![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 25, 2008, January 25, 2012, January 25, 2013, January 25, 2018, January 25, 2020, and January 25, 2024. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This information is inconsistent with the declassified documents released through the Freedom of Information Site (CIA): http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=0001060961 Paigeadele ( talk) 10:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I've done some housekeeping and rearranging. Nothing deleted or at least nothing major. Mrs.EasterBunny 22:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
The manual of style suggests how dates should be written. Essentially, two methods are acceptable as long as only one method is used in the entire article. Since this even is American, the American method (September 5, 1956 rather than 5 September) may be preferred. I have fixed the inconsistency to the latter (like 5 September) because that would mean fewer changes. I don't object if someone changes all of the dates to the style used commonly in the U.S. (like September 5, 1956). Mrs.EasterBunny 22:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This appeared in the 1st sentence. It's not the name usually associated with the event, just an editor's words. So shouldn't we not use it in bold. I am aware the suggestion from WP is to bold the title of the article in the 1st sentence. With biographies, this makes sense. In this case, it's like making up a title for a film. Who are we to make up the title if others' don't use it. This is not a big point and shouldn't be a huge debate. Mrs.EasterBunny ( talk) 21:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I've added a photo of the memorial of stars.
I also might note that yesterday was the 15th anniversary of that solemn day. It is nice that there was not a single vandal to the article despite a number of edits. Usually, there are no daily edits to this article but there was yesterday, the day the article was featured on the main page. Mrs.EasterBunny ( talk) 01:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Seeing a ref to the event in Dawn news story today, April 18, '09, I assumed this to be a report on CIA shooting someone. Changed to be obvious CIA employees were attacked. Attack on CIA employees might be better or 1993 Attack on CIA Headquarters Atmamatma ( talk) 11:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC) (re. CIA drones kill five 'foreign' guests, typical in the news today)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:27, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I removed the statement about Pakistani government attendees at Kansi's funeral. It's tendentious -- it's character and tendency is not neutral reporting but an incitement of an anti-Pakistan attitude. More importantly, the only source cited is the South Asia Analysis Group, which is a think tank made up exclusively of Indian members, primarily former high Indian government officials. I suspect anti-Pakistani orientations in the quoted source. If there is another source which provides this statement, then it would be reasonably included I would argue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.112.152 ( talk) 02:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 1993 shootings at CIA Headquarters. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.salon.com/news/1998/01/22news_kansi.htmlWhen 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:11, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 25, 2008, January 25, 2012, January 25, 2013, January 25, 2018, January 25, 2020, and January 25, 2024. |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This information is inconsistent with the declassified documents released through the Freedom of Information Site (CIA): http://www.foia.cia.gov/browse_docs.asp?doc_no=0001060961 Paigeadele ( talk) 10:15, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I've done some housekeeping and rearranging. Nothing deleted or at least nothing major. Mrs.EasterBunny 22:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
The manual of style suggests how dates should be written. Essentially, two methods are acceptable as long as only one method is used in the entire article. Since this even is American, the American method (September 5, 1956 rather than 5 September) may be preferred. I have fixed the inconsistency to the latter (like 5 September) because that would mean fewer changes. I don't object if someone changes all of the dates to the style used commonly in the U.S. (like September 5, 1956). Mrs.EasterBunny 22:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
This appeared in the 1st sentence. It's not the name usually associated with the event, just an editor's words. So shouldn't we not use it in bold. I am aware the suggestion from WP is to bold the title of the article in the 1st sentence. With biographies, this makes sense. In this case, it's like making up a title for a film. Who are we to make up the title if others' don't use it. This is not a big point and shouldn't be a huge debate. Mrs.EasterBunny ( talk) 21:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I've added a photo of the memorial of stars.
I also might note that yesterday was the 15th anniversary of that solemn day. It is nice that there was not a single vandal to the article despite a number of edits. Usually, there are no daily edits to this article but there was yesterday, the day the article was featured on the main page. Mrs.EasterBunny ( talk) 01:10, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Seeing a ref to the event in Dawn news story today, April 18, '09, I assumed this to be a report on CIA shooting someone. Changed to be obvious CIA employees were attacked. Attack on CIA employees might be better or 1993 Attack on CIA Headquarters Atmamatma ( talk) 11:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC) (re. CIA drones kill five 'foreign' guests, typical in the news today)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:27, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
I removed the statement about Pakistani government attendees at Kansi's funeral. It's tendentious -- it's character and tendency is not neutral reporting but an incitement of an anti-Pakistan attitude. More importantly, the only source cited is the South Asia Analysis Group, which is a think tank made up exclusively of Indian members, primarily former high Indian government officials. I suspect anti-Pakistani orientations in the quoted source. If there is another source which provides this statement, then it would be reasonably included I would argue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.112.152 ( talk) 02:34, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 1993 shootings at CIA Headquarters. 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.salon.com/news/1998/01/22news_kansi.htmlWhen 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:11, 16 June 2017 (UTC)