Talk:Harold Wilson plot allegations

Credit where credit's due

wilson was prime minister from 1964-1670 then he was prime minister again from 1974-1976 Other than a general mass cleanup of this article needed, the allegations attributed to this 'new BBC documentary' here and on Harold Wilson were surely published in 'The Pencourt File' by Penrose and Courtier years and years and years ago, and possibly even before then in a newspaper. Anyone have a copy handy who can point out what the doc said that the book didn't? --Aim Here 15:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a copy of The Pencourt File -- but don't own a TV, so didn't see the doc! Gah! However, will gladly check any necessaries if someone would care to give me pointers at what the doc might have duplicated. The 'newspapers' suggestion won't help much -- nearly all the reportage that came out of the Wilson plot allegations was either Pencourt's, or after the book. As I say, if some kind soul will give a precis of the doc's main points, I'll gladly play wiki-'battleships' ... Garrick92 17:58, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The doc is here: http://www.guba.com/watch/3000014882/How-MI5-destroyed-the-Prime-Minister-of-Great-Britain Stax68 (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax tag and Clockwork Orange

User:Rambutan has placed a {{hoax}} tag on this article, without explaining what the concern is. He has also done the same at Clockwork Orange (plot) and I managed to get him to state his problem there, which was that the article supposedly treated the Clockwork Orange plot as a proven fact (although I dispute this, and his complaint was more of a POV issue anyways, so I changed the tag there). I don't know what the beef is with this particular article, since the crossover between the Clockwork Orange paragraphs here and the Clockwork Orange (plot) article is fairly minimal. As an aside, the Clockwork Orange paragraphs mostly cover Wright's material, and it's not immmediately clear how much of Wright's work was related of the Clockwork Orange project that Colin Wallace was involved with, so I changed the heading.--Aim Here 21:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs a good editor

What a mess this article has become. I have the impression someone may have "cut" the section about the conspiracy theories out of the main Harold Wilson article and "pasted" it here into a existing more detailed article. As a result, we have, inter alia, repetititon galore (e.g., two different trudges through the King-Mountbatten fiasco). Does someone have the motivation and energy to knock all this into shape? Nandt1 (talk) 00:32, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The new and inexperienced user who deleted the section from the Harold Wilson article and pasted it here has responded to my message to his/her discussion page: "I apologise for deleting the information on Harold Wilson conspiracy theories: I only intended to shorten the section on Harold Wilson, but it was not my intention to cause any mess." I have therefore reverted the changes to both articles, leaving the present article as it was prior to the changes of Sept. 5. Nandt1 (talk) 10:39, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification needed!

Section 'The 1968 Plot', last paragraph, last sentence. Sorry, but who is the 'Williams' mentioned here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VapourGhost (talk • contribs) 09:58, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]