Talk:National Security Agency
 | United States: Government High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
.svg)
 | Maryland: Baltimore Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Politics: American High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Espionage High‑importance | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Mass surveillance High‑importance | ||||||
| |||||||
| Toolbox |
|---|
We need to make new articles sometime soon
Somebody should start some articles called the Signals Intelligence Directorate and Research and Development Directorate RDD. I also think a third person should do the Information Assurance Directorate acr. (IAD). Going to need 3 teams to write three types of articles. Be able to distinguish between emblem, seal, and logo.
See *https://electrospaces.blogspot.com/2014/01/nsas-organizational-designations.html which contains twelve additional cited sources.Also see *https://nsa.gov1.info/dni/ which many slideshows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Personisgaming (talk • contribs) 22:06, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
why does the "list of NSA controversies" redirect to the NSA page?
n Greek Architect (talk) 15:50, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- IMO that page and title shouldn't exist even is a redirect. A inappropriate title has no relevant target location. North8000 (talk) 17:09, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Greek Architect: That's an opinion, not an answer. There was a "NSA controveries" section header on the page, with a list of same (see: "Constitutionality, legality and privacy questions regarding operations"). As the page is aleady too large, and that section is also quite large, it was split off to the new page. A couple editors complained and one undid the removal for the split on this end, but still left the page intact on that end, creating a problematic fork. The content on that page was then removed and the page redirected back here. For more info, see the section: #Removal of Content from Main Article, up above. Hope this helps. - wolf 21:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Thewolfchild: @Greek Architect: Wolf gave a better and more informative answer than me. I was more thinking about an answer for "where should "list of NSA controversies" redirect to?" I did not look into the history of the redirect and. I didn't realize that it was created during the recent attempted split; if I did I would have discussed it differently and more diplomatically. My apologies to Wolf on that. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- Bah, it's all good, you're still on my Christmas card list. - wolf 05:13, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! North8000 (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
- Bah, it's all good, you're still on my Christmas card list. - wolf 05:13, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Thewolfchild: @Greek Architect: Wolf gave a better and more informative answer than me. I was more thinking about an answer for "where should "list of NSA controversies" redirect to?" I did not look into the history of the redirect and. I didn't realize that it was created during the recent attempted split; if I did I would have discussed it differently and more diplomatically. My apologies to Wolf on that. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:25, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Greek Architect: That's an opinion, not an answer. There was a "NSA controveries" section header on the page, with a list of same (see: "Constitutionality, legality and privacy questions regarding operations"). As the page is aleady too large, and that section is also quite large, it was split off to the new page. A couple editors complained and one undid the removal for the split on this end, but still left the page intact on that end, creating a problematic fork. The content on that page was then removed and the page redirected back here. For more info, see the section: #Removal of Content from Main Article, up above. Hope this helps. - wolf 21:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, I just saw the answers but that explains it very well, thank you :) Greek Architect (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
The ACLU and the NSA may soon square off in the Supreme Court — over Wikipedia
Include in article?
National Security Agency and American Civil Liberties Union
The ACLU and the NSA may soon square off in the Supreme Court — over Wikipedia - The NSA and the scope of state secrets privilege may be in front of the Supreme Court next term. Source: https://www.grid.news/story/technology/2022/09/27/the-aclu-and-the-nsa-may-soon-square-off-in-the-supreme-court-over-wikipedia/ September 27, 2022
"The Wikimedia Foundation, the organization that runs Wikipedia, last month asked the (Supreme Court) to hear arguments on its lawsuit over the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance of Americans’ international phone and email communications. The organization, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, has been fighting the NSA in court over such “upstream surveillance” for the past seven years."..."Wikimedia contends that given this surveillance, it cannot ensure the confidentiality of the tens of millions of people who read, edit and communicate about Wikipedia, one of the largest repositories of human information to ever exist."
Aeryn Palmer, legal director of compliance at the Wikimedia Foundation, said...“When we think about what we might be collecting from anyone who visits the site, when we think about how we do research with our readers or with our contributors to better understand what sorts of features they might like to see and how they want the projects to evolve, we’re continually thinking about how we can best protect their privacy,”
May1787 (talk) 12:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
- "
Include in article?
" - sure, why not. - wolf 16:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Sounds like suitable content. North8000 (talk) 18:44, 5 October 2022 (UTC)