Talk:Special Operations Executive

The list of agents on this page is of such a length that I feel it would benefit from being divided into the various SOE Sections. At present I don't have sufficient data to do this myself, but whoever has added all of the names which do not yet have their own pages may well have it. Petermanchester 11:44, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I am currently undertaking the addition to this page of as many books and films as I can recall and/or discover on the subject of SOE operations, as well as agent biographies that I am able to add. Petermanchester 22:05, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

---

As of this writing, the link titled "Special Operations Executive Records Release 8th Feb 2002" in category "external links" seems broken.
The current URL

http://www.pro.gov.uk/releases/feb2002-SOE/list.htm 

says 404.
Hope this helps maintain this impressive article.
Alain Becker (FR) 03:42, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yup, it's broken, and it doesn't look like it's going to come back. The whole site seems to have moved to http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk, and lists of releases before 2003 have been cleansed. Their online catalogue (PROCAT) is dead, so I can't search for the missing info. As a consolation prize, I added a link to the nearest thing I could find, a list of 2003 document releases relating to SOE. --Heron 10:52, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

They do seem to have been making changes. However, there's a search page active, for the moment, at ,http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp CVA 19:07, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

I think Roger Courtney has a role here, with the SBS, but can't figure out how. Guttlekraw 06:49, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've added details of two books by MFD Foot and a description of Mackenzie's book. As a personal opinion I'm not sure why we have books and films on a joint list. I feel films generally are very inaccurate and tend to "glamorise" the subject. I'd like to suggest we have separate "books" and "films" lists. There are now so many books (of varying quality) some of the very reliable ones are in danger of being "lost" in a ever lengthening list. What do contributors think of the idea of dividing the bibliography into three sections : official publications/academic histories ; autobiographies of those who actually took part ; biographies / popular books written by authors without personal experience ? Cefas 26 Mar 06

Have not received any comments so have amended article on lines suggested above. Cefas~~ 14 April 06

---

FANY "The SOE included a number of women (who were often recruited from the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry); its F Section (France) alone placed 39 female agents in to the field, of whom 13 did not return. " I always understood that female SOE agents were placed in FANY after recruitment because female members of the British Armed Forces were not allowed to carry arms. FANY had a more relaxed attitude to rules and regulations. It was thought that if capture they might get some protection from being members of a uniformed force. Of course it did not help. FANY did supply personnel to staff SOE UK radio stations but that was probably because they were considered very trustworthy because of their backgrounds. --jmb 23:38, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

---

France

The phrase "The F Section, under British control, recruited agents who were not prepared to accept the leadership of General De Gaulle" could be better expressed. Some people not liking De Gaulle wasn't the only reason for the two sections. If anything I thought F section came first & RF was started because De Gaulle didn't want to work under British control. -- SteveCrook 09:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

==ALBANIA

There seems to be a contradiction in this paragraph. It starts off with: few covert operations A little further it reads: more than a thousand were carried out

This should be clarified.