This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
I took out the sentence completely because it was an innuendo and a non-sequitur, placed in the second paragraph. It couldn't really be taken in any other way than criticism of Christopher Andrew. If it is to be in the article at all it should be explicit and be in a section on criticisms.PussBroad (talk) 20:43, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think its appropriate for the 'disinformation topic template to appear on the bottom of this page. it doesn't really make any sense, as the archives is not disinformation according to generally accepted scholarly opinion on the topic, and even if the KGB did in some way 'manage' the contents of the archives, the information in it has repeatedly been shown to be accurate, so disinformation doesn't really fit here. SomewhatSpurious (talk) 01:21, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SomewhatSpurious: I'm not sure what to do. The Archive itself is not disinformation, but Mitrokhin through Andrew reported on disinformation operations. See section called "Disinformation campaign against the United States". I don't know if that means the template should be removed or if this article should be added to it. -Location (talk) 15:07, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Location: That's a good point. Although I am somewhat concerned that it could be misinterpreted as potential POV pushing? SomewhatSpurious (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SomewhatSpurious: OK. I've removed it. It appears as though the template was once named ((Soviet Bloc disinformation in the Cold War)); however, it was changed as some point. I briefly looked at the edit history of the template and I couldn't figure out when. -Location (talk) 18:34, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since these Mitrokhin documents are handwritten or typed transcripts, why is it called an archive? Isn't an archive made up of primary-source documents? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:bdfb:5300:11dc:9d83:6c11:8d3c (talk) 19:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Mitrokhin Archive's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:22, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]