germans in Russia and the Soviet Union|German from Russia]] and his mother was of Russian descent.<ref name="Arthey, 2004, p. 10">Arthey (2004), p. 10.</ref><ref name="Whittell, 2010, p. 9">Whittell (2010), p. 9.</ref> He was given the name William August Fisher.<ref name="Arthey, 2004, p. 73">Arthey (2004), p. 73.</ref>
Fisher's father, a revolutionary activist, taught and agitated with [[Vladimir Lenin]] at [[Saint Petersburg State Institute of Technology|Saint Petersburg Technological Institute]].<ref name="Whittell, 2010, p. 9">Whittell (2010), p. 9.</ref> Arrested for sedition in 1896, he was sentenced to three years internal exile.<ref name="Arthey, 2004, p. 8">Arthey (2004), p. 8.</ref> He fled to the United Kingdom in 1901,<ref name="Andrew, 1999, p. 146">Andrew (1999), p. 146.</ref> the alternative being deportation to Germany or imprisonment in Russia for avoidance of military service.<ref name="Arthey, 2004, p. 11">Arthey (2004), p. 11.</ref> While living in the United Kingdom, Fisher's father took part in gunrunning, shipping arms from the North East coast to the Baltic states to help the [[proletariat]].<ref name="Whittell, 2010, p. 9">Whittell (2010), p. 9.</ref>
Auntieruth55 – Why are people quickly to jump to change the paragraph rather than trying to workout if their parents names should be included in the text or not? Adamdaley (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I thought it was a given that parents' names should be in there. I was fussing over the rest of it, which was confusing. auntieruth (talk) 15:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Auntieruth55 – I thought I made it pretty clear above what we were talking about. As for the rest of that paragraph, it's not confusing. I think you just misunderstood what the paragraph was trying to say. Adamdaley (talk) 01:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Anotherclown – What do you think? Which paragraph should we have? Adamdaley (talk) 01:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Nikkimaria – What do you think? Which paragraph should we have? Adamdaley (talk) 02:01, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Don't have a strong preference on the names, really. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:16, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

All Hallow's Wraith, trekphiler, Nick-D, Sturmvogel 66, AustralianRupert, Peacemaker67, Anotherclown, Auntieruth55, Dank, Hawkeye7, MisterBee1966, Nikkimaria, TomStar81, Kirill Lokshin, Roger Davies, Ed!, Ian Rose What if a source has both Heinrich and Lyubov Fisher as well their full name as above? Adamdaley (talk) 07:05, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but think a third option (i.e. compromise) is probably the best as there seems to advantages in both proposals. I understand Adam's point re them being married so don't have an issue with that form being maintained in-principle (assuming this is supported by the refs). However, as Hawkeye7 says it is standard in biographies to include maiden names in the text - as far as I've seen this is usually given in brackets (e.g. "(née X")) although I'm unsure what the conventions were at the time. Equally as Peacemaker67 says if its in the infobox it probably should be in the text and ref'd there. Anotherclown (talk) 22:04, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Why are you wasting time with this?--Jack Upland (talk) 10:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Jack Upland – Why do you think we are having a debate about this? Adamdaley (talk) 23:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
The sentence in question with the parents' names have been written for a "flow" affect. the second son of Heinrich and Lyubov Fisher. Which of course no-one has ever brought up or even noticed before. Compared to the second son of Lyubov Vasilyevna (Zhidova) and Heinrich Matthäus Fisher. Which is a god damn mouthful to say and is of course unreferenced with the names. As I referenced the names before this got changed. Adamdaley (talk) 21:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Accent

On Talk:Bridge of Spies (film)#Section on Inaccuracies? there has been a discussion about the accuracy of the portrayal of Abel's accent in the film. In the course of that user:Sam Blacketer links to sources for Abel's accent: logically there could be a section here on Abel's accent. DrArsenal (talk) 23:53, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Sentence? and Appeal?

I'm confused because I watched the movie. I know that the incident of Donovan's raincoat being stolen in East Berlin didn't actually happen.

There's something in the movie about a Supreme Court appeal. Did that happen? I can't tell from the article. There's no mention, so maybe not.

There is also a scene in the movie where Donovan talks the judge out of the death penalty-- as far as I can tell from the article, the death penalty was never on the table, and of course it's very doubtful that that incident occurred..

The article says this: "Fisher was tried in Federal Court at New York City during October 1957, on three counts:[60] Conspiracy to transmit defense information to the Soviet Union – 30 years imprisonment;[1] Conspiracy to obtain defense information – 10 years imprisonment;[1] and Conspiracy to act in the United States as an agent of a foreign government without notification to the Secretary of State – 5 years imprisonment.[1]"

Well, what the heck does that mean? Are those supposed to be the maximum sentences for each charge, or what? This is very unclear; those year terms should probably be removed if they don't mean anything, or if they do mean something, we should have that meaning explained. According to both the article and the movie, the actual sentence was 30 years (of which he served four).

Others may also have seen the movie and wondered about these things. It might be good if someone could more clearly explain the sentencing business, perhaps explicitly state whether the death penalty was ever a possibility, and whether there was any kind of appeal ever filed. Maybe that stuff belongs in the article about the movie, I don't know, but at least the above confusing passage about the charges and sentencing terms could be cleared up. 71.93.172.99 (talk) 05:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rudolf Abel. 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) 19:55, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Real Name?

Why is his "real name" Vilyam "Willie" Genrikhovich Fisher? He was born William August Fisher. Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher is a Russian version of his name. He was famous as Rudolf Abel, and the Soviet postage stamp, in fact, calls him Abel. Who actually called him Vilyam Genrikovich Fisher?--Jack Upland (talk) 09:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Though born in United Kingdom he was of mixed German and Russian blood. When he was formally employed by the OGPU he was asked:
"In this document you say that you're German. Here you say your Russian. Here British. What are you?"
"I don't know what I am according to your rules. I'll be whatever you say I am."
"You're Russian."
As far as the Soviet Union were concerned William August Fisher became Vilyam Genrikhovich Fisher.
Arthey, Vin. (2004). p. 73. Like Father Like Son: A Dynasty of Spies. St. Ermin's Press in association with Little Brown. London. ISBN 1-903608-07-4. Adamdaley (talk) 03:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
A "W" (Cyrillic В) is pronounced more like the English "V" (Cyrillic У). It would be more common to pronounce the name as the English "Villy".

The English Name "William Wordsworth" spelled in Cyrillic is "Уильям Вордсворт" but spoken in Russian as "Уильям Уордсуорт". Also, as he is more ethnic German his 'real surname' would be spelled "Fischer", having been changed to 'Fisher' after immigrating to UK to anglicize the spelling. THE REAL question is why the use of the "Abel" name - If his real name and codename are "Fisher"? - I can find no clue to source of Abel in the Russian and/or German Interwiki either, just seems to magically appear. 80.5.219.60 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:52, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

His use of the alias "Rudolf Abel" is explained under "Capture". He became famous as Rudolf Abel, and that is why this article is called "Rudolf Abel".--Jack Upland (talk) 12:49, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
From his fathers side, he was genetically and linguistically German, so his name would be Fischer (German), of which the Englisch translation would be Fisher. Which name Fisher or Fischer is written down in his birth certificate? Or did he or his father change his family name during the time in England? --Gunnar (talk) 18:01, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
It says "Fisher" on his birth certificate[9].--Jack Upland (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

American English and date-style

Marbe166 – When I originally came across this article, I wanted to improve it greatly. That being said, I also debated whether it should be American English and date-style... compared to British English, etc. Therefore, I made it all American English and date-style rather than British. Can people accept that me knowing a whole lot about Rudolf Abel, than others? If people would like to re-write the article and is far more detailed, than what currently stands then by all means, use British English. Otherwise, accept the article "as is" on a Good Article nomination. Adamdaley (talk) 08:07, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

American English, yes, American date format, no, not for non-American subjects. Improving articles is good, and you clearly know more about him than I do, but what was your reasoning for using American English in this case? --Marbe166 (talk) 08:16, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Also, you don't have ownership of an article just because you have a lot of knowledge on a subject. --Marbe166 (talk) 08:20, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Marbe166 - I suggest you go read some books and not mess with such non-sense. So what if he was born in the United Kingdom? So are millions of other people. Lets say, if we had a Kiwi soldier article, we would do it Australian English. I suggest, go bother someone else. I've never claimed "ownership", I am more knowledgable about the subject and you'll won't be the first or last person to screw around with the article. Adamdaley (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
The reason why I did this all in "American English" and included the dates in American-style, was because if Reino Häyhänen didn't get him into trouble in America, then I wouldn't have done it all in American-style. No-one ever pulled me up that I had to do it this way, or that way. You only have the problem with it, not me. If thousands of others have accepted it before recently with you, then why not you? Adamdaley (talk) 08:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Gentlemen, please stop reverting. The correct process is bold-revert-discuss. Marbe66 you were bold, which is fine, and Adamdaley reverted, which is also fine. At that point, you should both stop and calmly discuss on the talk page before changing things again, in order to establish consensus. Personally, I can see arguments for and against either format (although, I will be honest with you, I don't really care either way as date formats are a pretty minor point, IMO). Please stop changing things and wait for consensus to develop. You can each have your say, and then see what others say. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk)
Adamdaley Please refrain from personal attacks, thank you very much. You claim "ownership" by being aggressive towards me, even though were not even arguing about content. Also, I am not saying that the article shall be re-written in British English. It is standard to use dmy dates for European subjects, and mdy for American subjects, regardless of which style of English the article is written in. Have a look at other articles on Soviet subjects and you'll see that they are using dmy date formats. --Marbe166 (talk) 09:21, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Then why do we now have inconsistency with dates? All because one person decides it should be that way, without lifting a finger or doing anything "constructive" to improve the article. Brilliant. Next article, I do I'll make sure Marbe166 gets a say in it cause I hate to do all that late night Wikipedia editing to be for nothing. Adamdaley (talk) 09:30, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
I believe his strong connection to the US, plus the long-standing use of US-style dates (per WP:DATEVAR going back to 2012 at least, makes it preferable that this article use US-style dates. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:56, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Why not just wrap them all in {{date}} and let the user's preferences determine the display format? — Sasuke Sarutobi (push to talk) 14:10, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I've done this on all occurrences of day, month, and year together to demonstrate what I mean (see version here). Of course, feel free to revert if necessary. — Sasuke Sarutobi (push to talk) 17:08, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Unfortunately, there is a combination of American and British-style dates. Why couldn't anyone just leave it as it was? I'll be biased but it was fine the way it was until someone who doesn't like it that way, changes it and then draws out irregular date-styles throughout the article. Adamdaley (talk) 05:41, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
As per Peacemaker67, I think the article's link to the US warrants the use of US-style dates. Zawed (talk) 08:36, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
I'll be honest, I don't think you can rule either way based on his link to the US. He is also linked to the USSR, which uses dmy. He was born in the UK, which uses dmy. I don't think there is any conclusively determining criterion besides "What format was it first?". Nonetheless, I still think the use of {{date}} wrappers provides a solution for a large number of readers (certainly logged-in readers). — Sasuke Sarutobi (push to talk) 08:50, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
It was all American-style, in both English and date-style of American. Adamdaley (talk) 09:42, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rudolf_Abel/Archive_2&oldid=1252054951"