User talk:Tom Griffin

From Powerbase
Revision as of 21:53, 1 June 2008 by Paul (talk | contribs) (what is wrong?)
Jump to: navigation, search

Hi Tom,

Good work on IRD. Can you go to your user page:

and add a brief biog?

Also, can you make sure that your reference every assertion and quotstation?

To leave me a message go to my talk page:


--David 17:54, 25 November 2007 (GMT)

Great stuff about the SAS and MRF etc. Not clear from reading what is there which bits are quotes from the documents? Some seem to have opening but not closing quotes? Maybe the document quotes could be indented as well as having closing quotes.

I presume there is a lot more of this kind of stuff you have unearthed that could go on spinprofiles?

--David 08:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


I think we might start to use categories on all these pages. At present we have [[category:Spooks]][[Category:Northern Ireland]] [[Category:British Propaganda]], but we should probably inven some new ones too. Any suggestions? The current list of categories is here:

You will also see that we can have sub categories, so maybe there is cscope for a number of them which might relate to the propaganda, intelligence or NI categories? --David 08:12, 9 April 2008 (BST)

I think you are right about the agencies. Do you want to start doing that? just add the relevant category at the bottom of the relevant page. I wil set up the subcatory commands and then show you how to do it. I thik us military should be a cat of its own and counterinsurgency a sub of that? --David 14:14, 9 April 2008 (BST)

yes, but it can be a subcateogry f more than one category... --David 15:34, 9 April 2008 (BST)



In this GordonB speech there is a reference to "Portman Trust". (I can only find references to Tavistock and Portman Trust.) I wonder if you know who this Trust could be.


what is wrong?


What is wrong with you... one edits a list of names so that it is more compact -- this takes quite a bit of time to do -- and then without explanation you ax it.

Furthermore, there were quite a few interesting elements originating in the euston website -- again, axed by theee without explanation.

How about adding a wee explanation to major edits? thus far, you have cut out swathes of stuff without explanation, and this is rather... how shall we put it... annoying.

Kind rgds --Paulo 22:53, 1 June 2008 (BST)