| Revision as of 17:19, 16 April 2016 editDaltonCastle (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,806 edits →Ethel: Added info← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:24, 22 December 2024 edit undoSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,406 editsm Signing comment by 2600:8802:5913:1700:7597:DD0E:35B5:1044 - "" | ||
| (98 intermediate revisions by 40 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Talkheader}} | |||
| {{Skip to talk}} | {{Skip to talk}} | ||
| {{Talk header}} | |||
| {{Controversial}} | {{Controversial}} | ||
| {{Round in circles|search=yes}} | {{Round in circles|search=yes}} | ||
| {{Article history | |||
| {{ArticleHistory|action1=GAN | |||
| |action1=GAN | |||
| |action1date=14:25, 22 February 2006 | |action1date=14:25, 22 February 2006 | ||
| |action1result=listed | |action1result=listed | ||
| |action1oldid=40713471 | |action1oldid=40713471 | ||
| |action2=GAR | |action2=GAR | ||
| |action2date=18 July 2009 | |action2date=18 July 2009 | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| |action2result=delisted | |action2result=delisted | ||
| |action2oldid=302692106 | |action2oldid=302692106 | ||
| |currentstatus=DGA | |currentstatus=DGA | ||
| |topic=Socsci | |topic=Socsci | ||
| |otd1date=2004-06-19|otd1oldid=5183741 | |||
| |otd2date=2005-06-19|otd2oldid=15486963 | |||
| |otd3date=2006-06-19|otd3oldid=59401666 | |||
| |otd4date=2007-06-19|otd4oldid=139141079 | |||
| |otd5date=2008-06-19|otd5oldid=220089584 | |||
| |otd6date=2009-06-19|otd6oldid=297167862 | |||
| |otd7date=2010-06-19|otd7oldid=369024570 | |||
| |otd8date=2013-06-19|otd8oldid=560655448 | |||
| |otd9date=2018-06-19|otd9oldid=846512879 | |||
| |otd10date=2021-06-19|otd10oldid=1029390368 | |||
| |otd11date=2023-06-19|otd11oldid=1160692755 | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Rosenberg, Julius And Ethel|1= | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|collapsed=yes|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject Biography |
{{WikiProject Biography}} | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject Espionage|importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject New York City|importance=Low}} | ||
| {{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject United States History|importance=Mid}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=top}} | |||
| {{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=Low}} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{OnThisDay|date1=2004-06-19|oldid1=5183741|date2=2005-06-19|oldid2=15486963|date3=2006-06-19|oldid3=59401666|date4=2007-06-19|oldid4=139141079|date5=2008-06-19|oldid5=220089584|date6=2009-06-19|oldid6=297167862|date7=2010-06-19|oldid7=369024570|date8=2013-06-19|oldid8=560655448}} | |||
| {{Auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot I|age=60|dounreplied=yes}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 100K | |maxarchivesize = 100K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 3 | ||
| |minthreadsleft = |
|minthreadsleft = 1 | ||
| |minithreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| |algo = old(60d) | |||
| |algo = old(730d) | |||
| |archive = Talk:Julius and Ethel Rosenberg/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Talk:Julius and Ethel Rosenberg/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| == "...true Talmudic tradition..." == | |||
| Quote from article; "David Greenglass, Ethel Rosenberg's brother and key prosecution witness, in true Talmudic tradition, recanted his testimony about his sister's typed notes." | |||
| Can anyone understand the reference here? It makes absolutely no sense to me and seems POV at the very least. Is it possibly just antisemitic? Either way it's hard to understand what the writer was really going for. Or am I just overlooking something? I do admit that could be the case because I am confused! <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 07:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :I've deleted it. The user has been making anti-Semitic edits.--] (]) 10:14, 6 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Details of execution == | |||
| I admit the details of the execution are rather grisly, even though they are brief. However, the gory details of the Rosenbergs' execution is one of the major elements of their story -- two possibly innocent civilians being executed by one of the most heinous and inhuman methods available. Please decide whether the execution details should be included in the article. -- ] | |||
| Suggestion for further research: | |||
| I recall reading something about the opening of Soviet archives, and there being some information regarding the Rosenbergs' execution/crimes. | |||
| I've also read that Julius took 3 tries & Ethel 5 - but I don't have a good source on that. And did you mention that they left behind 2 young sons? | |||
| ~ender 2003-04-02 23:45 MST | |||
| ::Two possibly innocent civilians? How much more evidence has to be provided concerning their guilt before idiots stop claiming that the Rosenbergs weren't clearly guilty? And the fact they left behind two young sons is completely irrelevant. Many executed criminals leave behind innocent family members; they should have thought of that before they passed secrets to the Soviets. The seeming implication that this somehow makes the Rosenberg's execution that much more unjust is farcical. Passing secrets to the Soviets endangered everyone living in the United States(I will not bother to mention the other countries, as the case was tried in American courts). Capital punishment has long been a potential penalty for espionage in this country, and it still is. It was heartily deserved in this case. | |||
| :::Guilty of possibly being part of a conspiracy to give scientific information to an ally... Comment made in the hope that this section is archived.--] (]) 09:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Age at death / limitations of sidebar == | == Age at death / limitations of sidebar == | ||
| Line 60: | Line 53: | ||
| which I believe removes the ambiguity. There is still some minor formatting inconsistency as the sidebar places the initial age in parenthesis, but this was the best I could do with the automated process. At least now they are not reported dead at the same age. | which I believe removes the ambiguity. There is still some minor formatting inconsistency as the sidebar places the initial age in parenthesis, but this was the best I could do with the automated process. At least now they are not reported dead at the same age. | ||
| == USa and USSR allies as of when? == | |||
| The article states that the USA became the ally of the USSR after it was attacked by Nazi Germany in June 1941, during operation Barbarossa, when the US itself only entered the war as a result of Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Whilst the US supported the USSR via Lend-Lease programs, I am not sure if people in Britain or the USSR would regard the USA as having been an 'ally' until it formally entered the war. I'm willing to be contradicted though, if anyone can cite evidence to the contrary ] (]) 13:21, 7 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :If you want to chage it to entry of the US into WWII, I can't really formally argue. Though personally I think that even if Allies in the capital letter sense of the Grand Alliance of WW II, the US became an ally of both the UK after it declared war on Germany in 1939, and the UK after it was invaded in June 1941. Lend-lease (extended to the USSR in Sept, 1941) was essentially a giveaway. And it had nothing to do with lending in the normal sense of that word. The US was to lend the UK ships, and then get them back at the end of the war, perhaps from the bottom of the ocean? Lend the USSR aircraft and get them back after "use," certainly obsolete and used up, if not full of holes or blown to pieces? Bizzare. Lend-lease was a political way that FDR got around congress in order to pretend to be neutral. It made no business sense, and is not a relationship that one can imagine any country would ever doing with other truly ''neutral'' country. It was not the sort of thing the US would have done with Mexico or South America. It made sense only to help friends (the UK) and to help allies (the USSR) in the struggle against German and Japanese aggression (a bit like the mercenary ] of the end of 1941, which was a U.S. gift to China, clandestinely financed with loaned money). The USSR was not a US friend. Ally is a much better and more descriptive and true word. An ally of necessity. ]]]] 03:27, 8 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
| :: I rather do want to change it! It's not just a question of the semantics regarding 'ally' and 'friend' or 'friendly country'. The passage doesn't even reference Pearl Harbor, and seems to suggest that the US declared war on Germany altruistically as a result of operation Barbarossa. I think this matters in this article as the relationships between the USSR and the US are important- one would not want to give the false impression that the USSR was spitefully spying on a benevolent and supportive US, biting the hand that fed it, when the picture is more complex. Furthermore, for many outside of the US, America is not perceived as an ally until it joined the war, regardless of lend lease, and the suggestion that it was on a par with the other Allies during this time is borderline offensive to those who fought and died during this period. Lend Lease is loved and remembered in the US, and it's impact should not be underestimated, but in the UK and Russia it is regarded (at least now if not at the time) as rather a lame half-measure that bankrupted these countries whilst boosting the US economy and fell well short of actual involvement. The matter is further complicated by the fact that the sides in the conflict are known as the 'Allies' and the 'Axis'. Whilst one might conceivably consider Spain for example, as an 'Ally of the Axis', or 'Friendly to the Axis', to regard it as _part_ of the Axis seems just plain wrong. likewise, I would suggest that the US was 'friendly to the Allies', but not an 'Ally' until it actually declared war as a result of being attacked. 'Ally to the Allies' seems clumsy, as I agree does 'Friendly to Russia'. I would suggest something along the lines of | |||
| :::"Following the assault on the USSR by Nazi Germany, the US provided substantial support to the Soviet Union, leading ultimately to Germany's declaration of war on the US after the Japanese assault on Pearl Harbor brought it into the war, putting the two future superpowers on the same side of the conflict. However, suspicions regarding Joseph Stalin's long term intentions remained high in the U.S. government, certainly outside of Roosevelt's immediate circle, and the Americans jealously guarded their research on the Manhattan project from all the other Allies, including France and Britain." | |||
| ::To be a pedant, I don't even find this very satisfactory, as it was the UK (specifically Churchill) who was suspicious about Stalins long term intentions- Roosevelt was more inclined to sideline British concerns in the belief that Russia could broadly be trusted. However, I assume that this was not the case generally in the US administration, so I think the above is more or less satisfactory.] (]) 14:15, 5 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
| I have simplified the passage. I don't see why we need to summarise the history of the war here. For the purposes of this article, the two countries were wartime allies, but the USSR was not involved in the Manhattan Project. (The bomb was kept secret from the British as well, but British scientists like Fuchs were involved.) I have also deleted information about Oppenheimer etc because it doesn't relate to the Rosebergs.--] (]) 22:16, 15 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == Editor Lalalacomeon == | |||
| I've just posted this note to ]'s talk page: | |||
| ''Hi, I just reverted your edit, because it seems to me you made significant changes to sourced information without any explanation. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, feel free to contact me. ] (]) 21:17, 20 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
| Hello. A couple of editors have reverted your edits at ] as good faith but improper changes. Your persistence indicates you may not be editing in the best of faith. I am restoring the original text and request that you not make any further edits without engaging on the talk page. Thank you.'' | |||
| I'm working on restoring the text right now. ] (]) 16:31, 29 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
| == NPV maintained? == | |||
| == Change "Later developments" section to use chronological order == | |||
| I'm questioning the NPV of this article. The article seems quite slanted towards putting forward a largely discredited theory of the Rosenburg's innocence. Anyone familiar with this episode is aware that it was a celebrity cause of the far left for 20 years that the Rosenbergs were innocent. Eventually the evidence became overwhelming with the release of the Venona intercepts and so it was shelved. | |||
| I think it will benefit our readers if we untangle this section. New sources of information emerged at specific dates, which we can use: | |||
| It seems this article continues the tradition, now limited to trying to prove the innocence of Ethyl Rosenburg, alone. In fact as current written it might better by titled "The Innocence of Ethyl Rosenberg". | |||
| * 1995 publication of Venona decryptions (material that was available to the FBI but not made public during the trial) | |||
| * 2001 David Greenglass later statements | |||
| * 2008 release of grand jury testimony | |||
| * 2008 Morton Sobell later statements | |||
| * 2009 Vassiliev notebooks published online | |||
| The Rosenberg children and their campaign for the exoneration of Ethel Rosenberg belong in a different section. | |||
| I am going to try to sort this out. ] (]) 18:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| : 1995 Venona descriptions: | |||
| "...For example, a 1944 cable (which gives the name of Ruth Greenglass in clear text) says that Ruth's brother David is being recruited as a spy by his sister (that is, Ethel Rosenberg) and her husband..." | |||
| But Mr. David Greenglass wasn’t the brother of Mrs. Ruth Greenglass. He was her spouse! | |||
| This phrase must be written so: | |||
| For example, a 1944 cable (which gives the name of Ruth Greenglass in clear text) says that Ruth's spouse David is being recruited as a spy by his sister (that is, Ethel Rosenberg) and her husband. --] (]) 07:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC) | |||
| I note that many of the sources are from the Communist news paper "Sparticus" which can hardly be considered a reliable source in an article about Communist plots and spying. | |||
| == Clarification about Ethel == | |||
| Having a section on "controversy" and including some trimmed down information on this might be appropriate, but repurposing the article as ongoing propaganda is not. | |||
| The previous version of this article claimed at the start that both Julius and Ethel spied for the Soviets and provided info to them. But all of the article’s sources that I looked at said that Ethel was involved in recruiting but ''not'' in providing info to the Soviets. So that opening paragraph seemed to me to be factually incorrect (according to the article’s sources), so I changed it. My change may not have been the best way to address this issue, I don’t know; but if someone ends up reverting my change, then please make other changes to make the article match what it says in the sources. (Or else provide a source for the specific claim that Ethel passed info to the Soviets.) — ] (]) 00:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC) | |||
| I believe the article falls far short of maintaining a neutral point of view. | |||
| == Ethel's Innocence == | |||
| ] (]) 16:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
| This article would benefit from including information on the prosecution’s knowledge of intercepted Soviet communications related to the Rosenberg case. These communications detailed espionage activities using codenames for various spies, yet notably referred to “Ethel” directly in the description of the role codenamed “Antenna,” believed to refer to Ethel’s husband, Julius. It is significant that the prosecution was aware of this fact, and there is evidence suggesting that Ethel’s execution was intended, in part, to conceal the extent to which the United States had successfully intercepted and decoded Soviet messages. ] (]) 17:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Ethel == | |||
| :It's speculative.--] (]) 01:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| "Julius Rosenberg (May 12, 1918 – June 19, 1953) and '''Ethel Elizabeth Rosenberg''' (September 28, 1915 – June 19, 1953) were''' American citizen'''s who '''spied''' for the Soviet Union" --That's the lead sentence, but the article goes on to say that the evidence strongly indicates that Ethel did no spying. Wik should not have self-contradictory articles. ] (]) 12:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ::Wrong. | |||
| ::https://www.justsecurity.org/105873/ethel-rosenberg-wrongful-execution/ ] (]) 04:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Not a spy == | |||
| :The lead is correct. The rest of the article has been ] to claim their innocence. Changes coming soon. ] (]) 17:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
| https://www.justsecurity.org/105873/ethel-rosenberg-wrongful-execution/ <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 04:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
Latest revision as of 04:24, 22 December 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 2 years  |
| Skip to table of contents |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
 | Julius and Ethel Rosenberg was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
 | Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 19, 2004, June 19, 2005, June 19, 2006, June 19, 2007, June 19, 2008, June 19, 2009, June 19, 2010, June 19, 2013, June 19, 2018, June 19, 2021, and June 19, 2023. | ||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | |||||||||||||
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Age at death / limitations of sidebar
The right-hand information block suggested that, having died the same day, they died at the same age in spite of having different birth years. Reviewing the code, it appears this was an auto-calculated field which does not allow the flexibility of reporting two death ages at a unique time for non-unique birthdates. To clarify for other readers, I changed the code from
| date_of_death = June 19, 1953(1953-06-19) (aged 35) (both)
to
| date_of_death = June 19, 1953(1953-06-19) (aged 35) (Julius), and aged 37 (Ethel)
which I believe removes the ambiguity. There is still some minor formatting inconsistency as the sidebar places the initial age in parenthesis, but this was the best I could do with the automated process. At least now they are not reported dead at the same age.
Change "Later developments" section to use chronological order
I think it will benefit our readers if we untangle this section. New sources of information emerged at specific dates, which we can use:
- 1995 publication of Venona decryptions (material that was available to the FBI but not made public during the trial)
- 2001 David Greenglass later statements
- 2008 release of grand jury testimony
- 2008 Morton Sobell later statements
- 2009 Vassiliev notebooks published online
The Rosenberg children and their campaign for the exoneration of Ethel Rosenberg belong in a different section. I am going to try to sort this out. HouseOfChange (talk) 18:52, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
- 1995 Venona descriptions:
"...For example, a 1944 cable (which gives the name of Ruth Greenglass in clear text) says that Ruth's brother David is being recruited as a spy by his sister (that is, Ethel Rosenberg) and her husband..." But Mr. David Greenglass wasn’t the brother of Mrs. Ruth Greenglass. He was her spouse! This phrase must be written so:
For example, a 1944 cable (which gives the name of Ruth Greenglass in clear text) says that Ruth's spouse David is being recruited as a spy by his sister (that is, Ethel Rosenberg) and her husband. --Анатолий Глезер (talk) 07:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Clarification about Ethel
The previous version of this article claimed at the start that both Julius and Ethel spied for the Soviets and provided info to them. But all of the article’s sources that I looked at said that Ethel was involved in recruiting but not in providing info to the Soviets. So that opening paragraph seemed to me to be factually incorrect (according to the article’s sources), so I changed it. My change may not have been the best way to address this issue, I don’t know; but if someone ends up reverting my change, then please make other changes to make the article match what it says in the sources. (Or else provide a source for the specific claim that Ethel passed info to the Soviets.) — Elysdir (talk) 00:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Ethel's Innocence
This article would benefit from including information on the prosecution’s knowledge of intercepted Soviet communications related to the Rosenberg case. These communications detailed espionage activities using codenames for various spies, yet notably referred to “Ethel” directly in the description of the role codenamed “Antenna,” believed to refer to Ethel’s husband, Julius. It is significant that the prosecution was aware of this fact, and there is evidence suggesting that Ethel’s execution was intended, in part, to conceal the extent to which the United States had successfully intercepted and decoded Soviet messages. ChloeMS (talk) 17:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- It's speculative.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:55, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Not a spy
https://www.justsecurity.org/105873/ethel-rosenberg-wrongful-execution/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8802:5913:1700:7597:DD0E:35B5:1044 (talk) 04:23, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Delisted good articles
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in People
- B-Class vital articles in People
- B-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Espionage articles
- Mid-importance Espionage articles
- B-Class New York City articles
- Low-importance New York City articles
- WikiProject New York City articles
- B-Class United States History articles
- Mid-importance United States History articles
- WikiProject United States History articles
- B-Class Crime-related articles
- Top-importance Crime-related articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- B-Class Jewish history-related articles
- Low-importance Jewish history-related articles
- WikiProject Jewish history articles