Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Espionage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


People icon.svg Joint WikiProject collaboration.

Collaboration pages

Summaries of recent updates[edit]

  1. Few hours ago, the project page was restored to its previous version. —usernamekiran(talk)
    1. After a few hours from now (around 8-9 hours from now), I will selectively add some content from the version that has been undone. —usernamekiran(talk) 02:35, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


Old members list

Task Find who out of this list is still active, get new people to join. Dysklyver 21:38, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I am still active and about, but I have never been involved here much. I'll watchlist the page now :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:33, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't think I'm really active anymore. 0x0077BE (talk · contrib) 02:05, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Reviving the project, and "merging"/scope[edit]

A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver's contributions are very much refreshing, and appriciated. I think, before working on the project pages, we should discuss and decide what is to be merged here, and what is not to. We also need to discuss about the projects that are currently being handled as "task force" of other projects. Once the scope of this project is clear, we can then design the pages appropriately. Pinging Guy Macon, Indy beetle, Adamdaley, and JarrahTree. —usernamekiran(talk) (pings not coming in, not going out) 12:52, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Agree - what has happened over the years has been inertness and silence - the fact something is happening - is great.
I see the precedent of themes that evolved around maritime projects over time - things chopped and changed a little in the last 10 years.
It would be very good to see where maybe some previous projects need to be redirects and no content from them carried over.. just a suggestion JarrahTree

I just commented above without seeing these comments o_0
I think it would make sense to keep the project pages like the to do list separate, at least to an extent since there is no limit to how many pages we use. there is no technical issue with having 2 or 3 pages each dedicated to a specific part of the project. However the joint discussion/collaboration area is going to be more active through being central to several similar projects, so that we ought to keep. Similarly WP:SPY should be our joint landing page, since it is the only memorable shortcut we have.

I see three main project areas at the moment. Espionage/Milhist intel/Mass surveillance. But we could review this. Dysklyver 13:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Thats ok, I kept the old projects in case someone preferred them, they are at:
Dysklyver 15:21, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Chris. The changes made by A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver are very confusing. And I also tried to point out they are not result of any discussions. Dysklyver, kindly do not make further changes. I am willing to make changes, but with proper discussions, and systematic planning. If it is not done like that, we will end up editing pages, and making new things on a every day basis. As I've told you earlier, I'm sorry but I will undo most of the changes to this project after ~30 hours from now. —usernamekiran(talk) (pings not coming in, not going out) 06:44, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Part of the confusion is that I have created alot of new pages when previously there were only two. Dysklyver 08:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


App-icon-flat.svg Looking glass Hexagonal Icon.svg     Mass surveillance
Hexagon Radio Icon.svg     Intelligence
Orange Hexagon Ascii Eyes.svg     Espionage
  • I like this box!  ;) --Aboudaqn (talk) 19:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


Hi, I made various changes to various parts of the project in various ways. In short it was disorganized.
This is to actually discuss what to do. Basically there are 3 main issues Scope/Merge, and Layout.
Any comments would be appreciated.

The current scope of all 'spy stuff' very technical term is divided into three projects, as shown in my ^ headers. Some aspects are probably also covered to a lesser extent elsewhere - any known projects not already identified should be mention here.

Options re scope/merge[edit]

  1. Merge everything into MilHist as a task-force
  2. Merge everything into Espionage as a WikiProject
    1. I recommend retention of "Espionage" as its own WikiProject --Aboudaqn (talk) 19:13, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
    2. I also recommend revising the contents of "Infobox spy" but don't know how to go about that -- recommendations and instructions welcome --Aboudaqn (talk) 19:15, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  3. Keep all three sections separate with a joint collaboration page
  4. Do nothing

Options re layout[edit]

  1. Do nothing (single page)
  2. Tabbed layout (approx 7 subpages, each with specific content)
  3. Interactive layout (approx 30+ subpages, this allows processes and tutorials to be included)
  4. A mixture (lots of pages but not uniform)
|Dysklyver 14:40, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I think option 3 for a joint collaboration page is our best option. It causes the least confusion and provides a nice separate setting for discussions, and I think its easier to obtain consensus for than option 2. Personally I think option 1 (merge into MilHist) is out of the question, as there's plenty of intelligence/espionage/surveillance material out there that has little to no military element. Once a scope option is decided upon I think we can move to the layout discussions. -Indy beetle (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Here are my thoughts:
    1. At the given moment, "joint collaboration page" wouldnt be great idea. But redirecting (maybe soft) other talkpages to this talkpage can be a good idea.
    2. Creating a lot of sub-pages will be confusing for other editors, difficult for us to maintain, and inconvenient in general for everybody. I think squeezing all the content in fewer pages would be best. We can split the pages when necessary.
    3. I think, instead of focusing on layout, we should try to initiate discussion for merging military history's task force in espionage. We should do the rest of the stuff after that. —usernamekiran(talk) 20:38, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Honestly, in my opinion I find "WikiProject Espionage" as a very constructive WikiProject. Unfortunately, since the creation of the "WikiProject Espionage" there has been very few "active" members. I also find it interesting because if people continue being "spies" or charged of "espionage" then, this WikiProject should stand by itself and make it known that a combination of "Military History Intelligence" and "Espionage" can be both. Not just one. Hence the great improvement to Rudolf Abel (by myself) a few years ago. I've also been intending to expand his counterpart Reino Häyhänen which is on my subpage here. Because Rudolf Abel was, indeed both Military and a spy convicted of "espionage". Adamdaley (talk) 03:33, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Please come and help...[edit]

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:IP camera#Requested move 25 November 2017, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks,  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  02:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)