Jump to content

Talk:Clandestine HUMINT operational techniques

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger Proposal

[edit]

I would like to merge Covert cell and Sleeper cell into this article, which covers the subject in more detail, with the exception of the history in covert cell. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 14:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I feel that this article is probably already on the long side — as such, I think adding more detail to it is perhaps not the way to go. (Its only a guideline, but Wikipedia:Article length suggests that the article, at over 60 KB, "probably should be divided" as it is). I would suggest that this page serve as a central overview (which was previously lacking), but that smaller articles be maintained on subsets of the topic to contain detail — otherwise, the main article becomes longer than the guidelines recommend. Just my thoughts. -- Vardion (talk) 20:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Any suggestions on where to split? (edited change, as I already took cell structure to another article)Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 21:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. The six basic sections you've got seem to make sense, and simply dividing the article in two would destroy the coherence of the topic. Perhaps each of the current six sections could have a detailed article of its own, each one combining information from the current article and from the various articles you proposed for merger. Then, this article would summarise all six, referring to the specific sub-articles for a more detailed overview. That way, the main article isn't so long and is more easily readable for those who just want a quick glimpse, but the various subtopics are still united in a common framework that can be accessed from the summary. This is just my opinion, though. -- Vardion (talk) 21:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I think its fine the way it is. I enjoyed reading it in its current form, Dividing up seems like nothing but an attempt to make it more complicated to get all the relevant info. make the article longer and more detailed along with a more informative introduction paragraph if anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.138.96.243 (talk) 11:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Staff and Stations section can be a separate article, or subheading in section 2 or 3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.138.229.71 (talk) 20:52, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In section Support Services, the Useful Idiots link redirects to the republican party page (link of of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiots, instead of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot). That needs to be fixed please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esmaralda (talk • contribs) 17:13, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Predominently Soviet examples

[edit]

I think the article relies too heavily on the past Soviet intelligence organisation and to lesser extent CIA. Is there a way to include examples and practices of other countries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.48.107.240 (talk) 16:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is weird

[edit]

I am a CIA Operative with Clandestine experience and spy work from missions overseas. I have been actively doing most of my lifetime's work over the past ten years. I have never heard of any of the material mentioned in this article and it all sounds like dubious misinformation. My reading of this article is that it will give comfort and morale to terrorist organizations that either 1) believe they are getting true insights into goofy formal organizational processes or 2) believe they are seeing some frail attempts at misinformation, which is the more likely case. I don't think many civilians will even believe the stuff here, or if they do, they should still be sentient enough to wonder why it is posted openly on the Internet in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The big problem with misinformation campaigns like this is that enthusiastic recruits really study all of this public stuff sincerely and deeply because they really are gung ho and they want to get a good start to a great career by learning everything in the public knowledge about the CIA before they join so that they can be considered a good recruit when they apply for duty. In reality, the public should know the most important characteristic of a recruit is the willingness to volunteer to serve the CIA - the training a field agent gets can provide all the rest. Recruits get disappointed and discouraged when they find out they worked hard to memorize publically released material which is bogus and misleading. It convinces them that the Company is full of liars, and that is not precisely the case, since falsehoods should never be indulged in wantonly in violation of strict ethical rules. I'll post my code names here in case anybody wants to discuss the ethical issues surrounding modern revised orthodox leaky espionage theory. "h" - Britain, "Leviathan" - France, "Mr. Taco" - China, "667" - Russia, "g" and "Zero" - International. I'm called "Montgomery," "Priest," and "16." These remarks were reviewed and approved by 'Frank' on 12 August 2010 from within D Department. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.97.159.47 (talk) 00:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, uhh...what? What kind of former SAD officer from the CIA would leave their "code names" on Wikipedia for all to see? And I highly doubt some "supervisor" named "Frank" would approve you to do it. You say this article is weird...but this is possibly the weirdest comment I've ever read on Wikipedia. jlcoving (talk) 05:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Clandestine HUMINT operational techniques. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:27, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Stephan Haller affair

[edit]

Here's your source. Go. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol3no3/html/v03i3a01p_0001.htm Kortoso (talk) 17:04, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clandestine HUMINT operational techniques. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:55, 25 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Clandestine HUMINT operational techniques. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clandestine_HUMINT_operational_techniques&oldid=1200940135"