Template talk:Black project

Black project is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of espionage, intelligence, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.EspionageWikipedia:WikiProject EspionageTemplate:WikiProject EspionageEspionage articles

Military history: Technology

This template is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force

Fugly

This thing is hideous. Can it be cleaned up? —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 20:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation

Information that is "speculative in nature" does not belong in Wikipedia. Everything has to be verifiably cited to reliable sources. Tom Harrison ^Talk 13:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you can cite something doesn't mean it has any basis in fact. This is particularly true with magazines like Aviation Week that regularly publish rumors about Aviation Black Projects, and often ends up being wrong. The cite sources themselves are highly speculative in nature, otherwise they wouldn't be black projects. PPGMD 13:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is the template not seem to permit a lower standard of citation or verifiability. Whether the subject is a black project or North American shellfish, the same standards apply. Tom Harrison ^Talk 17:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And it is in difference to this that the template includes the line "Maintain this article to conform with Wikipedia's standards of verifiability and/or future events." This template is not licsence to add bull to the site, the line is merely intended to inform interested parties that the information presented in a given article may not be 100% true because its based on estimates, educated guesses, aproximations, and so forth. In most cases time will ineviatably win the battle of speculative information because said projects will be revealed to the public. At that time the black project template can be removed and the information presented cn be tightened to reflect the incoming information. TomStar81 18:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; as long as they are the educated guesses of cited reliable sources, that should be fine. Tom Harrison ^Talk 18:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Government

Which goverment? Does this refer to all governments or just the federal government in the USA? If the latter, shouldn't that be made clear in the template? Markb 12:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing on that template that makes it US only. But most of the projects tagged with it are US only. PPGMD 21:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite - hence the reference to the government' is confusing. It should either be 'governments' or list the relevant ones. Markb 11:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most black projects only involve one government at a time, I think the wording is fine. PPGMD 15:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]