Talk:Signal Intelligence Regiment (KONA)

Sourcing

This article so far only uses primary sources. According to Wikipedia:Notability, "Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability." Do you think you will be able to find secondary sources covering this topic?-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:35, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

You might find secondary sources for these, as they were more well know. Have a go. Any help is appreciated. scope_creep (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

There is a secondary source that talks about the various KONA units: Hitler's Codebreakers: German Signals Intelligence in World War 2, by John Jackson, pub Book Tower Publishing, 1st edition 2012 and 2nd edition 2013 (not necessarily identical). You could buy it from Amazon. This would at the very least establish notability.

There is a book that logically ought to mention KONA (but I cannot check that it does): Sigint: The Secret History of Signals Intelligence in the World Wars, by Peter F. Matthews, pub The History Press Ltd, 2013. If you are buying in Scotland, I suggest http://www.alibris.co.uk, since the book would be shipped from the UK, rather than India like with Amazon.

Whilst common sense would dictate that German sigint in World War II ought to be as notable as British and American sigint, this is WIkipedia...-- Toddy1 (talk) 18:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC) amended -- Toddy1 (talk) 18:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Coolio. I'll have a look, in the next few days. One or two of these books can be very valuable, as I've found in the past, in setting out the structure of an article. Most of the ones I researched seems to be in German, which I don't mind as such, but they take some work translating. scope_creep (talk) 01:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Cool. Just had a look on Google Books for the first one. It has a wee bit of data. scope_creep (talk) 01:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Cool. Solid choice. scope_creep (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Please do not remove the primary sources template whilst the article is mainly based on your interpretation of primary sources.-- Toddy1 (talk) 03:59, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

@Scope creep: If you do not stop removing the primary sources tag, this will go to WP:ANI.-- Toddy1 (talk) 12:00, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

TICOM DF-18 "Russian Decryption in the Former German Army" by Dettmann and Samsonow.

@Scope creep: If TICOM DF-18 is a missing document, how do you know what it says? You have cited pages 18 and 82.-- Toddy1 (talk) 10:46, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@Toddy1: DF-18 is mentioned in the first main, which is large. It is the main TICOM document. I've got the DF-18 on order from NARA. scope_creep (talk) 12:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I do not fully understand.

• Have you read pages 18 and 18 of TICOM DF-18? (Yes or no will do nicely.)
• Please identify the full name of whatever is meant by "the first main".

-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Citing I-19g, Page 5

Your recent edit says that "The Kona employed 5 personnel with each forward platoon with 50 officers stationed at Feste 10 (the long range intercept unit)" and cited I-19g, Page 5 as a source.

I downloaded I-19g and read page 5 (which is the 6th page of the pdf file). I cannot see how the document supports the statement. Incidentally though Feste 10 was listed as part of the long range direction-finding capability (on Page 6), it covered unidentified W/T nets (page 8); 617 and 623 Companies were long-range Sigint Companies (page 5).-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

This pdf contains Report No 2, which lists the "composition" of Feste 10 on page 3 (the 10th page of the pdf). There are only two officers, not 50.-- Toddy1 (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

It's going to take about a year and half to complete this article properly, I started it about a month. All facts and figures will be checked multiple times throughout the article, while it's been written and afterward. Lots of work is needing done to put in the initial structure of the article, a process to follow. The document for this article was the first done by TICOM, so it is a bit ropey in terms of content and structure. scope_creep (talk) 01:23, 16 February 2017 (UTC)