Talk:Secretariat of Intelligence

Move?

This page should be moved to an English title (as per WP:UE). Should we use Intelligence Secretariat (Argentina) or something like that? —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 23:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

• Why not just create a redirect? This page is a work of art!. 10.000 lines of BASIC --San Marcos 11:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

He didn't mean changing the content of the article, just changing the article's title. Mariano(t/c) 11:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The correct title should be Secretariat of Intelligence, without the (Argentina). —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 03:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

So, do we agree on the move to Secretariat of Intelligence?, should it have the (Argentina) suffix, as other countries might use the same name?. --San Marcos 19:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The (Argentina) suffix is absolutely unnecessary. As Google Search clearly states, Argentina is the only country in the entire world with an agency called Secretariat of Intelligence. —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 02:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Becoming A-Class/Featured

As per the Quality Guidelines, I want this article to be a top-notch Argentine A-class, or even a Featured one. If anybody else is interested on taking on such a project, please add on here what we should modify in the article. I am in the process of adquiring the new book by Gerardo Young, 'SIDE: La Argentina Secreta' to bring new information and references to the article. --San Marcos 19:09, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

We're thinking the same thought. In my opinion, and as per WP:WIAFA, the article needs a lot more references, and perhaps an additional rewording and cleanup. Footnotes are of critical importance here; as you probably noticed, the main problem with espionage-related articles is that the verifiability of its content can be permanently disputed, see WP:V. By the way, the level of detail is more than acceptable (finally some good news) and the page's perfectly stable — in fact, no edit war has ever happened! Hope this helps, —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 02:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

In the following weeks, or when I have time I will be forking the article again into my own copy to add a bunch of information, and rewriting the troubled parts. Expect big changes soon. --San Marcos 22:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Alleged assassination plans in Paris

As with Operation Marilyn below, the story lacks citations, these claims are unsubstantiated and no mention can be found anywhere of such plans. Also, the claim that the operation failed because guns smuggled via diplomatic carriage were not freed by the Ambassador is ludicrous (as if weapons could not be obtained alternatively). I'm removing until further information is brought up.

See also notes below on Operacion Marilyn

Operacion Marilyn?

The text about an alleged Operacion Marilyn, intended to obtain information from Cuban diplomats, does not contain any reference, it has not been mentioned in any widely available book about the SIDE, and a Google / Yahoo search gave no related results at all. If somebody knows a reliable reference please include within the text. Otherwise it should be considered an unverified rumor and removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.11.225 (talk) 02:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The reference to Marilyn is in "Los sospechosos de siempre: Historia del espionaje en la Argentina", by Jorge Bomvaiser. Chapter: "Mujeres al borde (de un ataque de SIDE)" (loosely translated: Women at the edge, of an attack of SIDE) on page 251 (second paragraph). The whole book is in Spanish (Argentine-dialect), and there are no translations available. I tried to respond to you with an answer, but you don't seem to care to register as a user to take full advantage of talk/discussion. (See my Talk page), I already answered this. You are free to add the references. --San Marcos (talk) 10:35, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm removing this subsection. I found the book cited above (I'm argentine native). The author does not substantiate the claims and lacks credentials.

Removal was reverted pending consensus here apparently. I would posit that sections claiming intelligence operations without citations and completely unverifiable information have no merit staying on any page on Wikipedia, but will abide and make no further effort to delete until this is seconded. Consider also that the initial contributor proposed adding sources fifteen years ago to no avail

Created wiki account, comments about removal above are mine. Epavese (talk) 21:56, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

GA reassessment

After reading through this article, I am delisting it for the following reasons:

• Refs #1, 8, and 22 are dead links.
• These sections are unreferenced: Subjects of interest, facilities, recruitment, associates, culture, numbers, nearly everything in the Historical Operations section.
• Any citation needed tags need to be fixed.

The article has a lot of info, which is good. It just needs to be cited. When this is fixed it can be renominated at GAN. Wizardman 18:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Господа, я считаю, что нет никакой разведки Аргентины. был мертв в течение длительного времени, Истинный интеллект давно умер. Сегодня только VIP сервис для коррумпированных президентов у власти, которые принимают различные мероприятия запутанным, плачевное исследованиями, политикой и имеет важное значение для некоторых государственном секторе. Аргентина располагает сетью из бандитов в костюмах и эксклюзивные свободу для изучения других не менее коррумпированных политиков, которые находятся в или вне власти.

Я живу в Буэнос-Айресе. Учился в разведке Соединенных Штатов Америки. Аргентина и интеллект, подобны кормящих ребенка. принимать разбавленное молоко, и по этой причине, логика, никогда не будет расти здоровым.

A-9154 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.235.182.226 (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism

The entire (or almost entire) article appears verbatim and without attibution, including even some spelling and grammar errors that I just corrected, in Heinz Duthel's book Secret and Intelligence Services I, Hidden Systems that deliver Unforgettable Customer Service, ISBN 9783738607710, pages 194 ff, also on Google books. The book was first published in 2006.

There are three possibilities here: (a) the entire Wikipedia article has been plagiarised from the book, (b) the book has been plagiarised from the Wikipedia article or (c) Heinz Duthel is the sole author of both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2149:A000:8200:216:76FF:FE91:2064 (talk) 17:42, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I have flagged the article as potential copy/paste. However, checking pre-2006 versions of the Wikipedia article, I am inclined to believe that alternative (b) above is the case. The Wikipedia article grew organically, while the book seems to be a snapshot of Wikipedia at some point in 2005. For example, the edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Secretariat_of_Intelligence&type=revision&diff=21953951&oldid=21953101 split Operation Ciprés into a separate section and added a lot of text to it. The book includes a later version of this section. Given that the book was first published in 2006, if would have been impossible for the Wikipedia contributors to plagiarise it in 2005. Nevertheless, I'm leaving the copy/paste flag in place until the issue has been thoroughly discussed. 2A02:2149:A000:8200:216:76FF:FE91:2064 (talk) 18:27, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

There has been no discussion on the subject, but an article on heise.de (in German, machine translation here) seems to settle the issue: Heinz Duthel makes a living by selling the content of third-party websites such as Wikipedia, as books on Amazon. According to the same source (in German, machine translation here), this practice is widespread and Heinz Duthel is only one of many such fraudsters. I am removing the {copypaste} banner from the article. Someone at the Wikimedia Foundation legal department needs to go after Amazon and I smell there a very good source of funding for Wikipedia. 2A02:2149:A000:8200:216:76FF:FE91:2064 (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2018 (UTC)