Talk:Intelligence collection management

Military history: Intelligence Start‑class

This article 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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Intelligence task force

Espionage Low‑importance

	Intelligence collection management 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

CCIRM and NATO

If anyone would like to take this on, I'd be grateful. Indeed, is there any central repository of NATO unclassified documentation? I seem to find it in random places.

It isn't clear to me how CCIRM, for example, differs from the intelligence cycle, although I suspect it has something to do with the way requests are entered. Are operations and warning centers part of CCIRM?

Non-NATO alliances

I'm thinking especially of ASEAN, knowing that UKUSA isn't going to be available. Any other sources?

Please look at WEU material in SIGINT platforms and see if that belongs elsewhere, or perhaps the part there is OK, but there needs to be more general material, higher in the hierarchy, about WEU, EU, etc. Howard C. Berkowitz (talk) 16:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Research in Collection Guidance

It seems this section is focused on one study with regarding to a theoretical approach to "ontologies" in collection requirements which is both unfielded and untested. I would highly recommend this section be removed as it is not directly related to the topic and provides no useful information regarding collection requirements processes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bear bs (talk • contribs) 02:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Intelligence collection management. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070623004953/http://www.arrc.nato.int/journal/april03/inteligence.htm to http://www.arrc.nato.int/journal/april03/inteligence.htm

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) 16:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]