Template talk:Intelligence

The title of this template currently points to Intelligence, which covers the topic from an abstract information processing position, but the topics in the infobox are overwhelmingly focussed on intelligence as a synonym for espionage. Seeking opinions on relative benefit of:

• Leaving unchanged
• Changing title to "Intelligence gathering"
• Leaving title unchanged, repointing to Intelligence assessment or perhaps Intelligence analysis

Epsilon.Prota (talk) 12:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Epsilon.Prota,

As intelligence assessment and analysis are both PHASES of the SAME intelligence cycle, and espionage is simply the method of intelligence gathering... what I've realized is that we probably need to create a new page for Intelligence as information rather than Intelligence as wisdom... I do not see this page on All pages with titles beginning with Intelligence... so...

I will create this new page soon – I am bogged down with Necktie at the moment. Guylaen (talk) 20:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, assessment and analysis and espionage are all deverbal nouns, whereas Intelligence in this context is a normal noun. Guylaen (talk) 20:52, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds very reasonable - if you leave a message on my talk page when you start I can lend a hand if needed. Epsilon.Prota (talk) 09:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I have created the pages Intelligence field and Intelligence (information). Guylaen (talk) 05:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Epsilon.Prota Guylaen (talk) 05:09, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been developing this: Sentient (intelligence analysis system).

Considering this template, it seems we lack a single cohesive article at all for the topic of intelligence automation, such as matters like ECHELON, Sentient (intelligence analysis system), and many other items that are listed as individual systems, programs or disclosures under Template:Global surveillance.

What may be a reasonable name for such an article? But more particularly, if made, where exactly would the topic best fit under the current structure of Template:Intelligence? Under "Areas of intelligence" perhaps? @Guylaen, any thoughts?

If helpful for context, I'm thinking of items like the ones here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Very_Polite_Person/test&oldid=1291195385 -- Very Polite Person (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, three big things on the agenda for the template;

          1) make the template collapsable

          2) make a new category in the template for... "It's Alive!" or... ¿computing systems?... or ¿tech sector? Thoughts? What should we call this new category?

          3) create intelligence (field) and intelligence (information) to finally avoid all of these major disambiguation issues surrounding intelligence and espionage.

P.S.;

Sentient means alive. So, basically, you've got an "alive artificial intelligence intelligence of intelligence," which is a confounding notion for taxonomy.

As for your that Surveillance template - surveillance is a different field than intelligence, often in NATO countries one of pillars of Intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance.

I should note that just because an intelligence agency performs an activity does not automatically make that activity intelligence. For example: the CIA original old headquarters building has a cafeteria and a food court.

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CAFETERIA%20REQUEST%5B16005502%5D.pdf
https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2016/jun/24/cia-cafeteria-complaints-ii-stale-bread-harder/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CIt%20actually%20looked%20like%20melted,about%20the%20quality%20of%20grub%20%E2%80%A6&text=there%20are%20a%20few%20that,antennae%20inscribed%20inside%20a%20circle. Nobody making coffee at the cafeteria really thinks of themselves as intelligence officers, and I don't think anyone else does either.

I did actually include a bunch of quotes about the confusion of the definition of intelligence at the top of the page espionage, but I will probably move them over to the page intelligence (information) or intelligence (field) whenever I finally get around to creating them. Guylaen (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sentient means alive. So, basically, you've got an "alive artificial intelligence intelligence of intelligence," which is a confounding notion for taxonomy.

Believe me, I know... it took ages to narrow the lede there to this, so that it would make sense:

Sentient is an artificial intelligence space-based satellite data analysis system operated by the intelligence community of the United States of America. Sentient is described as a heavily classified "artificial brain" and automated system that allows intelligence agencies and armed forces to use satellite imagery and other data to autonomously find and track in real time targets on or above the Earth from outer space. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 18:34, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, for now, I've just decided to add the category "Tools" to the template. Guylaen (talk) 18:45, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m very confused why you included Intellipedia in this list of systems?

I suppose I ETS’d before automation systems were implemented, but intellipedia doesn’t seem like it belongs here.

Full disclosure, I have made about twelve edits on that wiki for the page “Somalia.” Guylaen (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean on my personal page draft, it was to gather up contenders first, to review each. Nothing actionable from me yet. :) It will be a few weeks, I'm just collecting material now. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 20:55, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever you use the Color feature on the Appearance section and set it to dark the template shows up as white. whereas other templates do work with darkmode. 37.96.117.226 (talk) 14:37, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted the needless non-standard styling from this now – it has reverted to the default sidebar classes, which I assume should work across themes. Joe D (t) 19:31, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm it works now. 37.96.117.226 (talk) 22:21, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! Never even considered dark mode. Dark mode and wikipedia just don't go together in my head. I tried it once and was freaked out. Everything else on my device is dark mode though, just not the regular internet. Guylaen (talk) 23:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]