|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Anthony Blunt article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Lead Section
- 2 Older
- 3 Homosexuality
- 4 French WP
- 5 Article is unbalanced
- 6 Blunt's life after being publicly revealed as a traitor by Andrew Boyle's book and Margaret Thatcher (1979)
- 7 Third/Fourth man
- 8 Gangster
- 9 Knighthood
- 10 Moura Budberg and Anthony Blunt
- 11 Recent edits
- 12 Copyright problem removed
- 13 Bibliography is in shambles
- 14 Pedophilia?
Just a question. What on Earth does: Blunt was Professor of the History of Art at the University of London, director of the Courtauld Institute of Art, Surveyor of the King's Pictures and London. mean?
Th article gives two reasons for his knighthood - Surveryor of the Queen's Pictures, and his work for MI5. Since no-one else at his rank in MI5 got knighted that I can think of (eg not Guy Liddel, not Tomas Harris, etc.) it was presumbaly the former cause. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 17:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
It is mentioned in the article that Blunt was a homosexual, but it seems like an off the cuff comment. There is nothing else in the article to support this and I have not found any information to this end anywhere else. Could someone confirm this or delete the reference please?--Lorangriel 19:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Read the biographies. Go to the library, search for Anthony Blunt, lookup homosexuality in the index, read. Wikipedia is not the end-all.
Very interested by your new paragraphs, because I am trying to add details to the French text. Yes, Blunt is a great art historian and it seems important to insist on it. Addacat 01:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Article is unbalanced
This article is unbalanced. There is much material on Blunt's no doubt excellent achievements as an art historian and administrator but much less on what he is best known for-his spying. For example, what information did he pass on, what damage did he do? Was he run as a double agent after his exposure? This would explain the secrecy rather than his upper-class connections. Such material must surely be available in the biographies. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC).
Blunt's life after being publicly revealed as a traitor by Andrew Boyle's book and Margaret Thatcher (1979)
Can anyone add some information on this topic which is not covered in the article? Did he simply retire from public life? What he shunned by all his friends and colleagues? Where did he live and what did he do? Please reply on my talk page if you can do this!Ivankinsman (talk) 11:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Small point, but British_honours_system#Refusal_or_forfeiture says he was the "Third Man" and this article has him as the Fourth. Does it matter which one he is? Jddriessen (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Surely the phrase "but Blunt never sang. " is more appropriate to an American prohibition-era gangster than a British subject? Could that be worded better? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- done. But for future reference... 1) click "edit this page". 2) be bold!
jonathan riley (talk) 08:45, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
In different parts of the article, it is claimed that his Knighthood was awarded for his work with MI5, and for his work as an art historian. What was it actually awarded for? A source should exist somewhere, but I'm not sure where to look. --RFBailey (talk) 16:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Moura Budberg and Anthony Blunt
There is a passing exchange in file KV 2/981 at The National Archives dealing with the above adventuress (in the 1951) context of the Philby-Maclean 'departures' that Blunt was a Communist and Keeper of the King's Pictures, on which MB's comment was 'Only in England could this happen.' Jackiespeel (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
There have been dozens of edits made recently by our anonymous friends which to the unskilled eye look tendentious and relatively unsourced. Expert attention needed. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC).
Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/SShollis.htm & http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/06/books/the-fourth-man.html?pagewanted=6 Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Yoenit (talk) 09:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Bibliography is in shambles
A line was added to the lead but not the body of the article. I have reverted it as the lead is intended to be a summary of the article, and because "Blunt may have been a visitor" is a bit thin for us to throw such allegations around; more solid information is needed, I feel. Britmax (talk) 21:10, 23 December 2014 (UTC)