Jump to content

Talk:Katharine Gun

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

Untitled

[edit]

Has anyone read the memoir of KAtharine Gun? I think it's called the spy who tried to stop a war and it was published in 2008 maybe? Mang (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't heard of it - thanks for the tip-off. I see there are some snippets of reviews over here. --Andy Fugard (talk) 16:33, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Katharine Gun. 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) 03:26, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No such thing as significant or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyhendc (talk • contribs) 03:15, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Katharine Gun. 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) 01:12, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could cite 2003 primary sources

[edit]

https://www.google.co.uk/search?as_q=Frank+Koza&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=www.theguardian.com&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=

Many of the primary sources from 2003 are still online. In the leak section, they could be cited, as well as or instead of secondary sources. ArthurDent006.5 (talk) 10:25, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for example this document could be linked: http://www.iraqinquiry.org.uk/media/46499/Goldsmith-note-to-PM-30July2002.pdf - Mark Graham

Attorney General's initial advice

[edit]

The end credits of the film say that Goldsmith's advice to Cabinet (that war would indeed be illegal without a second resolution) emerged in 2012 (I think!) but this article says that it is unknown. Which is true? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.97.11.54 (talk) 23:36, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References to “illegality” of US plans as described in leaked NSA email

[edit]

I made a few small edits, removing descriptions of the US operation as described in the NSA email as “illegal activity” since none of the cited sources claimed that. While one Guardian article (and not the one directly cited) said the US plan “might” have violated the Vienna agreement, there was no official complaint, no prosecution and no actual evidence made public that tied actual US activity at the time of Gun’s leak to a violation of any specific law. It is not clear what the US actually did — Mexico and Chile later claimed the US had information they could have only gotten by spying, but no actual evidence was forthcoming. More broadly, to describe every instance of alleged plan for espionage as “illegal activity” would require wholesale rewriting of much of Wikipedia. The focus of the articles is on allegations of “dirty tricks” — surely a better term — and again, it would need to be made clear this was merely alleged, and after the fact. Elle Kpyros (talk) 03:57, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! If an attempt to blackmail members of the UN Security Council into supporting a fraudulent military invasion is merely a "dirty trick", that would call for the considerable scaling-down of all lesser offenses. Thanks for drawing our attention to this! – AndyFielding (talk) 10:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What citation technique did you use? google.com/books pg=PA30 displays the page...

[edit]

User:John_Maynard_Friedman:

  • "Chatter: Uncovering the Echelon Surveillance Network and the Secret World of ... - Patrick Radden Keefe - Google Books". Books.google.com. Retrieved 2020-03-22.
  • Patrick Radden Keefe (2006). Chatter : uncovering the echelon surveillance network and the secret world of global eavesdropping. Random House. ISBN 9780812968279. OCLC 74968795. Retrieved 2020-03-22.
  • https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/74968795 redirects to:
@T3g5JZ50GLq:, feel free to revert. The big problem with using google books as a reference is that it is too focused on selling (or selling booksellers), whereas Worldcat (a) tells you where you can borrow the book and (b) if you want to buy, gives you enough information to let you make your own choice about where to buy it. But, as you point out, it doesn't actually show you a relevant page. Most citations aren't concerned with that, their purpose is only to demonstrate that a citation exists and if you choose to follow it up, here is the page you need.
BUT there is a further option that I didn't use but if you happen to like template:cite book but don't like that you can't see the actual page, the template has a 'quote=' option that you could use to quote a sentence or two which is permitted under fair dealing. Revert or extend, your choice. Thanks for stopping by to ask questions first and shoot afterwards. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@John Maynard Friedman: which software did you use to fill in the template:cite book ?
also, |quote= is good idea.T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 00:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@T3g5JZ50GLq:, the hard way, hand-coded! Which brings me to the other nice thing about WorldCat: at the bottom of the page for a book, you get full details of publisher, location, date, ISBNs, editions, the full monty. Which Google Books doesn't give you. (When I am researching, I use google books to give me a clue and then WorldCat for the details. The downside of WorldCat, though, is that if you get multiple possible responses it is really not helpful to narrow the choices. Or at least not that I could find, though it has tick boxes that suggest that I need to try harder. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 00:42, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@John Maynard Friedman:, WorldCat can be sloppy, like the people that libraries use to contribute are the lowest paid and educated. Looking for books: Amazon and title-publisher searches can work.
  • filling references, these could be an easier way:
  • do you know lua, javascript, html5, or css ?
T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 01:27, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • every edition and format and ISBN probably has at least one WorldCat/OCLC entry.
  • but not every book is in WorldCat/OCLC
T3g5JZ50GLq (talk) 01:35, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I use reffill regularly, but it is not obviously relevant here? There is a guidance at wp:GBOOKS that I've been meaning to read. It has a ref to an automated tool. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 09:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed

[edit]

This contradiction in the "Personal Life" section appears to have been caused by a failure to update it:

As of 2020, Gun lives in Turkey and Britain. After the charges against her were dropped in 2004, she found it difficult to find a new job. As of 2019 she has lived in Turkey with her husband and daughter for several years.

– AndyFielding (talk) 10:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Date of marriage?

[edit]

To avoid the verbal gymnastics, it would be helpful to know when she changed her name to Gun? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Katharine_Gun&oldid=1240769012"