Talk:Operation 40

Untitled

There is abundant publicly available, non-classified archival information on Op 40 now available, it need not be referred to as "alleged."— Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.59.121.177 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments

The following was found in the article. It was best to place it here. "Due to the nature of the topic, it is imperative that all facts be well-documented, with citations/references, rely on credible sources, and avoid conspiracy theories. The 1975 Church Committee reports is a good place to start[1] , as is the Cuban Information Archives." Joelito (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Joel! :-)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.59.121.177 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Isn't this technically a terrorist group? 76.174.139.84 (talk) 20:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Black Ops?

I'm not sure the video game Call of Duty: Black Ops "immortalizes" Op40, or if that is really relevant for the main section. Possibly in a "in popular culture" section? Dataxpress (talk) 03:44, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

f —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.193.156.58 (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Pop culture edit

I saw that a section of the article was removed by @Nikkimaria which had been added by 68.5.51.186. I am not the unregistered user, nor do I know them, but I did find the trivia interesting and believe some part of that trivia should be captured by the encyclopedia if only to mention that the Operation 40 was a playable faction in the video game.

"Operation 40 is a playable faction in the video game Call of Duty: Black Ops. Within the game's campaign mode, there is heavy implication that the main protagonist and Operation 40 operative Alex Mason may have been involved in the assassination of President Kennedy as a Soviet sleeper agent."

Therefore, I would like a community review on what part of this (some or all) should remain as part of the article or how to transform it into an appropriate part of the article. I believe the source (fandom.com) counts as a tertiary source. eximo (talk) 17:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not considered a reliable source - see WP:RSP. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)