Talk:Aleksander Piotr Mohl

Challenge any thoughts about deletion

Would whoever marked this entry as "considered for deletion" please provide a clear rationale for such action?

On a cursory glance, the entry seems reasonably complete, has a reasonable number of sources cited, etc. – all the trappings of a reasonable entry?

What are the considerations for deletion?

--Aboudaqn (talk) 03:11, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

It was entirely reasonable when placed - [1] - see the rational at the top of the afd discussion - the whole thing was pretty much unsourced and described a mid-level diplomat with a previous political position. Finding sources here wasn't easy - there's an "Alexander Mohl" who was an author and artist who predates this guy - and who has many more references - which flood out results here. Polish sources on WWII are a bit scant in general (due to the communist takeover, etc.). Mohl is a fairly common surname (with some well known German figures... and in Czech, a word). Alexander is common. He has quite a bit of variant spelling (Aleksander/Alexander, Peter/Piotr, "count Mohl" (though I haven't see hrabia Mohl yet)... If you can find more espionage sourcing - that would be great!Icewhiz (talk) 05:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

As you pointed out there are many variations of the spelling of the name. Even though he was born Aleksander..from my reviewing of sources, newspapers and books, the most commonly used name for him is Alexander. There is some confusion with this as there is the alexander mohl author and another second modern day version...but I still think he his best known as Alexander. I think that has to be with his cosmopolitan background...in Germany, France, Spain and USA, which were his stomping grounds he would be known as Alexander.... I think he should be Alexander...Even his Polish geneaological references name him Alexander.....http://www.sejm-wielki.pl/b/sw.53076 Gzegosh (talk) 07:51, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Alexander/Aleksander is really just variant spellings of the same name in different language - it is the sort of thing that often gets fixed (including by the subject's themselves) when crossing languages (by using the locale specific spelling or form). But it does complicated searching.Icewhiz (talk) 08:03, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Additional sources

There a whole box of documents here - [http://www.oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf4z09n74m/entire_text/ - "Box/Folder 4 : 8 Mohl, Aleksander, 1941-1943" - probably relating to his service in the Polish government in exile (with an indeterminite position - possibly Intel service head).Icewhiz (talk) 10:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

And here - [2] "Mohl, Aleksander, Case against", "Aleksander" - correspondance from 1942-1943 - seems to be related to "SERIES NO. 472. DISCIPLINARY INVESTIGATIONS".Icewhiz (talk) 10:22, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

The disciplinary investigation is dated 1942, could it be related to the Donovan leak? Fascinating line of investigation

--Gzegosh (talk) 23:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Probably not. IIRC the Donovan leak was only discovered post war in the captued Abwehr archives. Probably something else.Icewhiz (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Additional sources are possible available in http://pdd.pism.pl, he appears in 3 indices that supposedly point out some reference, but I'm not able to understand which ones - [3] [4] [5].Icewhiz (talk) 10:45, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Some here too - [6].Icewhiz (talk) 11:25, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

• London Polish newspaper from 1959 - [7] - need better Polish to understand this.Icewhiz (talk) 11:32, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Open: determining actual position in Polish secret service

He should have been high (if he met with Donovan, going back and forth between Lisbon and New-York (not an easy thing back then), position in the French embassy (and head of delegation to France post French fall) - which was the main Polish espinoage hub in the West), Former secretary to the President of the government in exile (Władysław Raczkiewicz) when he was Marshal of the Senate (which at the time was 2nd/3rd position in Polish hierarchy)). One of the the book sources says he was "the Polish secret service chief" - [8]. Others say diplomat or intelligence officer. He might not have been the "secret service chief" - but he wouldn't have been much farther down than one or two tiers down. This is an interesting open question here - perhaps some of the Polish sources might be helpful.Icewhiz (talk) 20:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

He was almost definitely the resident spymaster in the Paris embassy - both before 1940, and after (which was why he was left as "head of delegation" 1940-3 in Lisbon for the non-existent embassy) - the Donovan documentation + the diplomatic postings fit this position. The Polish network in the west (which was extensive) - was hubbed in Paris (and I think later in Lisbon). How high up this placed him the Government in exile hierarchy - is open.Icewhiz (talk) 10:01, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: @Aboudaqn: - could you maybe take a look here in this regard? The current espionage sourcing here at the moment is being mentioned as the source of a leak from Donovan to the Abwehr (with one book claiming he was "the Polish secret service chief", others an intel officer), and some mentions in intel reports (on the Gullion plot, not sure who the writer is (can't make out the signature)) to FDR's circle. The Polish sources mostly detail (the ones I've got access to and I'm able to understand) his official positions (personal secretary to the senate marshal (who is 2nd/3rd in line in Poland) - who subsequently became president, and then diplomatic posts in France (just below the ambassador) - pre-war and throughout the war (in Lisbon, the Algeirs, and back in France). His diplomatic positions + various medals (legion of honor and various equivalents from other countries) would fit such a posting.Icewhiz (talk) 14:51, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Icewhiz: Hi. Thanks a lot for pinging me here, or else I would have missed it. Unfortunately, I need a little time to look into this with depth. Kindly give me 2-3 days, and I will come up with facts/content, and sources. Hopefully they will be good enough to save the article from deletion. Once we do that, we can improve the article later. First priority should be given to adding content and/or sources that would save the article. —usernamekiran(talk) 18:15, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

The initial article, which did not specify espinoage/intel, screamed resident spymaster to me (Positions, awards, and description)... I got this confirmed at least with the Donovan link (which is from a few strong RS), with much weaker primary sources on a second mention with the FDR plot letters (and the FBI cutting off his phone calls, romantic connections). I think this should pass AFD the way it is after adding quite a few sources (even though the article itself is not up to snuff, but I cringe at cutting too much out as I do not have all the Polish sources (nor working knowledge of Polish))... But the subject is definitely interesting. It is a shame the Polish government in exile papers have not been digitized (though they are available in 3 archives (California, London, and Poland...) with folders on Mohl). Bringing some spies back from the cold is not always easy, and I am not an expert on WwII spying... So help here is much appreciated.Icewhiz (talk) 18:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)