Jump to content

Talk:Counterintelligence Corps

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

List of agents

[edit]

Both this page and United States Army Counterintelligence have lists of notable agents. While the lists overlap, they disagree. User:Cmacauley and I have agreed that the lists should be merged. Should the combined list be in this article, United States Army Counterintelligence, or a new "List of notable Army counterintelligence agents (United States)?" Comments are requested about the destination and the name of the list. Thanks.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 20:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One cannot move CIC agents to a list of Military Intelligence Corps personnel - they were in a different corps. So there may need to be two different lists if the notable agents were spread across both time periods.. Buckshot06 (talk) 06:55, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point, but some cleasnup is required. For example, Ib Melchior, who served in WW II, appears on both lists. Are they not all counterintelligence agents?--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 14:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is it not possible simply to go through both lists carefully and move each entry to the right list, possibly deleting it off the other one? Buckshot06 (talk) 19:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When Counterintelligence, when Counter Intelligence?

[edit]

Anyone know which one uses when? There seems to be confusion. 95.145.170.95 (talk) 06:43, 19 July 2020 (UTC)95.145.170.95 (talk) 06:44, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The style of the article title indeed does not match the style within the article text ("Counter Intelligence Corps"), which is especially understandable because the style is also inconsistent in documentation thereof.[1][a]
I feel fairly confident that it makes sense to move the page to "Counter Intelligence Corps," but I'm happy to hear any objections! I'm also posting in the WikiProject Military history discussion to ask about prepending "Army" to the article title, despite this having been discussed previously, because I see other corps article titles using it: United States Army Signal Corps, United States Army Corps of Engineers, United States Army Acquisition Corps, etc.

Notes

  1. ^ The table of contents (p. vii) repeatedly styles the name "Counterintelligence Corps" for chapter headings while the chapter headings (pp. 23, 81, etc.) are styled "Counter Intelligence Corps".[2]

References

  1. ^
    • Comparing search results in the National Archives:
    • 40 results for "Counter Intelligence Corps".
    • 59 results for "Counter Intelligence Corps".
  2. ^ Gilbert, James L.; Finnegan, John P.; Bray, Ann (2005-12-15). In the Shadow of the Sphinx (PDF). Fort Belvoir, Va: Department of the Army. pp. vii, 23, 81. ISBN 978-0-16-075018-2.

spida-tarbell ❀ (talk) (contribs) 16:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Counterintelligence" is a function. "Counter Intelligence Corps" was an organization. I joined the Army in 1963, not long after the Counter Intelligence Corps had been redesignated/converted to/replaced by the (pick your term) the Intelligence Corps. Units that had formerly been CIC groups or detachments (the designations had to do with authorized strength and groups were larger than detachments) became Intelligence Corps (INTC) groups. My first assignment after schooling was to the 112th INTC Group headquartered at Fort Sam Houston, Texas. The 112th's area of operations was the old 4th Army area in the Continental United States (CONUS) (CONUS was "the lower forty-eight"). To answer the question, the page should be "Counterintelligence Corps". Other pages on the subject should probably be rolled into this one, but that's a discussion for another day.--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 16:42, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the article title should match the name of the group it is about. We shouldn’t be retroactively making a new name for the group.
    I would change it but I’m not sure how? Mspandana (talk) 06:08, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]