A.K.A. Keeping an eye on the Misinformation Corporation

Taken from The JC:

‘PETER WYNGARDE, the actor best known for his role as 1960s TV sleuth Jason King, has died at around the age of 90.

The reason for the uncertainty over his age is due to the mysterious circumstances surrounding Mr Wyngarde’s origins. Everything about his birth – including the date, the year, the place, and even his parentage – have all been disputed’.

The only reason for this confusion is Wikipedia muddying the waters with disinformation!

OLDERIn the wake of PETER’s passing, many of the more lazy journalist tended to rely entirely on Wikipedia when writing their ‘Obituaries’ rather than to carry out their own research, thereby perpetrating the already misleading content. Thankfully, the more respectable elements such as The Times and The Telegraph chose to come to us as an official source.

Over the time this Blog has been online, I’ve received a huge amount of mail regarding the article/biography about PETER on Wikipedia, which I’ve already tackled to some extent on this ‘site. However, I’ve been asked by many fans to identify the erroneous content in this particular piece of writing, and to show what or why parts of it are inaccurate or, at the very least, flawed. 

In the wake of PETER’s passing, many of the more lazy journalist tended to rely on Wikipedia when writing their ‘Obituaries’, thereby perpetrating the already misleading content. Thankfully, the more respectable elements such as The Times and The Telegraph chose to come to us as an official source.

What follows is the Wikipedia ‘biography’ in its entirety (as it stood before they added content found on this website), with those specious sections highlighted and corrected.

(As of 12.02.18. – it’s stated in the main body of the aforementioned article that PETER passed on 18th January, 2018. This is incorrect. The date should read 15th January, 2018).

Birth and family background

Peter Wyngarde’s date and place of birth, his birth name, and his parent’s nationalities and occupations are all disputed. His biography at IMDb which is not supported by any primary sources but often used in other accounts of his life, states he was born Peter Paul Wyngarde on 23 August 1933 at an aunt’s home in Marseilles, France. It says his British father worked for the British Diplomatic Service resulting in the family living in various countries, including British Malaya and China. He is claimed to be the nephew of French actor-director Louis Jouvet. Primary sources indicate a likely different birth name, year of birth and family background. There is strong evidence Wyngarde was born as Cyril Goldbert, possibly in Singapore, which is the place of birth Wyngarde gave on a 1960 immigration application, although a 1956 Straits Times article about his mother does give Marseille as his birthplace.

Author J. G. Ballard wrote in his memoir (and stated in interviews and private letters that he and his family knew Wyngarde as Cyril Goldbert in Shanghai during World War II.

Regarding Wyngarde’s year of birth there is considerable variation. Different sources quote or suggest dates between 1924 and 1933. In a 1993 interview Wyngarde claimed not to know his own age.

The given names of Cyril Goldbert’s parents and siblings match those of Peter Wyngarde. His father was Henry Peter “Harry” Goldbert, born in present-day Ukraine and raised in Singapore where his mother ran the Singapore public house, and where he became a naturalised British subject in 1919 He does not appear to have been a diplomat: travel records from the mid-1940s show that he was working as Second Chief Engineer in the British Merchant Navy. Cyril Goldbert’s mother was Marcheritta (Madge) Goldbert, nee Ahin, later Macauley, who was a Swiss national. She was interviewed in the Straits Times in 1956 about her son Peter Wyngarde’s career, by which time she had remarried. Wyngarde claimed in a 1993 interview that his mother was a racing driver.

The full names of the two younger Goldbert children match those of Peter Wyngarde’s purportedly elder siblings: Adolphe (later Henry) Peter “Joe” Goldbert (1930–2011) and Marion Colette Simone Goldbert, later Wells (1932–2012).

Regarding Louis Jouvet being Wyngarde’s uncle, Jouvet’s biography confirms he had two brothers, neither of whom appear to be related to Cyril Goldbert’s parents by blood or marriage.

Early life

Wyngarde told an interviewer that his parents divorced when he was very young, and that his father took him to China “only months before war with China broke out” in the summer of 1937.

In the early 1940s, Cyril Goldbert was living in Shanghai when the Japanese Army took over Shanghai’s International Settlement on 8 December 1941, and as a British citizen he was interned in the Lunghua civilian internment camp on 10 April 1943. Peter Wyngarde has spoken about his time in Lunghua, and it is included in his official biography.

After internment, Cyril Goldbert sailed from Shanghai to Southampton in December 1945 on the Cunard White Star Line vessel the Arawa, listed as an 18-year-old passenger. J.G. Ballard was also on board. After arriving in the UK, Cyril Goldbert disappears from public records under that name.

In a Q&A on a fan blog in April 2017, Wyngarde said that he studied in the Faculty of Law, University of Oxford for three months, before leaving to work in a London advertising agency.

Acting career: 1940s to 1970s

In 1946, Peter Wyngarde took his first professional roles in theatre productions. An early success was in the part of Morris Albert in a production of Noël Coward’s Present Laughter which opened on 7 August 1947 at the Theatre Royal, Birmingham.

Later accounts say that he was around 13 years old when he took these early roles, but Peter Wyngarde is listed as a registered voter aged 21+ in 1948, so he was 18-20 years old in 1946 and 1947.

From the mid-1950s, Wyngarde had roles in feature films, television plays and television series guest appearances. One of these, a television adaptation of Julien Green’s novel South (1959, originally Sud), in which Wyngarde featured in a lead role, is thought to be the earliest television play with an overtly homosexual theme. He appeared as Pausanias opposite Richard Burton in the film Alexander the Great (1956), played a lead role in the film The Siege of Sidney Street (1960), and appeared as Sir Roger Casement in an episode in the Granada Television’s On Trial series produced by Peter Wildeblood. Wyngarde’s film work was not extensive, but gained attention.

In Jack Clayton’s The Innocents (1961), he had brief (unspeaking) scenes as the leering Peter Quint with Deborah Kerr and Pamela Franklin. He followed this appearance as the lead in the occult thriller Night of the Eagle (US: Burn Witch Burn, 1962). By the late 1960s, Wyngarde was guest starring in television series of the time, many of them were shown internationally, including The Avengers, The Saint, The Baron, The Champions and I Spy. He also appeared in The Prisoner (“Checkmate”, 1967) as the authority figure Number Two.

Wyngarde became a British household name through his starring role in the espionage series Department S (1969). His Jason King character often got the girl and as she is about to kiss him, he manages to avoid it, much to the annoyance of co-actor Joel Fabiani. After that series ended, his character, the suave womaniser Jason King, was spun off into a new action espionage series entitled Jason King (1971), which ran for one season (26 fifty-minute episodes). The series led Wyngarde to briefly became an international celebrity, being mobbed by female fans in Australia. A revival in October 1973 of The King and I, featuring Wyngarde in the male lead role, and initially with Sally Ann Howes as Anna, ran for 260 performances at the Adelphi Theatre in London.

Later career

Wyngarde appeared as the masked character Klytus in the film Flash Gordon (1980) and as Sir Robert Knight in the film Tank Malling (1989) with Ray Winstone. He appeared in The Two Ronnies 1984 Christmas Special as Sir Guy in “The Ballad of Snivelling and Grudge and A Film Story”. Other TV appearances include Doctor Who (Planet of Fire, 1984), Hammer House of Mystery & Suspense (1984) and The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes (1994).

In 1983, he acted in the thriller Underground with Raymond Burr at the Royal Alexandra Theatre, Toronto, and at the Prince of Wales Theatre, London. After leaving a 1995 stage production of The Cabinet of Dr Caligari mid-performance during previews, Wyngarde mostly stopped acting but he has done occasional voice work.

He appeared as a guest of Simon Dee in the Channel Four one-off revival of his chat show Dee Time in 2003. In 2007, he participated in recording extras for a box-set of The Prisoner, including a mock interview segment titled “The Pink Prisoner”.

In January 2014, he narrated an episode of the BBC 4 Timeshift documentary strand, How to Be Sherlock Holmes: The Many Faces of a Master Detective. In the 2015 documentary series for Channel Four, It was Alright in the 1960s, Wyngarde expressed his unease at having to don blackface to play a Turkish man in The Saint, but said that he had done it only in the hope that a theatre director might pick him to play Othello.

Latterly, Wyngarde’s public appearances are mainly restricted to Memorabilia and other nostalgic events commemorating television programmes.


In 1970, Wyngarde recorded an album for RCA Victor entitled simply Peter Wyngarde, featuring a single, “La Ronde De L’Amour”/”The Way I Cry Over You”. The album is a collection of spoken-word/musical arrangements produced by Vic Smith and Hubert Thomas Valverde. A promo single of the track “Rape” (entitled “Peter Wyngarde Commits Rape”) was also issued in 1970.

In 1998, the album was reissued on CD by RPM Records, now titled When Sex Leers Its Inquisitive Head. According to Wyngarde himself (quoted in the liner notes of the CD re-issue), prior to the RCA deal, EMI Records had also been interested in cashing in on his fame and suggested issuing an album of him performing a selection of Sinatra songs. However, RCA allowed him carte blanche, assuming that the record would be a failure and could be used by them as a tax loss. However, when the initial pressings quickly sold out and it showed a profit, they declined to press any more copies.

The album is now usually treated as a curiosity because of its unusual spoken-word style and the controversial subject matter of some of the tracks.

Personal life

In the early 1950s, he was married to the actress Dorinda Stevens for 3 years.

Wyngarde shared a flat in Earls Terrace, Kensington, with the actor Alan Bates for some years in the 1960s.

In September 1975, Wyngarde was fined £75 (under his real name, Cyril Louis Goldbert) for gross indecency.

Wyngarde battled alcoholism at the height of his career, telling an interviewer in 1993 “I drank myself to a standstill … I am amazed I am still here”, but that he stopped drinking in the early 1980s.

N.B. Terms used below: 

‘Author’ = The individual who wrote the ‘biography’ currently on Wikipedia.WIKI
‘Biography’ = The ‘biography’ on Wikipedia


  • On viewing the ‘biography’, you’ll find this box (right) which, as you can see, contains the following details:

‘Occupation: Film TV actor’, and

‘Active: 1946-1994’

Firstly, I find it extraordinary that, given the fact PETER has had a far more prolific stage career than he has in film, his theatre work is not acknowledged at all in this section. Perhaps that’s why the Author also chose to ignore his role as a theatre producer and director.

In regard to the ‘Active’ part: it’s clear that the Author doesn’t take into consideration PETER’s radio plays either, which is probably why he claims that Mr WYNGARDE has not worked since 1994 [1].

  • In the main body of the ‘biography’, however, mention is made of the biography on the Internet Movie Database (IMDb). That particular profile was written by myself – the “primary source” being PETER. I hope that clears up this particular mystery.
  • In respect of the question concerning PETER’s uncle, Louis Jouvet. Both PETER and his mother have confirmed the family connection in various interviews.


This cutting was taken from the Monday, August 2nd, 1954 edition of The Times. JOUVERT

In view of the fact that much of the Wiki-Committee’s ‘biography’ depends upon information derived from newspapers, and that Wikipedia itself judges The Times to be a “reliable source”, it should follow that the information relating to PETER’s uncle found in THIS extract from the abovementioned daily must also be considered dependable and trustworthy(?) 

With that in mind, there should be no reason for the Wiki-Committee to delay in revising their entry concerning Louis Jouvet’s relationship to Mr WYNGARDE.

I went to see my uncle – the French actor, Louis Jouvet, up in Scotland where he was appearing on stage, but he wasn’t very receptive. All I wanted was some advice, but I feel he thought I was looking for favours. I never saw him again”. PETER WYNGARDE.

JUVET4⇐ A shield of the Juvet Family that hung on the wall of PETER’s home for almost 60 years.  

His Mother was a Juvet, hence the connection to the French actor, Louis Jouvet (variant spelling) – PETER’s Uncle.

The ‘biography’ claims that PETER had the same father as Marion Simone and Adolph Henry (Goldbert). HE DID NOT. Mr WYNGARDE’s mother was married several times. PETER actually has TWO step-brothers and one step-sister.

After leaving the Diplomatic Service, PETER’s biological father started an import-export business dealing in antique timepieces. He lived in Eton Square, London.

Re. the claim made by J.G. Ballard which is also mentioned by the Author. PETER maintains that he never met either J.G. Ballard or any member of his family. He has no recollection of Ballard ever being in Lung Hau.

While PETER has mentioned in interviews many times that his mother raced cars, he has never, ever suggested that it was her profession. This is probably why the Author was unable to find any evidence of this whilst carrying out his intrusive inquiries.

“She (Mother) was beautiful – a real Claudette Colbert lookalike and racing driver, who was chased all over the place by men. I ended up in China when the Japanese invaded”. PETER WYNGARDE 

  • The “Q&A’ and “fan blog” referred to by the Author is a section of the Official Peter Wyngarde Blog entitled ‘Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Peter Wyngarde… But Were Afraid To Ask’.

The definition of a “fan blog” is as follows: ‘A fan blog, fan site or fan page is a website created and maintained by a fan or devotee about a celebrity, thing or particular cultural phenomenon.’

Firstly, The Official Peter Wyngarde Blog was not created by a ‘fan’, nor is it run by a ‘fan’.

Secondly, the Blog was started and supported with the approval and backing of PETER WYNGARDE. The Blog contains numerous personal contributions from Mr WYNGARDE. It is our belief that the term used by the Author was specifically chosen to demean our repute, and give his version of PETER’s life and career more credence.

DIXONIn a production of ‘Present Laughter’ in which PETER appeared early on in his acting career, he played a character called Morris Dixon, not “Morris Albert”, as is stated by the Author.

⇐ Taken from an original theatre programme for ‘Present Laughter’

It’s interesting that the Author references ‘South’ as a significant moment in PETER’s career, which indeed it was, but doesn’t bother to acknowledge the numerous other notable highlights, which include:

1960: ‘Most Promising Newcomer’ for portrayal of Count Marcellus in Duel of Angels on Broadway. U.S.A.

1960: ‘San Francisco Award for Best Actor In A Foreign Play’ for portrayal of Count Marcellus in ‘Duel of Angels’ on Broadway. U.S.A.

1962: ‘Best Actor’ by the Guild of Television Producers and Director

1964: Television Actor of the Year’ for his portrayal of Ferdinand de Levis in ‘Loyalties’ on ITV.

1967: ‘Best Actor’. Emmy Nomination for his portrayal of Stewart Kirby in the ‘Avengers’ episode, ‘Epic’.

1972: Starring in the World Premier of ‘Butley’ in Melbourne.

1977: World Premier of ‘Big Toys’. English Theatre, Vienna.

Was ‘South’ highlighted merely because of the homosexual connection? Probably.

  • Having gone through boxes and files of original ITC material on both Department S’ and ’Jason King’, I can find nothing in which either show was described as an “espionage” series.
  • “His Jason King character often got the girl and as she is about to kiss him, he manages to avoid it, much to the annoyance of co-actor Joel Fabiani”.  

I put the following sentence both to PETER and other ITC aficionados – none of whom were familiar with this scenario. I have, however, seen something similar on at least two other websites (one cut and pasted from the other). The original was obviously written by someone who professes to know about these series but who, in reality, has probably never seen either of them.

  • Although PETER made 260 appearances in ‘The King and I’, not all of those performances were at the Adelphi Theatre, as stated.

The production toured the UK for several months prior to opening in London, with the show stopping off in Birmingham, Glasgow, Hull, Leeds, Manchester, Nottingham… etc., before transferring to the West End.

  • Whilst the Author is correct in saying that PETER made an appearance in the Two Ronnies 1984 Christmas Show, I don’t recall the segment being entitled “The Ballad of Snivelling and Grudge and A Film Story“.
  • Although perhaps a bit nit-picky, there is a lack of attention to detail with the reference to ‘Tank Malling’. The character PETER played was called Sir Robert Knights, not Sir Robert Knight.
  • The production of ‘Underground’ referred to did not only play at The Royal Alexandra Theatre, Toronto, and at the Prince of Wales Theatre, London, which appears to be suggested. It was also staged in Birmingham, Brighton, Lincoln, Manchester, Richmond, York… etc.
  • The wording used by the Author in relation to ‘The Cabinet of Doctor Caligari’ (1996), implies that PETER pulled out of a performance midway through. In actual fact, the first ‘Preview’ was abandoned at the interval when a winch that was integral to the plot, failed. I was there that night and witnessed what happened myself. PETER was forced to leave the production on the following day after he contracted a severe throat infection.
  • PETER was actually married to Dorinda Stevens for five years, not three, as is claimed by the Author.
  • The words “battled alcoholism” could be viewed as libelous, since PETER was never diagnosed as an alcoholic, nor has he ever received treatment for “alcoholism”. He has not drunk any kind of alcohol since 1980.

It’s interesting that the author of the Wikipedia ‘biography’ relies on items from online archives such as My Heritage. The following was found on that ‘site ( )

In Biographical Summaries of Notable People

Peter Wyngarde

Gender: Male
Aliases: Cyril Louis Goldbert, Wyngarde, Peter, Peter Paul Wyngarde, Cyril Goldbert
Birth: Aug 23 1928  Marseille


Nationality: United Kingdom
Occupation: Actor
Residence: Marseille

This particular website, just like Wikipedia, invites any Tom, Dick or Harriett to contribute information, or to edit the details contained therein. Perhaps someone should inform them that, apart from a couple of weeks following his birth, PETER has never been a resident of Marseilles!

The point, as above, is that if there are inaccuracies in a supposed primary source, then you have to ask yourself, what other pieces of so-called “reliable”(!) or ‘substantiated evidence’(!!) did this particular Author rely upon to compile his article? And how many others have, in turn, used his work as a source?

[1]. The Pickerskill Detentions. Character: Mr Mike Poulson-Jabby. Broadcast: BBC Radio 4 – 28th February 2007 at 23.15 


The committee behind the Wikipedia ‘biography’ seems to have sunk to new depths by citing the disgraceful ‘Obituary’ published in The Guardian on 18th January, 2018 – i.e.:  

Fortunately, everyone else realised that it’s author, Gavin Gaughan, wouldn’t know the truth if it jumped up and bit him on his ignoble behind!

Curiously, the Wikipedia lot don’t consider this website to be a “reliable source”, but will rely on something as crude and vulgar as this article to bulk out their ‘biography’.

Public Response To The Article:

  • This is a thoroughly mean-spirited ‘obituary’ by someone who seems to bear a personal grudge against Wyngarde.
  • This reads less as an obituary and more as a rather nasty hatchet job……the guy was certainly an enigma, but didn’t Gielgud call him one of the finest actors of his generation? (or was that made up too?)  
  • Strikes me as a pre-prepared obit that didn’t get a second pair of eyes before being heading off to the presses. It is grossly one sided. Does he not get any credit for creating a wonderfully outrageous and camp character that inspired the hugely successful Austin Powers performance.
  • One doesn’t doubt that he was possessed of a huge ego but that’s what makes an actor, or at least what did before Eastenders up its doors for today’s talentless grunters.
  • My father’s not here for me to ask him again what it was like, but worked with PW twice. Once on The Siege of Sidney Street (1960) and a decade later on an episode of Jason King (A Thin Band of Hair) and I believe found Wyngarde nothing less than professional.
  • What a nasty piece of writing. I’m actually quite surprised the Guardian saw fit to publish it.
  • One can only imagine penning this obituary has saved its author the trouble of going along to the cemetery and urinating onto its subject’s grave.
  • Well! The Grauniad doesn’t often do hatchet-jobs in its obits, but this is clearly the exception!
  • I admit I wasn’t a big fan of his, but let’s give the guy some credit! After all he was a fine actor in his day. And that moustache! Just about every bloke of my generation was growing a zapata like his, back in his heyday when he was one of the most familiar faces on TV. I certainly grew one (people said it didn’t suit me, so after a few months I shaved it off…).
  • R.I.P. Peter W. You deserve it.
  • Not the first time. Michael Hann’s piece on Sean Hughes also fits into the ‘hatchet job’ category. 
  • Nasty obituary for a man who deserved far better – shame! Yes, Jason could be terribly effete but he had more style than any other TV hero and Peter Wyngarde nailed the character absolutely. I still remember the shock of learning from one episode – quite out of the blue – that Jason was a widower whose wife had been killed in an air crash.
  • Blimey, the man’s not long dead and he gets this!
  • Very disrespectful of a talented and entertaining man brought low by poisonous bigotry.
  • Shame on the Guardian. 
  • What a mean spirited piece…
  • What an incredibly spiteful, mean spirited and malicious obituary. I feel very sorry for the kind of man that derives personal satisfaction from such pettiness.
  • Most of it is from Wikipedia.
  • Having fun with Wyngarde’s age and ancestry while trying to work through the actor’s own obfuscation on the subject is one thing, but the penultimate paragraph seems mean-spirited for the sake of being mean-spirited.
  • What a disgraceful review. Most of the information is supposition, guesswork and slurs and offers little in the way of fact. Written with an axe to grind from someone who would be better placed with the Daily Fail. Shame on the Guardian for allowing this kind of shoddy journalism.
  • The Guardian is getting a bit of a reputation for this sort of Obituary now, it seems… The very same comments were made about Michael Hann’s awful piece on Sean Hughes. Not at the bottom of the article, but all over Twitter and Facebook. Unfortunately they had taken the comment feature off of that one so that those of us close to Sean who knew how wrong it was couldn’t reply. Certainly both obituaries seem like the work of a tabloid dressed up in Guardian clothing. 
  • Peter Wyngarde deserved something far better than this piece. Of course, as other newspapers have done, one can have sport with the seemingly preposterous moustache/suits (which, as others have commented, were pervasive at the time), but those pieces credited Wyngarde as somebody who took acting seriously.
  • Peter Wyngarde’s arrest is surely as irrelevant – in real terms – as Alan Turing’s.
  • Yuk, what a miserable hatchet job.
  • How horrible. Shame on the Guardian!
  • What a shame The Guardian memorialises Wyngarde’s with this snide piece.
  • Er, we think he did this, we think he did that, help me desk, do I have to write this?  
  • Clearly the author of this piece isn’t an adherent of the old maxim about not ‘speaking ill of the dead’. Talk about kicking someone when they’re down (or kicking someone when their dead in poor Peter’s case). RIP Peter Wyngarde – at least you were never boring. PS by all accounts lots of ‘Jasons’ in their mid 40s owe their name to you 🙂 
  • The dead can’t sue!
  • Obituaries are generally one of the stronger suits the Guardian has left. This one is quite off-colour. I feel, it is a bit on the lazy side and also structurally not quite up to the job. On the other hand, my compliments to the Wikipedia author, who quite untypically relatively to his peers, was not lazy at all but invested quite a bit of time into his research.
  • What Peter Wyngarde is concerned: I came to the conviction that his whole life up to 1969 was just a preparation to become Jason King. And he did the role with such excellence that there was nothing really left to follow.
  • The Sydney Morning Herald, another publication way past its bed time, spoke to him on occasion of his visit to Australia in 1972 where he played in the Melbourne stage production of Simon Gray’s “Butley” a loser and alcoholic to boot. There he let us know:

“I also wrote all the dialogue for Jason. well I had to as they originally had him as the type of man who’d use expressions like ‘my dears’ and ‘old boys’ and it was all terribly camp. But Jason isn’t camp – he is high-camp and that saves him. 

He also tells us that his greatest wish was to star in a musical, admitting that he is not the greatest singer in the world. 

“Perhaps I could fake it like Rex Harrison in ‘My Fair Lady'” 

Anyway, I will take the occasion to drag out the old Department S and Jason King DVDs, travelling back to an era which was still looking up in hope and not endlessly dragged down. The eloquent Jason King in his nigh infinite flamboyance is probably one its ultimate symbols and a definite contrast to our time in which we ended up running around in deliberately washed out and ripped jeans and where the most frequent use of the word “fuck” is considered cool. 

  • He did appear in at least one musical – The King and I at The Adelphi Theatre with Sally Ann Howes. The obituary seems to be written by someone with an axe to grind. Obits should be balanced but this one seems way off kilter. I agree. There was a similar obit about the folklorist Iona Opie recenly that focussed upon one or two of her crankier qualities and sale of her collection, rather than a lifetime of hard work and lasting influence. That is not fair – and an obitury in a paper of record should aim to be fair and balanced.
  • For better or worse, Peter Wyngarde will be remembered for the “character” of Jason King – a character whose suaveness and “way with the ladies” have become shorthand for that brief period when the mainstream of popular culture appropriated – and vulgarised – certain aspects of swinging London and the hippy/groovy lifestyle of half a decade before. I would suggest that it was his great skills as an actor that allowed him to inhabit this role with such aplomb. Compare/contrast with say Tony Curtis and Roger Moore (both fine actors on their day) in “The Persuaders” who were utterly stiff and unconvincing.

Peter committed to that part with astonishing success; I would also suggest – however it looks throughthe prism of time -that he became a kind of feminist icon. I recall a brief period when almost every other suburban kitchen seemed to have a picture/poster of Jason King somewhere – usually in a leather catsuit – whose attentive, soulful eyes and cat-like physique seemed to offer everything a woman everything she wasn’t currently getting. Is it any coincidence that the women’s liberation movement hit a kind of peak during the Jason King years? The defiant act of pinning Jason to the wall (or in one instance I heard, the bedroom ceiling) was a simple statement that men needed to change in some fairly fundamental ways; unlike, say, James Bond – loved more by men than women – this was a character who Peter suggested actually liked women on many levels; was attentive to them – who dressed as carefully as them – to please them and himself of course – and sought a significant connection with them above and beyond sex. That was really powerful stuff circa 1970.

I was really hoping for much more insight here – and much more about the rest of his life and career, including what must have been a traumatising period interned by the Japanese. He was older than Ballard and must have found it much more difficult to cheerfully adapt that he did.

Come on Guardian. Sort these obituaries out.

  • Is Vic there ? RIP Mr. Wyngarde.

  • Disappointing that The Guardian should choose to run such a distasteful hatchet job under the guise of an obituary. 

  • An obituary needs to be, to some extent, a document of record, of fact. Wyngarde deliberately obscured many of the facts in his life, so the obituarist has to make do with what’s left. 400 words of “gosh, he wore funny clothes on telly, Austin Powers” isn’t much good to anyone.
  • But Tim, there is much, much more to say about the man than dates and clothes. Ask anyone.

Other than born and died dates an obituary doesn’t need to be a document of record at all.

  • It can easily have a lightness of touch, and some humour.

The author seems the go to guy for 1960’s / 70’s British TV & film stars, but sadly just doesn’t seem very good at it.

The Telegraph (i know, I know) do a great series of books covering obituaries subtitled “a celebration of eccentric lives”. That’s probably what should have been aimed for here, not this sneering, nasty, hatchet job.

I read similar short biographies (obviously not an obituary) about Peter Wyngarde over the years and they all point to the various mysterious claims about his age, place or birth, parentage, achievements, and more. I wish he’d written his autobiography. Jason King may be a possible influence on Austin Powers, but Wyngarde is truly the international man of mystery…

  • I understand that Matthew Vaughn twice wanted him for reasonable-sized film roles, in Layer Cake and X-Men: First Class, but on each occasion was told that he had died.
  • How fitting that today’s Edgar Allan Poe’s birthday – for that Wyngarde obituary gives the impression that Gaughan is only a pen-name for Griswold. Of course, de mortuis nihil nisi bonum – Mr. Gaughan might, like Griswold, be dead for quite some time, as it seems to be rather common to write tosh like this for a newspaper’s stockpile and use it years after it was written. Either if Mr. Gaughan is dead or still alive, it would have served this obituary if the author would have been less obsessed by the “mystery” of Wyngarde and had instead tried to inform himself a little less roughly about his work and career. But then, the spirit of Griswold still walks amongst us and would rather stick his nose into a public toilet then into over 200 successful performances of “The King and I”. It possibly was less the intention to give a fair and interesting life’s review but rather to serve the yellow press and have the last snarl? 

  • Peter was one of the great TV characters of the late 60s and early 70s. A credible and sinister ‘Number 2’ in ‘The Prisoner’ set him up for ‘Department S and ‘Jason King.’ He lived out his characters and just like King would have done, flicked a tray of nonchalant cigarette ash at suggestions that he was the son of a Liverpool seaman. Instead, the son of an aristocratic diplomat, up to Oxford sometime to study Law went nicely with the man, his persona and his TV and Film characters. Interestingly, he maintained a few odd contacts up on Merseyside but as his most famous character would have said to the beautiful lady he was about to seduce… ‘I’ts purely for research purposes for my latest novel… Now, let me take your coat my dear.’ Wonderful, one of the greats.
  • Poor form writing this. Though there are many truths here there are some utterly pointless criticisms of a remarkable man who made a remarkable cultural contribution. Once again, a bad show from The Guardian. 

Quite agree, argentofan. Recounting Wyngarde’s petty vanities at this time is at best bad form and at worst squeezes out of the obit what should have been a generous recognition of his talent. 

  • What a tawdry and nasty obituary that concentrates mostly on the downside of Peter’s life. The author was allegedly banned from Peter Wyngarde’s Official Facebook page because he insisted on posting vindictive comments about the great actor on there. Peter Wyngarde was one of our finest actors and he didn’t do anyone any harm. He was a hero to millions of television viewers. He deserves a better obituary than this one straight from a gutter press author who clearly bears a grudge against the late, great Peter Wyngarde. RIP Peter. 
  • Ah, that explains the vitriol. I thought the piece reeked of personal animosity.

    Yes, it probably boils down that Peter didn’t sign Gaughan’s autograph book in the correct colour ink or something equally as trivial.

  • You couldn’t help but like him, and his acting style. He had a point about being flamboyant. He was born OTT and went on from there. 
  • Watching Department S and Jason King,made the move away from Crackerjack pencils,a kind of growth spurt into adult television.

  • This poor obituary does not become you Gavin or the Guardian.
  • I think it becomes Gavin, whoever he may be, very well indeed. 
  • Just not good enough. Apart from the unnecessarily spiteful tone – sneering never becomes the obituarist – this cut-and-paste job is incomplete. Whatever the merits of Wyngarde’s curious LP When Sex Leers Its Inquisitive Head – and it did gain an audience on reissue in the 90s – it should have been mentioned, as should have been his gentle, amused presence, particularly in later years.
  • So, The Guardian, explain again how this works: an elderly actor who many people have a deep affection for because he was a greatly talented, huge entertaining part of their lives, dies, you think it appropriate to allow a hack with a personal axe to grind to write his official ‘obituary’ that does nothing but spit vitriol as though he was another Saville or Glitter? What an utter, utter joke this piece is.
  • Gavin Gaughan, read these comments, if you please! And then have a good hard think.
  • From reading these slapdash, thoroughly unkind words you’d think Wyngarde was a public hate figure on a par with Saville or Gary Glitter. What exactly did Wyngarde do to Gavin Vaughan one has to wonder. 

  • Spell check wants him to change his name to Vaughan it seems. After this, that might not be a bad idea.
  • The obits from the Graughan usually describe the negatives and the positives of a notable person’s life but in a respectful and reflective manner;this essay regarding Wyngarde however is unduly cynical and flippant.It is true his career was affected by his conviction in 1975,though surely it should have been pointed out this was still an era in which Britain was coming to terms with the decriminalisation of homosexuality eight years before;apparently,Wyngarde never publicly acknowledged he was homosexual,and in fact denied it.In any case,should one sneer at his personal/sexual orientation as is implied here?

Regarding his acting career,his performance as the suave,witty,slightly too old playboy Jason King was a real icon of its era,perhaps arriving a trifle too late as the swinging 60’s were giving way to the more pessimistic 70’s.My late father was often mistaken for Jason King in this period too,with his droopy moustache and long hair,taking it all as a badge of honour.’Department S’ and the eponymously named series itself were merely fluffy,far-fetched spy/mystery dramas in the ITC mould,but Wyngarde’s performance as King provided a nonchalant,adroit resonance that gave it an extra spark.His TV career did decline after the shows ended,but what is not mentioned is that he at least managed a revival on the stage in various performances and tours,and made a decent comeback on TV in the mid 80’s in shows like Doctor Who,Crown Court and The Two Ronnies.

  • Wyngarde’s acting persona may probably have become more unfashionable from the mid-70’s onwards,but his urbane,cultured presence and impeccably modulated diction were always welcome in any film or TV programme he graced.He deserves more respect than this obituary has provided, R.I.P. 
  • There is an amazing obituary to be written about the great Peter Wyngarde, highlighting the many triumphs of his long & eventful career. This isn’t it. On a personal note, in the 1990s, when I screened the Granada TV dramas South (1959) & On Trial: Sir Roger Casement (1960) at the National Film Theatre (with great success), Mr Wyngarde took the time & trouble to write to me, a beautifully hand-written three page letter, informing me about the two plays & an earlier BBC TV drama he had done, Patrick Hamilton’s Rope. 
  • This article seems to making fun of details that may may not be true. wtf! name me one actor/actress without some amendment to there name or persona in some way. the whole film tv and music industry is SMOKE AND MIRRORS!!!!! the guy was a genuine talent, the likes of which won’t be found in this modern day post x factor po-faced world where real characters aren’t allowed or tolerated anymore. 

  • Sad to see the vitriol in this article. Peter Wyngarde may not have been everyone’s glass of champagne, but he made his mark in acting, creating an icon in Jason King, and in Klytus had one of the most melodious, seductive voices ever. He was an original, a one of a kind and one that could never be copied no matter what. He will be sorely miss by those who admired him.
  • What a small minded, nasty, spiteful piece this is. Shame on the guardian for hosting it.
  • Nasty piece of work. The obituary I mean, not Peter Wyngarde.
  • Yes I must agree with the general tenor of comments that this is a nasty hatchet job. Plus there’s not many of us born these days whose birth dates are uncertain, further uncertainty about his paternity – sounds like a very interesting life worthy of further investigation – and undeserving of this kind of critique.

  • Disgraceful piece, utterly shameful
  • If this ‘so-called ‘obituarist’ had done his homework, he may have uncovered the following critique & understood what Peter Wyngarde was truly capable of as an actor. In 1993 Keith Howes described Peter Wyngarde in Broadcasting It as “an incomparable player of dashing, juicy rakehells, men on the edge, pagan creatures. A star in the grand style, with the ability to lengthen his vowels & pierce with his eyes, never afraid to add touches of the absurd & the surreal. Remembered now not for his extraordinary range & charisma during the 1950s, but for his campy thriller-writer sleuth Jason King in the early 1970s.”

  • “Night Of The Eagle” is not ‘a’ horror film.

It’s one of the best supernatural-themed films of all time, up there with “Night Of The Demon”.

I was only a wee lad at the time but I still remember Peter as Sydney Carton in the BBC Sunday tea-time serial “A Tale Of Two Cities”.

‘Gaughan-the-hatchet-man’ failed to mention Peter’s theatre work post-Jason King ( he was an impressive Dracula ) or that Peter was a guest at memorabilia/autograph fairs when he was in his mid-to-late 80’s. As his ITC series were made 40 years ago, that’s quite a testament to his continued popularity.

  • Well the comments section has provided The Guardian with a nice bit of market research on this appalling piece of work…… 9 out of 10 cats preferred someone else’s product.
  • I see we can report a post, but not a whole article.
    i’ll have to contact the ed somehow to get this appalling piece pulled, and a proper knowledgeable obit published in its place.
  • Gavin seems nice doesn’t he?

Gavin Gaughan has become a hate-figure around the world, but who is he?

The Gavin Gaughan – individual who wrote of the shameful piece as dicussed above, joined The Hellfire Club – The Official Peter Wyngarde Appreciation Society, in 2015 for the sole purpose, it transpired, of posting homophobic slogans on our Facebook page.

In spite of being warned numerous times (on one occasion by PETER himself), Gaughan chose to persist with his infantile campaign,[1] but by August 2016, everyone in the Group had tired of this tedious nonentity, and he was barred from the Society.

Apart from Trolling our website, this amateur hack seemingly amuses himself by waiting for celebrities to die and then writing so-called “obituaries” about them for The Guardian and The Independent – the only newspapers desperate enough to accommodate him.

Ironically, whilst he was carrying out his campaign against our Society, The Guardian was reporting on how new laws were being considered to force Internet ‘Trolls’ to face their victims in a court of law. A letter was sent to Katherine Viner – the editor of The Guardian advising her that, whilst her paper professed to deplore the actions of these bullies, one of her own was habitually posting offensive messages on our site – thereby bringing her paper into disrepute.    

At the time that Gaughan was banned from our ‘site, he boasted to his ‘friends’(!) in a post on his own Facebook page that, come the day PETER passed away, he would write and publish the most abhorrent ‘obituary’ his twisted mind could devise – thereby claiming his revenge[2]. This is exactly what he did in the article published in The Guardian on Friday, 18th January, 2018.

This ‘writer’s’ attack on PETER within days of his death was, by his own admission, malicious and premeditated.

Within hours of Gaughan’s hateful tirade[3] appearing in The Guardian’s online edition, the public had recognised it for what it was: a spiteful deception. Certainly, the ‘paper had received so many messages of complaint from their readership that the malicious piece was hastily replaced with a more respectful tribute – this time penned by a proficient journalist. In the end, all this hack had succeeded in doing was turning himself into a hate figure the world over.

The Editor of the Guardian had been made aware of this individual’s vicious and peculiar hatred of PETER[4] 17 months PRIOR to this obscenity being submitted to her newspaper, and yet this vicious little man was still afforded a platform to spit his bile.

The point I continue to make about Wikipedia – and particularly the authors of the PETER WYNGARDE ‘biography’ – is that in their eagerness to quote a quack like the above described, they are facilitating the spread of lies and inaccuracies via the media. For reasons known only to themselves, some people – including journalists and authors, rely on Wikipedia for their source material. Any invalid content is thereby restated in magazines, biographies and newspapers until it, inevitably, becomes ‘fact’ to the public.

A formal letter of complaint was sent via PETER’s Management Company to the Obituaries Editor, Richard White. Here with his reply:

“The circumstances that you detail in your email certainly sound disturbing, and I’m sorry for your distress. Up to the appearance of the piece, we had found Gaughan to be a dependable, occasional contributor. However, we immediately appreciated the need to present a better picture (of PETER), so I asked Tony Hadoke to provide a replacement.

Gaughan isn’t among the writers who we’d now think of turning to. We would much rather have published a piece that no-one would consider unfair. We are not planning to ask Gaughan for any further pieces, and I cannot foresee any situation in which he would write for us again”

For the record: PETER WYNGARDE NEVER, EVER CLAIMED BENEFITS! Such a suggestion is merely the collusion of a venomous and maladjusted mind, and Wikipedia would do well to remove this libellous section with immediate effect!        

Another section from this attack on PETER used by the Wiki-Committee is as follows: “One obituary described Wyngarde as playing the role “in the manner of a cat walking on tiptoe, with an air of self-satisfaction”…

I was of the understanding that Wikipedia was designed to provide cold, dry facts about a subject, not to recite the personal interpretations of a professional actor by an amateur stringer!

“…but that increasingly his acting became more mannered and he came to believe his own publicity. His director, Cyril Frankel, said: “It got to a point where he wouldn’t accept direction.”[19] Frankel also said: “He was a very fine actor, but unfortunately a difficult person.”[2]

[1] It was obvious that Gaughan’s attention-seeking was an attempt to get a rise from our membership but, woefully for him, he was almost universally ignored. The best of it was that he made no attempt to say anything new or intelligent on the subsequent occasions he chose to attack our website – opting instead to post the same wearisome message each time.

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Albert Einstein

[2] This statement was made in August of 2015. Screenshots were taken from the ‘author’s’ Facebook page at the time as evidence.

[3] Gaughan’s article had been cobbled together using unsubstantiated and fabricated pieces of muckraking garnered from the most sordid recesses of the Internet.

[4] Gaughan had stated back in August 2015, that he had never met PETER, consequently there could be no ‘personal’ score to settle. This makes his behaviour even more questionable!  

I can see that I have my work cut out with THIS lot…

Isn’t it strange that the guru’s who’ve been writing, monitoring and deleting all this misinformation, are content for us to believe that what we read on Wikipedia is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, whilst continuing to insist that anyone using this ‘site should “use caution”? This is in spite of our Website being compiled by PETER WYNGARDE’s partner of 30 years; based on personal experience and relying on original documents and first-hand accounts. BIZARE!

Whilst they regard us with suspicion, they refer to the likes of the national newspapers as more “reliable sources”. NONE of these ‘papers have access to the same material that we have, so what Wikipedia consider to be trustworthy, WE wouldn’t touch with a bargepole!

Anyway, let’s just have a look at the discussion currently taking place in Wiki’s back bedroom…


“In my view, the whole section on “Birth and family background”, and much of the Early life” section, is synthesis with elements of original research. There is clearly a mass of conflicting evidence about his birth, parentage and early years, and when alive he and his family vigorously contested many of the details in the article[1]. The article goes into a great amount of detail over the conflicting claims, but it is not up to any of us editors to identify the truth of the matter. We need to wait to see what emerges from the researches and obituaries published in reliable sources, and then summarise them – and, in the meantime, we should edit out much of the (in my view) synthesis and original research in the current article. Thoughts? Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:21, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

A lot of it is backed up by references, and it gives an interesting perspective, while at the same time acknowledging the uncertainties. It seems alright to me, but I’ll be interested in the majority view. MidnightBlue (Talk) 15:45, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Many of the references are to primary sources, and given the disputes with his family and/or friends we should be treating them with great caution. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

I’ve now had a go at removing much of the material derived from primary sources, large chunks of which appear to me to be original research about his various purported relatives. It’s all fascinating stuff, but not in a Wikipedia biographical article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:11, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Since you mention the website of the Peter Wyngarde Appreciation Society (PWAS), I note that we already have editors here busily deleting information quoted from that site on the grounds that “it’s just a fan site”[2] and “this isn’t a reliable source.”[3] Since the website claims to be Wyngarde’s official “mouthpiece”[4] and features interviews with the man himself I would have thought it would be OK to cite it (with caution) as per WP:ABOUTSELF, noting when it conflicts with other sources.[5] Perhaps we should try to get a consensus here about how to handle quoting PWAS.–Muzilon (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

None of the claims made by the PWAS can be independently verified [6]. Rather than taking an honest and accurate look at his life PWAS treats him with undue reverence[7], even strongly denying his now widely acknowledged homosexuality.[8] Jack1956 (talk) 03:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, maybe he was bisexual, I’m not really worried about that. On more objective matters, PWAS says he was married to Dorinda Stevens for seven years, whereas the WP article says three years. Which is correct?[9]Muzilon (talk) 03:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC) – married Michael Boultbee in Nairobi in 1957. No record of a marriage to a Wyngarde or Goldbert at any time suggesting they never married.[10] Jack1956 (talk) 08:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Dorothy “Dorinda” May Stevens – BIRTH 16 AUG 1932 • Southampton, Hampshire, England DEATH 10 APR 2012 • Southampton, Hampshire, England

If there was a marriage it may not have been in the UK, so may it not necessarily be in those records? Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:35, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

In an interview on PWAS, Wyngarde said he and Dorinda Stevens married in Sicily – hence no UK marriage record.–Muzilon (talk) 08:51, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Convenient there would be no record. [11] And of course, PW always told the truth about his early life. Jack1956 (talk) 09:13, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

No online record, at any rate. According to the Talk page archives they were listed as Mr & Mrs Wyngarde on the UK electoral roll in 1953.–Muzilon (talk) 22:03, 21

What seems to be widely acknowledged now is that he was bisexual, rather than homosexual [12]. It’s certainly true that PWAS treats him with some reverence, and where their statements conflict with other published information that site should be treated with great caution[13]. But it should not be completely dismissed as unreliable – it seems well-informed on many matters and may contain information that is unchallenged elsewhere. Although some of the obituaries in usually reliable sources may have derived some of their information both from here and PWAS, they should provide the basis of the article here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:33, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Birth and family background

This section is currently tagged with WP:UNDUE. But I think it’s a reasonable size What do others think? This is the only issue now preventing posting the death of Wyngarde at RD on the main page. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

I’ve given it another trim. The article as a whole is starting to look more balanced, but some more work might be beneficial. Bring me the bore worms…. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:26, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Does anyone know why the newspaper i is quoting the specific birthdate of 27 August 1927? Jack1956 (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I would have thought that depends on the newspaper. Perhaps for the reasons given in “Note 1”? in the article? Perhaps because they have access to the birth records for Marseille? It’s only really the year that’s been in dispute. All of the initial BBC radio news reports I heard described him as “aged 90”, so you would assume they did some homework. Newspapers typically don’t disclose their sources, and indeed may deliberately choose not to. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:45, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

My print copy of the i says 28 August 1927….  ?? Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:24, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

My mistake on a cursory read – 28 August it is. Jack1956 (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

His passport says he was born on 28 August 1937, not 1927. [1] (talk) 05:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

We have no way of verifying the authenticity of that image[14]. (Are you even allowed to wear a baseball cap in a British passport photo?[15]0 —Muzilon (talk) 08:38, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

How very odd. I searched here, but failed to find anything at all. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

PS: The first notice of his death seems to have been given by his agent, who presumably knew that PW was born in 1927 rather than 1933 regardless of what he had previously claimed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I just did a further small edit of the details of the wartime correspondence about the Goldbert children, which I viewed at the National Archives before adding it here recently. It does not mention Cyril or any of the children by the first names, but as I have added in my note on the edit, the family name, ages and genders of the children everything else correspond exactly with Cyril, Adolphe and Marion. Theheartof (talk) 11:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Your edit summary says: “The children are not named in the correspondence, but the names and ages correspond exactly with Cyril, Adolphe and Marion.” That looks a bit self-contradictory? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

“Names” = family name, I assume….? Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I was trying to keeping it short. There are no *given* names for the children in the correspondence, only the family name, the parent, and the ages and genders. I have edited again to remove my previous “Master Goldbert” Theheartof (talk) 13:09, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Theatre work in South Africa and Austria?

This unreliable source claims that, after his arrest, he did some stage work in South Africa and Austria. Do we have a better source for this claim? If so, it could be added to the article[16]. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

His Times obit also makes a passing comment that he “worked as a Shakespearean actor in South Africa [and] appeared on stage in Vienna,” without giving any further details.–Muzilon (talk) 10:26, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I’ve added a brief sentence. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:48, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Roger Langley’s 2012 biography of Wyngarde (self-published, so I don’t know if that counts as a “reliable source” as far as Wikipedia is concerned) contradicts The Times slightly by saying Wyngarde appeared as a Shakespearean actor in *Austria* (not South Africa) in 1975-76; and that his tour of South Africa was actually in a 1981 production of Ira Levin’s Deathtrap. —Muzilon (talk) 11:15, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

The article now says simply: “In the late 1970s he performed in the theatre in South Africa and Austria.” So, we could add a reference to early 1980s if necessary. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:26, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Birth year in lead and infobox (again)

I know this is going over old territory but I’m not sure we should be stating his birthdate as 23 August 1927 quite as confidently as we are. When the following section starts with “… date and place of birth, his birth name, and his parents’ nationalities and occupations are all disputed.” it doesn’t seem to sit that the lead and infobox birthdates don’t carry a {{disputed}} tag. I appreciate that The Guardian and i both seem quite definite but The Times [2] is more circumspect and goes no further than “probably born on 23 August 1928” (yes 1928). I doubt the truth will ever emerge so I think the lead ought to reflect the uncertainty more than it does (and this is before I get lambasted on Facebook again as the author of this article by the person who runs the PWAS). Nthep (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I’ve no objection to adding more {{disputed-inline}} tags, and then removing them as and when they are resolved. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:12, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Actually, the Guardian obit is not very definite: it states “c. 1926 or 1927.” And the last I heard, the PWAS manager was banned from Wikipedia for issuing legal threats[17] about this article.–Muzilon (talk) 09:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Re the truth of his DOB never emerging, will the GRO death record and details held Golders Green Cemetery be reputable sources? Theheartof (talk) 12:20, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I don’t think the date of his death is in dispute in any way? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:22, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

The GRO death certificate is only reliable for date of death, not date of birth as it is only created on the information given by the person making the report[18] and is only what they believe to be correct and therefore maybe inaccurate to a greater or lesser extent. Nthep (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Out of curiosity I contacted Singapore’s vital records department to determine whether there is a record of a Cyril Goldbert being born there around 1927. They were not very helpful, but it seems they won’t release any information about Singapore birth records to an unrelated third party unless the person in question was born at least 100 years ago. —Muzilon (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

As pointed out by an anonymous IP editor above, PWAS has suddenly produced what purports to be a scan of Wyngarde’s passport showing an implausible birthdate of 28 August 1937 (place of birth: “Marseille”.) His biography page has also been updated to state that he had three “step-siblings”: Henry, Simone and Charles. This is the first time a “Charles” has been mentioned, as far as I know [18].–Muzilon (talk) 09:22, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

The basic point needs to be reiterated – that what Wyngarde claimed is not necessarily what was true. Some of the points of detail mentioned in the PWAS article may well be true, but others may not be. It is certainly not the case that he was born in both 1937 and 1933, as they (currently) claim. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:40, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

1937! That is hilarious[19). Theheartof (talk) 13:49, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


[1] Mr WYNGARDE and his family had/have every right to “vigorously contest” the inaccurate information published online by Wikipedia.

[2] We are NOT “Just a fansite”. This label has been discussed previously on this ‘site before. We are an Official – i.e. sanctioned – information ‘site. What is Wikipedia if not just a free space anyone and everyone one can pen an editorial, regardless of whether they’re conversant enough to do so?

It’s not the place of Wikipedia’s contributor(s) or moderators to brand other websites, or to demean them in an attempt to enhance their own importance. The last place any self-respecting author or journalist would go to find source material is Wikipedia, as it’s become a bi-word for unreliability worldwide. 

[3] The Official Peter Wyngarde Appreciation Society is a group for fans of Peter Wyngarde. The Hellfire Hall Blog is a resource for fans, authors, journalists and anyone else who wishes to learn more about the man and his career.

All the information posted on these ‘sites by the Administrator has come from first-hand sources, including Mr WYNGARDE.

[4] We do not, nor have we ever “claimed” to be PETER WYNGARDE’s mouthpiece”. The Hellfire Hall Blog was set up to act as an antithesis to the misinformation peddled by the media and online encyclopaedias, including Wikipedia.

[5] The reason that the information posted by the Administrator of the Official Peter Wyngarde Appreciation Society Facebook page/The Hellfire Hall Blog sometimes conflicts with other sources is because those other sources are incorrect!

[6] ALL of the so-called “claims” made on our Facebook page and Blog can be verified by the original documentation we rely upon. These papers, which include contracts, passports, royalty receipts, theatre programmes, scripts, filming schedules, personal correspondence (between Mr WYNGARDE and actors, directors, producers et al), personal diaries (1952-2017), overseas visas… etc., are stored in the Peter Wyngarde Archive, which is in the keeping of Mr WYNGARDE’s long-time partner, Tina Wyngarde-Hopkins.

The fact that the Wikipedia contributor(s) have no access to this documentation does not diminish the accuracy of the information that appears on our Facebook page or the Blog. On the contrary, it serves to highlight the poor quality of the material that is accessible to them – i.e. their reliance on newspaper and magazine articles, et al.

[7] “…PWAS treats him with undue reverence”. The Facebook group is an Appreciation Society, for God’s sake – the clue is in the title! What would you expect from such an organisation – for the man to be pilloried? What IS “undue” is the faith in which supposed ‘professional journalists’ put in Wikipedia.

[8] Why shouldn’t we dispute the “homosexual” tag ASSUMED by the media? Did the Wikipedia contributors/editors expect us to nod wildly in agreement with the rest of the knuckledraggers, whilst being fully aware that it wasn’t true? Would that have been more acceptable to them?

This hypothetical homosexuality is only “widely acknowledged” because so many members of the populace are content to be TOLD what to believe by the tabloids (or, indeed, by online encyclopaedias who continue to cite these self-same publications as “reliable sources”)

Jack1956’s comment is merely confusing opinion with fact.

[9] This one is simples!

PETER WYNGARDE was the man who married Dorinda Stevens, not some stranger hiding behind a Username. As far as he and those closest to him are aware, no one connected to Wikipedia was there on the day that the marriage took place, nor was anyone from Wikipedia there when the union ended. Therefore, Mr WYNGARDE had far more knowledge regarding the duration of the marriage than those who now query it!

The original Marriage Certificate and Divorce Papers are kept in the PETER WYNGARDE Archive.

[10] As above.

[11] The word ‘Convenient’ suggests that some type of subterfuge is afoot. Mr. and Mrs. WYNGARDE did not purposefully leave a paper trail for the, a-herm, convenience of Wikipedia and its contributors. I can just imagine the conversation back then:

PETER, darling,” Dorinda sighed lovingly. “It’s so beautiful here in Taormina. Why don’t we go to that little chapel on the hill and get married?”

“A romantic idea, my love”, PETER lamented. “But what if, sometime in the future – an interfering busybody perhaps – decides to write a ‘biography’ about me, and when he’s not able to find the relevant paperwork in the UK relating to our marriage, he pours scorn on our union?”  

                Yeah, right!

[12] “…widely acknowledged’… AGAIN! A couple of weeks ago, Wikipedia were adamant that PETER was ‘homosexual’. Now they’ve downgraded him to ‘bisexual’. Why don’t they just admit that they were not only barking up the wrong tree, but were in the entirely wrong forest?!

[13] There’s a COLOSSAL difference between Wikipedia’s reliance on press articles/ Internet gossip, and the first-hand information used by our Website. If the contributor(s) and editors of the P.W. ‘biography’ choose to treat us with “…great caution”, that’s their prerogative. It wouldn’t be the first time that they’ve dismissed the facts in favour of publishing something fallacious, so why break the habit of a lifetime?!

[14] Muzilon is absolutely correct – the contributor(s) and editors at Wikipedia don’t have any way of verifying the authenticity of the passport (see above), because there is only one of it in existence, and we have in the safe keeping of the PETER WYNGARDE Archive. That’s Wikipedia’s loss and our gain!

[15] Quite clearly, it is legal to wear a baseball cap in a British passport photo. See Muzilon, you learn something new on this Website every day!

(Muzilon – Might I suggest, if you still suspect that the image on this ‘site has been faked, that you contact your local Passport Office to enquire about the baseball cap thing. When they inform you that it’s perfectly acceptable to wear headgear as long as it doesn’t cover any part of your face, you can leave a little note of apology for me at the bottom of this page. I shall look forward to reading it).

[16] There is no better source of information concerning the theatrical productions in which PETER starred than on the Hellfire Hall Blog! There’s a comprehensive list of ALL his stage work, plus reviews and photographs of the plays performed in South Africa and Austria.

If the Wikipedia contributor(s) and editors decide that this information is too “unreliable”, then they might try contacting the theatre’s where the productions were staged. I’m sure that the managers of these venues will be happy to furnish them with exactly the same information that can be found here on this ‘site. 

[17] Mr WYNGARDE’s death was registered by his partner and next-of-kin, Ms Tina Wyngarde-Hopkins.

[18] …but not as hilarious, I dare say, as the error-strewn pages of a certain online encyclopaedia, hey, Theheartof!?! 


By Tina Wyngarde-Hopkins

I find it absolutely deplorable that, within days of his passing, the individuals referred to above were actually debating whether or not to contact Golders Green Crematorium in an effort to garner information about PETER. Clearly, the whole rotten lot of them are devoid of any morals or decency.

Whilst those of us who grieved and despaired at our loss, these sorry excuses for human beings were thinking only of acquiring yet another morsel of information for their wretched page. “Lambasted on Facebook”? That’s the very LEAST they deserve! The lot of them should hang their heads in shame!

Whilst I’ve seen the best of people during the last few weeks, I’ve also run into the very worst of them. Come the day these people suffer the loss of their Soulmate; or a parent, grandparent, sister, brother, child or best friend, I hope they spare a thought for my beloved PETER and I, and realise how it might feel if they were to learn that a complete stranger was planning to call the cemetery of choice in an effort to obtain private information relating to their loved one.

Thankfully, those of us who have experience of such pond life had anticipated this, and requested that all services assigned with PETER care use the utmost discretion should they be contacted by the kind of callous and cold-hearted people discussed here.

Thank God that PETER passed without fully realising how low some parties will stoop to procure what they want.


There’s no better example of the symbiotic reliance of the press and Wikipedia on each other than the misreporting of PETER’s age (and place of birth) following his PASSPORT2passing. And so an image was posted on this page showing PETER’s last passport.

As might be expected, the latest allegation from the Wikipedia committee is that said passport had been “faked”. That’s quite an accusation to make!

But herein lies the problem: whenever we produce a genuine piece of documentation that just so happens to challenge the crumbs of information they’ve gathered, their primary instinct is to suggest some sort of skullduggery on our part. It just goes to prove how self-important they’ve become.

Strange as it might sound, we have better things to do with our time than sit around,

falsifying paperwork in an attempt to wrong-foot these meddlers!

We’ve therefore replaced that image with another from an earlier passport, which VISA
displays exactly the same details as the first. I dare say that the judge and jury in Wikiland will poo-poo this in the same way as they did the first….!

An American visa from 1983. Will the Wiki-Committee claim that this has also been faked…?

Click here for: ‘When is Enough, Enough’? The unwarranted intrusion into PETER’s privacy

© The Hellfire Club: The OFFICIAL PETER WYNGARDE Appreciation Society:



One thought on “WIKI-WATCH

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.