![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The notion that the Secret Service was ever known as "Her Majesty's Secret Service" is actually something of an urban myth, brought about by the popularity of the novel and film On Her Majesty's Secret Service. However, Fleming intended the title as a play on words based on the old term "On Her Majesty's Service", represented as O.H.M.S. on envelopes containing tax documents and other mundane official communications. It's become apparent to me that this isn't widely known outside the UK! I've fixed the article to reflect this jamesgibbon 12:21, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Anyone got the will or the way to tweak this article so it could be a Featured Article one day? I'd be willing to do what I could. -- PopUpPirate 23:14, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
There are now: http://images.google.co.uk/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=%22richard+dearlove%22
This sentence, due in part to an excess of participial phrases functioning in various capacities, supplemented by infinitives fulfilling various roles, in conjunction with a relative clause whose relative pronoun is elided, leading to an inability to communicate clearly the actual statement from said report. Can someone please introduce a declarative verb? I have no idea what it's trying to say.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.236.61 ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 12 September 2006
Clem, you made a lot of deletions in your "revert vandal" edit. I noticed there were a few good changes in there, but these were heavily outnumbered by the bad ones and the mass deletions of correct information (so I've reverted back). Grateful if you could be more careful - your own edit looked more like vandalism than whatever it was you thought you were correcting. Wiki-Ed 10:42, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
The title is misleading. I came here looking for a general description of secret intelligence services, and instead found a description of one in particular. The content of this article should be moved to one titled "MI6", and in it's place should be a general description of secret intelligence services, with links, including MI6, the CIA, Mossad, the KGB (and it's newer incarnation), etc. StuRat 20:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
I would support the move to MI6. While this is not the correct name it is the most common, which is what is usually whats used by wikipedia with the correction given in the first sentence (see articles of any pop star for examples of this).
Surely the SIS only covers the UK and not the Republic of Ireland. Is this vandalism? josh ( talk) 22:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Didn't know where to put this, but im sure i recall a rpg attack "MI6" headquarters just thought that should be in the history happened a few years ago 7-8 possiably.
Where does that "James Bond working for MI6 is a myth" come from? As far as I am aware, Bond was indeed working for MI6 in the novels and not the NID - his rank was Commander, yes, but that was his official naval rank and cover. -- khaosworks 18:14, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Just curious if it is, im trying to confirm the details of Cpt. Fred Holroyd Fluffy999 12:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
This article perpetuates a myth about SIS (MI6) and the Security Service (MI5). The myth is that MI6 spies overseas and MI5 spies in Britain. In fact, both organisations work both abroad and at home, but in slightly different ways: MI5 concentrates on protecting British citizens and interests wherever they are in the world, whereas MI6 concentrates on gathering intelligence which might be of use to the government. That's why they have such different names, the Secret Intelligence Service gathers intelligence whereas the Security Service guarantees security.
This is what it says on the official MI5 website (yes, they really do have one now) under the heading "FAQ & Myths":
http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page119.html
"Myth 2: MI5 only works in the UK"
"Media reporting sometimes confuses the geographical scope of our work. Threats to national security often come from abroad, for example from foreign intelligence services or from terrorist groups based overseas. Moreover, the scope of national security extends beyond the British Isles and may involve the protection of British interests worldwide, e.g. diplomatic premises and staff, British companies and investments and British citizens living or travelling abroad. Security threats to British interests anywhere in the world fall within the scope of our functions as set out in the Security Service Act 1989."
It might be of interest to note that in the past MI5 has been charged with dealing with events overseas as part of its role as an Imperial Intelligence Agency. MI5 was tasked with intelligence matters throughout the British Empire, and thus there was some overlap between it and its sister organisation, SIS. In such cases it was sometimes the case that an joint organisation was formed in which both MI5 and SIS operatives would participate. MI5's role in the decolonisation process in the British Empire is the topic of some soon-to-be-published PhD/MPhil theses. Asmillar 20:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Why there is no info about the assasination of Princess Diana ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.178.5.122 ( talk) 23:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
As the SIS was originally part of the War Office, when exactly did it come under the jurisdiction of the Foreign Office? Opera hat ( talk) 23:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Cammy White is credited to have worked under MI-6, and is a fictional character. Should we add her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.149.132 ( talk) 16:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
"In order to better control information" ye gods! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.249.2.158 ( talk) 15:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I have created a United Kingdom intelligence community page where we can address the broad issues, such as the relative scope of MI5 and MI6 (as mentioned above). Starting with the list of key agencies shown at the global List of intelligence agencies. It should provide an appropriate place to deal with some of the ambiguities that the present atomised articles fail to cover well.
To discuss, please use this Talk page. Earthlyreason ( talk) 06:25, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Following the clear usage on the official site, I have changed 'colloquially known as MI6' to 'often called MI6'. Earthlyreason ( talk) 05:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
The second sentence of this article baffled me. I (an American) have a degree in English from Harvard, have written many books, love the English language (and particularly British thrillers and spy stories), and had never encountered the word "remit" before in this sense. I've just tried googling "has a remit" and "have a remit" and found about 10,000 instances of each phrase. I would say, without examining all 20,000 cases, that they are all from British contexts. I think most educated Americans are aware that our English cousins say "lift" for "elevator", "boot" for "trunk", "lorry" for "truck", etc. etc. But I think that they would be baffled by "MI6 has a remit to..." although they could probably figure out the sense from the context. Could someone here take pity on their transAtlantic cousins and find another way of phrasing this? "has the authority", perhaps? "is chartered to"? "Is legislated to"? Or something of the sort.... Hayford Peirce 7 July 2005 00:21 (UTC)
This article lacks information on its Head,staff..etc..!!! It just has info on history and its location, Some knowledgeable person please expand the article.. -- Shekhartagra ( talk) 09:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Currently it says: 'Its headquarters, since 1995, is at Vauxhall Cross'
Am I being a bit thick, or should it be 'Its headquarters, since 1995, are at Vauxhall Cross..'?
Dvmedis ( talk) 01:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
head·quar·ters (hěd'kwôr'tərz) pl.n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)
Possibly not definitive, but it appears not to be clear cut 122.107.58.27 ( talk) 07:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I enjoy it when some contributors to this resource are shown up to be completely ignorant and uninformed. Looks like it is SIS (for SECRET Intelligence Service) after all. Just 'cause the man in the street thinks it is officially named MI6, or DI6, or the first 's' stands for Special, or officially it's the "Secret Service", it don't mean it's true. It means they believe the newspapers/movies/bloke down the pub who says he's an expert. The redirect from MI6 to SIS is correct.
Do a bit of research before pontificating here.
The result of the move request was: page not moved. Rough consensus in this discussion, as User:ALR said, is that "there is insufficient justification for titling the article with a different name from that of the organisation" at this time. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 16:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Secret Intelligence Service → MI6 — common name. There have been several inconclusive discussions on the matter on the talk page, time to see what the consensus is. PBS ( talk) 01:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I noticed a drastic discrepancy between the English and the German edition of this article. The German edition of the Wikipedia says that the Intelligence Service has been founded by Sir Francis Walsingham, who lived from 1532 to 1590. According to the German version the first successes were the prevention of several assassination attempts to Queen Elizabeth I. Thomasd5 ( talk) 01:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
This was the organisational structure of WWII at the start of WWII, perhaps some details can be used in the main article [1] -- jmb ( talk) 23:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
(Consolidated thread)
When is it MI6 and when is it SIS? I think the public hardly ever call it SIS most people refer to it as MI6?
Well, according to the general public (I straw polled 4 people, unaninmous result), it's MI6, known colloqually as MI6. According to the article as written, it's called MI6, known colloquially as MI6. Accodring to Hannsard, it's MI6, known as MI6. According to the press, it's MI6, known as MI6.
So... I think that the title it misleading, and that the article is best held under the heading of MI6. Plus, as it stands, there are bits of the article that hold no value - "'Quex' Sinclair died in 1939 and was replaced as "C" by Lt. Col. Stewart Menzies. Menzies was another run-of-the-mill chief; by common opinion, SIS did not have a head of Cummings' calibre until Dick White, in the post-war era." In the absence of a timeline of the had officers, this has little merit. It's bland assertion of the calibre of the head is out of place (that's a blatent show of POV). It's comment about 'passport-control officers' I find to be unveryfiable. And there are a few more problems too, along the same lines. Syntax 03:45, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Actually, given the MI5 article is at its common name, I've changed my mind. I think this should be moved to MI6. Any objections? — OwenBlacker 02:15, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
the article should be renamed to MI6 since it is known to more people and widely used If you asked a person what SIS was they wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about now if you asked them what MI6 was they would more likely know becuse they heard it in media or James Bond Dudtz 7/21/05 5:42 PM EST
Agreed, the Security Service is under its old but better known name of MI5 so I don't see why the Secret Intelligence Service shouldn't be under MI6. Silveralex 18:17, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Just to add an official "last word" on this, here's what the Secret Intelligence Service's official website says about its name - SIS OR MI6. WHAT'S IN A NAME?. Basically, it went by several different names after its inception in 1909, including "Foreign Intelligence Service", "Secret Service", "MI1(c)", "Special Intelligence Service" and "C's Organisation" (the original head and his successors are all called "C"). But by 1920, the name "Secret Intelligence Service" became the most common name, even before the term MI6 had been invented. The name SIS was given an official status in a law passed in 1994, so SIS definitely is the only official name for the organisation. I suspect it took this long to be made the official name mainly because until very recently the government denied that SIS even existed, so it was impossible to lay down any details about it in public. MI6 was briefly an unofficial name used during the Second World War, when different intelligence departments were all referred to as MI-something, because they were all meant to be departments of the Military (MI = Military Intelligence). They're not a department of the Military though, they're actually part of the Foreign Office, not the Ministry Of Defence. This is why the name is so important to some people, because SIS had a long struggle to break itself free of the military so it didn't want a name that implied it was part of something that it wasn't. MI5 is similarly inaccurate, the Security Service is part of the Home Office, NOT the MOD. Neither of the organisations are Military, so the names MI5 and MI6 are simply wrong even if they're commonly used by outsiders, just as Sydney isn't the capital of Australia even though most outsiders think it is.
I have put the link to the site above. Here it is again: http://www.sis.gov.uk/output/sis-or-mi6-what-s-in-a-name.html
This idiot up here doesn't know how to spell. If you can't spot it, you are in a very pitiful state...
Pumanike
18:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Do we need three pictures of the same building?
I'd say so, they're great pics -- PopUpPirate 13:06, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
MI6? DI6 = more accurate. But the name is SIS and it's Special not Secret.
Interestingly, the official site of the Secret Intelligence Service is http://www.mi6.gov.uk And it's articles noted that MI6 'fell into official disuse' - i.e. it was used officially. -- 203.118.157.221 11:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Just to add to an old debate: Britannica has its articles under the headings 'MI5' and 'MI6' (with formally followed by the offial name opening the article). Tobyox ( talk) 06:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Greek newspaper "Proto Thema" publicly named the head of MI6 in retaliation over joint british and greek conducted abduction and torture of 27 ethnic pakistani people from Athens. See and hear:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4561720.stm
Why is the Iranian coup called a success? Keith-264 ( talk) 14:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
A number of other buildings are reported[who?] to be in use by the agency including Fort Monckton in Gosport, Hampshire.[citation needed] This sentence is speculative at best and has not been referenced since it was requested in Dec 2011. It should be removed. Thank you Horation12 ( talk) 11:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Wasn't helping that nice man Franco get his rebellion in Spanish Sahara off the ground SIS's finest hour? Keith-264 ( talk) 21:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Secret Intelligence Service → MI6 — MI6 is the most common name for this particular service. It's also depict in the logo of the organisation and it's sister organisation the Security Service is also titled MI5 on Wikipedia. So to be consistent this page better be moved to MI6.-- Wester ( talk) 17:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
The picture of the Englishman in a Chinese outfit seems to be a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.109.117 ( talk) 13:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Mansfield is said to have built a post-imperial intelligence service. This might refer to the independence of Ireland in 1922. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.123.215.180 ( talk) 10:52, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
MI6 like any kind of secret integence It'so important for U.K and to all rhe world! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.246.246.141 ( talk) 12:03, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
In the 1994 Intelligence Services Act? Earlier? And what were MI1,2,..., anybody know? I know MI8 was a name, or one of several names, for what is now GCHQ. It's not important, but historically interesting. Anyhow maybe it's still all classified up the wazoo. :)
Nice article, people. Thanks. 209.121.88.198 10:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Flat Earth News, by Nick Davies, gives the date of official acknowledgement of the existence of MI6 by the British Government as 1992. You'd hope a book about journalistic truth would be accurate. I'm not confident I can make a reference without screwing up though. 92.24.101.30 ( talk) 20:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to request that a section on WAY be added. The setup and financing of World Assembly of Youth in the late 1940s was an "anti-Communist" operation by MI6. Management & financing of it later passed to the CIA in the USA, but I think MI6 kept a hand in.
It would be interesting to find the names of the first students recruited by MI6 to set up WAY and staff it; and the names of MI6 people who vetted and recruited the students.
It would be interesting to know if any of the Soviet spies, Philby, Burgess, etc., crossed paths with the WAY operation, as in years that followed, some Catholics alleged that WAY was a Communist front.
Reading here about all the Soviet penetration of MI6 near the period when WAY was set up, I wonder if WAY might have become Soviet-influenced or infiltrated. 24.201.231.71 ( talk) 06:25, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
There appears to be no legitimate reason behind listing the name "MI6" in the infobox. Firstly, it has been placed under the parameter "nativename", which, is according to the template usage, an "agency name in a native language using Western characters"; in this case, the article is in English so this parameter should not need to be used at all. Secondly, the official name of the agency is Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) as noted in the lead paragraph; "MI6", is a name that, according to the SIS' website (scroll down to "1920"), "officially fell into disuse years ago [but] many writers and journalists continue to use it to describe SIS". Thirdly, the fact that "MI6" is an alternate name is already included in the lead paragraph, so it is not needed in the infobox. I propose removing the name "MI6" from the infobox for these reasons (keep in mind that this is for the infobox only, the name can still be used within the article). – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 05:20, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The "Minister Responsible" line in the info-box seems to have mislead a lot of people into loudly opining that Boris Johnson is "now in charge of the MI6". This isn't actually true, since the direct line of over-sight goes through the Joint Intelligence Committee (United Kingdom) to the Cabinet Office. Perhaps the infobox needs some clarification that "Minister Responsible" doesn't mean he's in the command chain. (The responsibility seems more in terms of keeping them funded.) -- Barberio 11:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
to keep under review threats to security at home and overseas and to deal with such security problems as may be referred to it
to maintain oversight of the intelligence community’s analytical capability through the Professional Head of Intelligence Analysis
JIC draws the collective evidence of all security agencies, ministerial departments and even military intelligence and then briefs relevant (senior) Cabinet Secretaries of State. SIS, MI5 and GCHQ run their operations, but Ministerial oversight rest with two Secretaries of State--Foreign Secretary for SIS and GCHQ and MI5 falls under the Home Secretary. Cantab1985 ( talk) 05:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Secret Intelligence Service. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
The notion that the Secret Service was ever known as "Her Majesty's Secret Service" is actually something of an urban myth, brought about by the popularity of the novel and film On Her Majesty's Secret Service. However, Fleming intended the title as a play on words based on the old term "On Her Majesty's Service", represented as O.H.M.S. on envelopes containing tax documents and other mundane official communications. It's become apparent to me that this isn't widely known outside the UK! I've fixed the article to reflect this jamesgibbon 12:21, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Anyone got the will or the way to tweak this article so it could be a Featured Article one day? I'd be willing to do what I could. -- PopUpPirate 23:14, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
There are now: http://images.google.co.uk/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=%22richard+dearlove%22
This sentence, due in part to an excess of participial phrases functioning in various capacities, supplemented by infinitives fulfilling various roles, in conjunction with a relative clause whose relative pronoun is elided, leading to an inability to communicate clearly the actual statement from said report. Can someone please introduce a declarative verb? I have no idea what it's trying to say.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.236.61 ( talk • contribs) 13:56, 12 September 2006
Clem, you made a lot of deletions in your "revert vandal" edit. I noticed there were a few good changes in there, but these were heavily outnumbered by the bad ones and the mass deletions of correct information (so I've reverted back). Grateful if you could be more careful - your own edit looked more like vandalism than whatever it was you thought you were correcting. Wiki-Ed 10:42, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
The title is misleading. I came here looking for a general description of secret intelligence services, and instead found a description of one in particular. The content of this article should be moved to one titled "MI6", and in it's place should be a general description of secret intelligence services, with links, including MI6, the CIA, Mossad, the KGB (and it's newer incarnation), etc. StuRat 20:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
I would support the move to MI6. While this is not the correct name it is the most common, which is what is usually whats used by wikipedia with the correction given in the first sentence (see articles of any pop star for examples of this).
Surely the SIS only covers the UK and not the Republic of Ireland. Is this vandalism? josh ( talk) 22:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Didn't know where to put this, but im sure i recall a rpg attack "MI6" headquarters just thought that should be in the history happened a few years ago 7-8 possiably.
Where does that "James Bond working for MI6 is a myth" come from? As far as I am aware, Bond was indeed working for MI6 in the novels and not the NID - his rank was Commander, yes, but that was his official naval rank and cover. -- khaosworks 18:14, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Just curious if it is, im trying to confirm the details of Cpt. Fred Holroyd Fluffy999 12:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
This article perpetuates a myth about SIS (MI6) and the Security Service (MI5). The myth is that MI6 spies overseas and MI5 spies in Britain. In fact, both organisations work both abroad and at home, but in slightly different ways: MI5 concentrates on protecting British citizens and interests wherever they are in the world, whereas MI6 concentrates on gathering intelligence which might be of use to the government. That's why they have such different names, the Secret Intelligence Service gathers intelligence whereas the Security Service guarantees security.
This is what it says on the official MI5 website (yes, they really do have one now) under the heading "FAQ & Myths":
http://www.mi5.gov.uk/output/Page119.html
"Myth 2: MI5 only works in the UK"
"Media reporting sometimes confuses the geographical scope of our work. Threats to national security often come from abroad, for example from foreign intelligence services or from terrorist groups based overseas. Moreover, the scope of national security extends beyond the British Isles and may involve the protection of British interests worldwide, e.g. diplomatic premises and staff, British companies and investments and British citizens living or travelling abroad. Security threats to British interests anywhere in the world fall within the scope of our functions as set out in the Security Service Act 1989."
It might be of interest to note that in the past MI5 has been charged with dealing with events overseas as part of its role as an Imperial Intelligence Agency. MI5 was tasked with intelligence matters throughout the British Empire, and thus there was some overlap between it and its sister organisation, SIS. In such cases it was sometimes the case that an joint organisation was formed in which both MI5 and SIS operatives would participate. MI5's role in the decolonisation process in the British Empire is the topic of some soon-to-be-published PhD/MPhil theses. Asmillar 20:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Why there is no info about the assasination of Princess Diana ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.178.5.122 ( talk) 23:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
As the SIS was originally part of the War Office, when exactly did it come under the jurisdiction of the Foreign Office? Opera hat ( talk) 23:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Cammy White is credited to have worked under MI-6, and is a fictional character. Should we add her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.149.132 ( talk) 16:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
"In order to better control information" ye gods! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.249.2.158 ( talk) 15:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I have created a United Kingdom intelligence community page where we can address the broad issues, such as the relative scope of MI5 and MI6 (as mentioned above). Starting with the list of key agencies shown at the global List of intelligence agencies. It should provide an appropriate place to deal with some of the ambiguities that the present atomised articles fail to cover well.
To discuss, please use this Talk page. Earthlyreason ( talk) 06:25, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Following the clear usage on the official site, I have changed 'colloquially known as MI6' to 'often called MI6'. Earthlyreason ( talk) 05:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
The second sentence of this article baffled me. I (an American) have a degree in English from Harvard, have written many books, love the English language (and particularly British thrillers and spy stories), and had never encountered the word "remit" before in this sense. I've just tried googling "has a remit" and "have a remit" and found about 10,000 instances of each phrase. I would say, without examining all 20,000 cases, that they are all from British contexts. I think most educated Americans are aware that our English cousins say "lift" for "elevator", "boot" for "trunk", "lorry" for "truck", etc. etc. But I think that they would be baffled by "MI6 has a remit to..." although they could probably figure out the sense from the context. Could someone here take pity on their transAtlantic cousins and find another way of phrasing this? "has the authority", perhaps? "is chartered to"? "Is legislated to"? Or something of the sort.... Hayford Peirce 7 July 2005 00:21 (UTC)
This article lacks information on its Head,staff..etc..!!! It just has info on history and its location, Some knowledgeable person please expand the article.. -- Shekhartagra ( talk) 09:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Currently it says: 'Its headquarters, since 1995, is at Vauxhall Cross'
Am I being a bit thick, or should it be 'Its headquarters, since 1995, are at Vauxhall Cross..'?
Dvmedis ( talk) 01:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
head·quar·ters (hěd'kwôr'tərz) pl.n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)
Possibly not definitive, but it appears not to be clear cut 122.107.58.27 ( talk) 07:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I enjoy it when some contributors to this resource are shown up to be completely ignorant and uninformed. Looks like it is SIS (for SECRET Intelligence Service) after all. Just 'cause the man in the street thinks it is officially named MI6, or DI6, or the first 's' stands for Special, or officially it's the "Secret Service", it don't mean it's true. It means they believe the newspapers/movies/bloke down the pub who says he's an expert. The redirect from MI6 to SIS is correct.
Do a bit of research before pontificating here.
The result of the move request was: page not moved. Rough consensus in this discussion, as User:ALR said, is that "there is insufficient justification for titling the article with a different name from that of the organisation" at this time. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 16:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Secret Intelligence Service → MI6 — common name. There have been several inconclusive discussions on the matter on the talk page, time to see what the consensus is. PBS ( talk) 01:51, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I noticed a drastic discrepancy between the English and the German edition of this article. The German edition of the Wikipedia says that the Intelligence Service has been founded by Sir Francis Walsingham, who lived from 1532 to 1590. According to the German version the first successes were the prevention of several assassination attempts to Queen Elizabeth I. Thomasd5 ( talk) 01:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
This was the organisational structure of WWII at the start of WWII, perhaps some details can be used in the main article [1] -- jmb ( talk) 23:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
(Consolidated thread)
When is it MI6 and when is it SIS? I think the public hardly ever call it SIS most people refer to it as MI6?
Well, according to the general public (I straw polled 4 people, unaninmous result), it's MI6, known colloqually as MI6. According to the article as written, it's called MI6, known colloquially as MI6. Accodring to Hannsard, it's MI6, known as MI6. According to the press, it's MI6, known as MI6.
So... I think that the title it misleading, and that the article is best held under the heading of MI6. Plus, as it stands, there are bits of the article that hold no value - "'Quex' Sinclair died in 1939 and was replaced as "C" by Lt. Col. Stewart Menzies. Menzies was another run-of-the-mill chief; by common opinion, SIS did not have a head of Cummings' calibre until Dick White, in the post-war era." In the absence of a timeline of the had officers, this has little merit. It's bland assertion of the calibre of the head is out of place (that's a blatent show of POV). It's comment about 'passport-control officers' I find to be unveryfiable. And there are a few more problems too, along the same lines. Syntax 03:45, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Actually, given the MI5 article is at its common name, I've changed my mind. I think this should be moved to MI6. Any objections? — OwenBlacker 02:15, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
the article should be renamed to MI6 since it is known to more people and widely used If you asked a person what SIS was they wouldn't have a clue what you're talking about now if you asked them what MI6 was they would more likely know becuse they heard it in media or James Bond Dudtz 7/21/05 5:42 PM EST
Agreed, the Security Service is under its old but better known name of MI5 so I don't see why the Secret Intelligence Service shouldn't be under MI6. Silveralex 18:17, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Just to add an official "last word" on this, here's what the Secret Intelligence Service's official website says about its name - SIS OR MI6. WHAT'S IN A NAME?. Basically, it went by several different names after its inception in 1909, including "Foreign Intelligence Service", "Secret Service", "MI1(c)", "Special Intelligence Service" and "C's Organisation" (the original head and his successors are all called "C"). But by 1920, the name "Secret Intelligence Service" became the most common name, even before the term MI6 had been invented. The name SIS was given an official status in a law passed in 1994, so SIS definitely is the only official name for the organisation. I suspect it took this long to be made the official name mainly because until very recently the government denied that SIS even existed, so it was impossible to lay down any details about it in public. MI6 was briefly an unofficial name used during the Second World War, when different intelligence departments were all referred to as MI-something, because they were all meant to be departments of the Military (MI = Military Intelligence). They're not a department of the Military though, they're actually part of the Foreign Office, not the Ministry Of Defence. This is why the name is so important to some people, because SIS had a long struggle to break itself free of the military so it didn't want a name that implied it was part of something that it wasn't. MI5 is similarly inaccurate, the Security Service is part of the Home Office, NOT the MOD. Neither of the organisations are Military, so the names MI5 and MI6 are simply wrong even if they're commonly used by outsiders, just as Sydney isn't the capital of Australia even though most outsiders think it is.
I have put the link to the site above. Here it is again: http://www.sis.gov.uk/output/sis-or-mi6-what-s-in-a-name.html
This idiot up here doesn't know how to spell. If you can't spot it, you are in a very pitiful state...
Pumanike
18:33, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Do we need three pictures of the same building?
I'd say so, they're great pics -- PopUpPirate 13:06, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
MI6? DI6 = more accurate. But the name is SIS and it's Special not Secret.
Interestingly, the official site of the Secret Intelligence Service is http://www.mi6.gov.uk And it's articles noted that MI6 'fell into official disuse' - i.e. it was used officially. -- 203.118.157.221 11:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Just to add to an old debate: Britannica has its articles under the headings 'MI5' and 'MI6' (with formally followed by the offial name opening the article). Tobyox ( talk) 06:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Greek newspaper "Proto Thema" publicly named the head of MI6 in retaliation over joint british and greek conducted abduction and torture of 27 ethnic pakistani people from Athens. See and hear:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4561720.stm
Why is the Iranian coup called a success? Keith-264 ( talk) 14:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
A number of other buildings are reported[who?] to be in use by the agency including Fort Monckton in Gosport, Hampshire.[citation needed] This sentence is speculative at best and has not been referenced since it was requested in Dec 2011. It should be removed. Thank you Horation12 ( talk) 11:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Wasn't helping that nice man Franco get his rebellion in Spanish Sahara off the ground SIS's finest hour? Keith-264 ( talk) 21:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Secret Intelligence Service → MI6 — MI6 is the most common name for this particular service. It's also depict in the logo of the organisation and it's sister organisation the Security Service is also titled MI5 on Wikipedia. So to be consistent this page better be moved to MI6.-- Wester ( talk) 17:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
The picture of the Englishman in a Chinese outfit seems to be a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.109.117 ( talk) 13:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Mansfield is said to have built a post-imperial intelligence service. This might refer to the independence of Ireland in 1922. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.123.215.180 ( talk) 10:52, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
MI6 like any kind of secret integence It'so important for U.K and to all rhe world! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.246.246.141 ( talk) 12:03, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
In the 1994 Intelligence Services Act? Earlier? And what were MI1,2,..., anybody know? I know MI8 was a name, or one of several names, for what is now GCHQ. It's not important, but historically interesting. Anyhow maybe it's still all classified up the wazoo. :)
Nice article, people. Thanks. 209.121.88.198 10:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Flat Earth News, by Nick Davies, gives the date of official acknowledgement of the existence of MI6 by the British Government as 1992. You'd hope a book about journalistic truth would be accurate. I'm not confident I can make a reference without screwing up though. 92.24.101.30 ( talk) 20:09, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to request that a section on WAY be added. The setup and financing of World Assembly of Youth in the late 1940s was an "anti-Communist" operation by MI6. Management & financing of it later passed to the CIA in the USA, but I think MI6 kept a hand in.
It would be interesting to find the names of the first students recruited by MI6 to set up WAY and staff it; and the names of MI6 people who vetted and recruited the students.
It would be interesting to know if any of the Soviet spies, Philby, Burgess, etc., crossed paths with the WAY operation, as in years that followed, some Catholics alleged that WAY was a Communist front.
Reading here about all the Soviet penetration of MI6 near the period when WAY was set up, I wonder if WAY might have become Soviet-influenced or infiltrated. 24.201.231.71 ( talk) 06:25, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
There appears to be no legitimate reason behind listing the name "MI6" in the infobox. Firstly, it has been placed under the parameter "nativename", which, is according to the template usage, an "agency name in a native language using Western characters"; in this case, the article is in English so this parameter should not need to be used at all. Secondly, the official name of the agency is Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) as noted in the lead paragraph; "MI6", is a name that, according to the SIS' website (scroll down to "1920"), "officially fell into disuse years ago [but] many writers and journalists continue to use it to describe SIS". Thirdly, the fact that "MI6" is an alternate name is already included in the lead paragraph, so it is not needed in the infobox. I propose removing the name "MI6" from the infobox for these reasons (keep in mind that this is for the infobox only, the name can still be used within the article). – Nick Mitchell 98 talk 05:20, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The "Minister Responsible" line in the info-box seems to have mislead a lot of people into loudly opining that Boris Johnson is "now in charge of the MI6". This isn't actually true, since the direct line of over-sight goes through the Joint Intelligence Committee (United Kingdom) to the Cabinet Office. Perhaps the infobox needs some clarification that "Minister Responsible" doesn't mean he's in the command chain. (The responsibility seems more in terms of keeping them funded.) -- Barberio 11:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
to keep under review threats to security at home and overseas and to deal with such security problems as may be referred to it
to maintain oversight of the intelligence community’s analytical capability through the Professional Head of Intelligence Analysis
JIC draws the collective evidence of all security agencies, ministerial departments and even military intelligence and then briefs relevant (senior) Cabinet Secretaries of State. SIS, MI5 and GCHQ run their operations, but Ministerial oversight rest with two Secretaries of State--Foreign Secretary for SIS and GCHQ and MI5 falls under the Home Secretary. Cantab1985 ( talk) 05:06, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Secret Intelligence Service. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)