text:
Philippine Basketball Association

The Philippine Basketball Association (PBA) is a men's professional basketball league in the Philippines composed of twelve company-branded franchised teams. Founded in 1975, it is the first professional basketball league in Asia and is the second-oldest continuously operating professional basketball league in the world after North America's NBA.

The league played its first game at the Araneta Coliseum in Quezon City on April 9, 1975, and its regulations are a hybrid of rules from the NBA and FIBA. As of the 2022–23 season, the PBA season consists of three tournaments known as "conferences": the Philippine Cup, the Commissioner's Cup, and the Governors' Cup. The Commissioner's and Governors' Cups allow each team to sign a single foreign player known as an "import". Meanwhile, the Philippine Cup is exclusive for Filipino players and is considered the most prestigious of the three conferences. Although the three conferences have minor variations in format and rules, each consists of a single round-robin elimination round followed by playoffs to determine the champion. The winners of the conference cups do not face each other at the end of the season to determine the season champion; instead, each conference champion team are considered PBA champions. The achievement of a team winning all three conferences in a season is called the Grand Slam.

The San Miguel Beermen are the most successful team with a total of 29 championships, including a Grand Slam in 1989. They have also won the most titles in each of the current conferences: 10 Philippine Cups, 5 Commissioner's Cups, and 5 Governors' Cups. Meanwhile, the defunct Crispa Redmanizers are the only team to have achieved two Grand Slams.

As of 2022–23, the PBA earned ₱200 million in net revenue and had an average television audience of 4 million per game. The PBA also has an official developmental league, the PBA D-League.

Founding

The Philippine Basketball Association was founded when nine teams left the now-defunct Manila Industrial and Commercial Athletic Association (MICAA), which was tightly controlled by the Basketball Association of the Philippines (BAP), the FIBA-recognized national association at the time. With the BAP controlling the MICAA, the league was de jure amateur, as players were only paid allowances. This is much like what was done in other countries to circumvent the amateur requirement and to play in FIBA-sanctioned tournaments such as the Olympics. MICAA team owners were not pleased with how BAP (then led by Gonzalo "Lito" Puyat) were taking away their players to join the national team without consulting them first. On January 23, 1975, Mariwasa-Noritake Porcelainmakers' team owner, Emerson Coseteng, together with Carrier Weathermakers, Toyota Comets, Seven-Up Uncolas and Presto Ice Cream announced the formation of the PBA. The Crispa Redmanizers, Royal Tru-Orange, Tanduay Distillery, and the U/Tex Weavers later joined the upcoming professional league. Leopoldo Prieto, the coach for the Philippines at the 1956 Melbourne Olympics, was appointed as the first commissioner and Coseteng was chosen as the first president of the league's Board of Governors. The first game of the league was held at the Araneta Coliseum on April 9, 1975, featuring Mariwasa-Noritake and Concepcion Carrier.

Early years
The league's first 10 years was known for the intense rivalry of the Crispa Redmanizers and the Toyota Tamaraws, still considered one of the greatest rivalries in league history. Big names such as Robert Jaworski, Ramon Fernandez, Francis Arnaiz, Atoy Co, Bogs Adornado and Philip Cezar played for those squads before the two teams disbanded in 1983 and 1984 respectively. Following their disbandment, the league moved from the Araneta Coliseum to ULTRA in Pasig. There, the league continued to be popular, as several former Toyota and Crispa players suited up for different teams.

During the mid to late 1980s, Jaworski and Ginebra San Miguel became the league's most popular squad for their "never say die" attitude. The team had intense rivalries with the Tanduay Rhum Masters, which was led by Jaworski's ex-Toyota teammate-turned-rival Fernandez, and later the expansion Purefoods Corporation and younger players Alvin Patrimonio, Jerry Codiñera, Jojo Lastimosa and Fernandez (who moved from Tanduay). By the end of the 1980s, San Miguel Beer won numerous championships that included the 1989 Grand Slam, led by coach Norman Black and former national team stars Samboy Lim and Hector Calma.

In 1989, FIBA voted to allow professionals to play in their sanctioned tournaments, hence the PBA's players are now able to represent the country internationally. In 1990, the league sent its first all-professional squad to the Asian Games, earning a silver medal. The PBA would later send three more all-pro squads to the event.

The early 1990s saw Ginebra and Shell forming an intense rivalry that included Ginebra's walkout in 1990 finals against Shell and the team's dramatic comeback from a 3–1 deficit to beat Shell in the 1991 First Conference. Patrimonio, Allan Caidic, and a host of others became the league's main attraction. By 1993, the league moved to the Cuneta Astrodome in Pasay and later saw the Alaska Milkmen win the 1996 grand slam and nine titles in the decade.

Competition and scheduling changes
From 1999 to 2000, the PBA endured controversy. Several expatriate cagers arrived on the scene (such as Asi Taulava, Danny Seigle and Eric Menk). Their lineage was questionable and most of them were deported for falsifying documents. The arrival of dozens of these players was a counter to the fledgling Metropolitan Basketball Association, a regional-based professional league formed in 1998. After ABS-CBN's 2001 abandonment, the MBA faced mounting expenses and would fold within a year. Despite the MBA's disbandment and the arrival of those players to the PBA, attendance went sour for the PBA in 2002 and was even worse the following year.

In 2004, the league introduced drastic scheduling changes, when it decided to begin the season in October instead of January. The change in starting the season allowed the league to accommodate international tournaments held from June to September and it fit better with college hoops, the NCAA and the UAAP, whose seasons run from June to October. The league also reduced the number of conferences from three to two, renaming the All-Filipino Cup as the Philippine Cup and introducing a new import laden tournament named as the Fiesta Conference. To accommodate these changes, a transitional tournament, the 2004 PBA Fiesta Conference was held from February to July, which was won by the Barangay Ginebra Kings. The league also began to hold the annual All-Star weekend in the provinces, alternating from Luzon and Visayas/Mindanao provinces every year.

The league regained some popularity by this year, thanks in large part to Barangay Ginebra's three PBA championships led by Eric Menk, Jayjay Helterbrand and Mark Caguioa. Solid marketing and arrival of collegiate stars from the UAAP and the NCAA also worked in the PBA's favor.

By 2005, the league would take on the role of Philippine national representation under Chot Reyes, when FIBA lifted the suspension of the country following the formation of the Samahang Basketbol ng Pilipinas despite a ninth-place finish in the 2007 FIBA Asia Championship. In 2009, however, the all-amateur Smart Gilas team became the country's official representative in international competitions. The PBA's role in forming a national team was thus reduced to sending up reinforcements to beef up the national squad.

Modern era and expansion
After the appointment of Chito Salud, son of former commissioner Rudy Salud as the commissioner of the PBA, the league returned the three-conference format starting in the 2010–11 season. This also ushered the return of the previously retired conferences, the Commissioner's and Governors' cups.

The beginning of the 2010s also saw the dominance of the Talk 'N Text Tropang Texters, who nearly got the Grand Slam in the 2010–11 season and won the Philippine Cup in three consecutive years (2010–11, 2011–12, 2012–13) enabling them to permanently keep possession of the Jun Bernardino Trophy, the trophy given to the Philippine Cup champions.

On May 19, 2013, the third game of the PBA Commissioner's Cup Finals between the Alaska Aces and the Barangay Ginebra San Miguel set the all-time basketball attendance record of 23,436 at the Smart Araneta Coliseum, which broke the previous record of 23,108 set 11 days earlier that featured the semifinals series doubleheader between Alaska vs. San Mig Coffee and Barangay Ginebra vs. Talk 'N Text. This record was eventually broken on February 12, 2014, when the seventh game of the 2013–14 PBA Philippine Cup Semifinals series between Barangay Ginebra San Miguel and San Mig Super Coffee Mixers set the all-time basketball attendance record of 24,883.

The 2013–14 season became historic as the San Mig Super Coffee Mixers became the fourth team to win the Grand Slam. Tim Cone, the coach of the Coffee Mixers also made history when he became the first coach to win two Grand Slams.

For the 2014–15 season, the league expanded to twelve teams, after accepting two new franchises: Kia Sorento and Blackwater Elite. The league held its opening ceremonies at the Philippine Arena and set an all-time Philippine basketball attendance record of 52,612. This record was eventually broken during the Game 7 of the 2022–23 Commissioner's Cup Finals, contested between the Barangay Ginebra San Miguel and guest team Bay Area Dragons, which was also held in the Philippine Arena with an attendance of 54,589.

On February 15, 2015, in the middle of the 2014–15 PBA season, commissioner Chito Salud announced that he would step down as the league's commissioner and was succeeded by Chito Narvasa starting the 2015–16 PBA season. Salud was then appointed as the President and CEO of the league, when the board of governors decided to restructure the league and create the President/CEO position to manage the league's marketing, expansion and business-related matters. The Commissioner (who will also be the league's Chief Operating Officer) will handle game-related matters.

Salud, however, also stepped down as the league's president and CEO on December 31, 2015, and was replaced by incumbent PBA chairman Robert Non. The board of governors later appointed Chito Narvasa as the President and CEO. The said position was eventually dissolved before the start of the 2016 Governors' Cup.

Amid controversies during his term, Narvasa stepped down on December 31, 2017. The board appointed Media Bureau chief Willie Marcial as his replacement on January 25, 2018.

PBA bubble and declining attendance
Upon the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, the league was forced to postpone their games for the 2020 season just three after holding their opening ceremonies. It is not until October that the league was able to resume the Philippine Cup at Angeles, Pampanga in a bubble setup. This was the first time that the league held only one tournament in a season.

The opening of the 2021 season was planned to open in January 2021 but was also delayed to July 2021 due to the rising cases of COVID-19 caused by the virus' Delta variant. The games were initially played at the Ynares Sports Arena in Pasig in a semi-bubble type setup but due to another case surge in Metro Manila in August, the games were moved to the Don Honorio Ventura State University in Bacolor, Pampanga. The 2021 Governors' Cup started in December in a semi-bubble type setup at the Ynares Sports Arena in Pasig. After two weeks, the Quezon City government approved the league's proposal to play their games with a limited number of audience at the Smart Araneta Coliseum. The league postponed indefinitely the scheduled games for January 2022 due to the increasing number of COVID-19 cases brought by the Omicron variant.

On February 16, 2022, Alaska Milk Corporation which owned the Alaska Aces announced that the team would leave the PBA at the end of the 2021 Governors' Cup after 35 years in the league and winning 14 championships. Alaska played their last game on March 19, 2022, with a loss to the NLEX Road Warriors in the quarterfinals. A ceremony was held shortly after the game to mark the Alaska's departure from the PBA. The team was later sold to Converge ICT, to which it was named Converge FiberXers.

The league's modern history is noted for its declining attendance, despite still pulling high television viewership. Journalists, team owners, and coaches have noted the dominance of SMC/RSA and MVP teams as a potential reason, with some calling for parity in the league. The low attendance has also been compared to the high figures of collegiate and professional volleyball in the country. The Samahang Basketbol ng Pilipinas has since stated that they will help address these concerns.

Teams
All franchises are owned by corporations since the league's inception in 1975, being the successor of the Manila Industrial and Commercial Athletic Association, an amateur league which also featured corporate teams. They are not based on geographic locale, so they do not play in a home arena.

A team's name is often divided into two parts; the first is the company or brand name, then the product or a moniker – usually connected to the business of the company. In some cases, the brand name and the moniker can be fused. For example, the San Miguel Beermen is a team owned by the San Miguel Brewery of the San Miguel Corporation, makers of the popular San Miguel Beer brand. The names of the teams often changes, often depending on what product or service the owners like to advertise. A name change could be drastic, to the point of switching industries entirely, such as in the case of the Pepsi Mega Bottlers which changed their names to the Mobiline Cellulars (now TNT Tropang Giga).

 * Notes

Team popularity
In 2008, a survey by the Social Weather Stations showed that Purefoods shares the honor of the league's most popular team along with Barangay Ginebra. It appeared that Ginebra was the most popular team among men, while Purefoods was the most popular among women. Also, Ginebra was more popular in Metro Manila and Luzon and in classes ABC, while Purefoods was more popular in Visayas and Mindanao and in class D. The two teams were tied for most supporters in class E. In terms of percentage of supporters, the survey showed that, after Ginebra and Purefoods (which both got 31%), are San Miguel Beermen (21%), Alaska (13%), Sta. Lucia (5%), Red Bull (4%), Talk N' Text (3%), Coca-Cola (1%), and Air 21 (1%). Notably, the top three teams that have the most supporters have also been considered the most talent-laden teams. They also fall under the San Miguel Corporation umbrella.

Team rivalries
The most famous matchup was the Crispa-Toyota rivalry of the 1970s. Fans faithfully supported their favorite squads and appeared in the multitudes at the Araneta Coliseum, or wherever the archrivals had met. In those days, the players were very passionate. On one occasion, they engaged in a major brawl, leading to the arrest and detention of several players from both clubs at Fort Bonifacio.

The most heated rivalry in the PBA today is that of two teams representing the Ginebra franchise and the Purefoods franchise. The rivalry is now commonly known as the Manila Clasico. It traces its roots on the original Añejo–Purefoods rivalry of the late 1980s to early 1990s.

Other short-lived or less intense rivalries include:
 * Tanduay vs Ginebra (1986–1987 rivalry)
 * Ginebra–Shell rivalry (1990s rivalry)
 * Purefoods–Swift rivalry (1990s corporate rivalry)
 * Añejo/Ginebra vs San Miguel (late-1980s to present rivalry)
 * Ginebra/Gordon's Gin vs Alaska (late-1980s–2022)
 * Alaska vs Purefoods (late-1980s–2022)
 * Alaska vs San Miguel (late-1980s–2022)
 * Red Bull vs. the San Miguel franchises (Barangay Ginebra, San Miguel and Purefoods, 2000–2007)
 * Talk 'N Text/TNT vs. Petron/San Miguel (2010–present)
 * Purefoods/San Mig Coffee/B-Meg/Star/Magnolia vs. Rain or Shine (2009–present, "New Age Rivalry or Kontrapelo")
 * Barangay Ginebra–Meralco rivalry (2016–present)

Playing venues
As teams do not represent geographic locales, the league itself rents venues for games. The PBA usually plays a doubleheader three times a week at the arenas in Metro Manila, and a game on Saturdays at the provinces, popularly known as "out-of-town" games.

The majority of games are at the Araneta Coliseum in Quezon City and the SM Mall of Asia Arena in Pasay. When both arenas are unavailable, the alternate venues are the Ynares Center in Antipolo, Rizal, PhilSports Arena in Pasig, and the Filoil EcoOil Centre in San Juan. Occasionally, provincial games are hosted in selected venues throughout the country. Playoff games are usually held at venues in Metro Manila, most often at the Araneta Coliseum. However, recent incentives to promote the league throughout the country have resulted in out-of-town playoff games.

The league has also played several times outside the Philippines, the majority in Dubai where there is a large Filipino community.

Selection of teams
When the PBA was created, it was from the nine clubs representing different companies that seceded from the Manila Industrial and Commercial Athletic Association (MICAA). The PBA adopted the MICAA's "franchise system" akin to North American sports, only that instead of geographic regions, teams represent companies. Several teams have disbanded and entered the league. Disbandment of a team usually occurs if its mother company regularly sustains financial losses, or for non-sporting reasons, causing it to sell the team to another company. Aside from buying an already-existing team, a company can enter the PBA via an expansion team.

An aspiring team seeking to join the PBA had to be approved by majority of the existing teams. There is a lockout provision, which enables a team to veto the entry of a franchise team whose company is a direct competitor that of one of the existing team's business.

Previously, a company is allowed only one team, with each team having one vote in the Board of Governors; with the acquisition of La Tondeña Distillers (now Ginebra San Miguel) by the San Miguel Corporation (SMC) in 1987, this caused the SMC to have two "sister" teams: the San Miguel Beermen and the Ginebra San Miguel (now the Barangay Ginebra San Miguel). At this point, Ginebra coach Robert Jaworski had autonomy on the decisions on his team, so the situation of SMC having sister teams was tolerated. In 1998, Jaworski ran and won for a Senate seat; this caused him to delegate coaching duties to his longtime deputy Rino Salazar. By this time, Danding Cojuangco has seized control of SMC, and he added Allan Caidic to Ginebra from San Miguel. Jaworski disapproved of this, and resigned.

In 2001 the Ayala Corporation sold its Purefoods-Hormel unit, which included the Purefoods TJ Hotdogs team, to SMC. Later that year, RFM Corporation sold its Cosmos Bottling Corporation, including the Pop Cola Panthers team, to Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, a subsidiary of SMC, rechristening them as the Coca-Cola Tigers, and giving SMC four teams. The PBA approved this arrangement, with SMC getting two votes in the Board of Governors instead of four. In 2006, SMC sold back its Coca-Cola unit to the Atlanta-based Coca-Cola Company, and sold the now renamed Powerade Tigers to Sultan 900, Inc., becoming the GlobalPort Batang Pier, decreasing their teams to three.

By 2010, Manuel V. Pangilinan has owned the Talk 'N Text Phone Pals team via the Pilipino Telephone Company. Pangilinan, who had controlling ownership in Meralco, bought the Sta. Lucia Realtors team, rechristening them as the Meralco Bolts. His NLEX Corporation then bought the Air21 Express team in 2014, becoming the NLEX Road Warriors. This has made Cojuangco and Pangilinan own three teams each out of the 12 teams in the PBA by 2014.

This closed system, while unlike the open European model of promotion and relegation, allows teams from other leagues to carryover some of players to the PBA, if they are given this concession, such as in 2006 when the Welcoat Dragons were allowed to carry over three players from their Philippine Basketball League team.

The PBA also allows "guest teams", or teams not represented in the Board of Governors, to play in certain conferences. The most recent guest team is the now-defunct Bay Area Dragons, who took part in the 2022–23 PBA Commissioner's Cup.

Season format

Since the 2010–11 season, three conferences are usually held. Unlike in most leagues where a "conference" refers to the grouping of teams based on historical or geographical context, PBA conferences are tournaments each consisting of an elimination round and playoffs, similar to the Apertura and Clausura format in Latin American football. There may be fewer conferences in a season, such as the 2020 and 2021 seasons having one and two conferences, respectively, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The three conferences are the Philippine Cup, Commissioner's Cup and Governors' Cup, with the Philippine Cup being considered the most prestigious of the three. The season begins with an opening ceremony consisting of the presentation of the team's roster and their respective muses followed by the Leo Awards, the league's awarding ceremony, all before the start of the first game of the season.

All conferences begin with a single round-robin elimination round, where every team plays against each other once, with the top eight teams advancing to the playoffs while the rest are eliminated. The format of the playoffs depends on the conference being held and has varied over the years. The Finals, regardless of conference, is a best-of-seven series to determine the conference champion. Previous conferences featured a group stage where teams play against their group opponents twice or a second elimination round for the top teams serving as the conference semifinals. The conference champions don't meet at the end of the season to determine an overall champion, instead, all of them are declared league champions. If a single team manages to win every conference in a single season, the team earns the rare distinction of being a Grand Slam champion. At the end of the conference, the league holds an awarding ceremony to honor the best players of the conference.

Once the season concludes, the league holds its rookie draft. Most draft applicants have played in the collegiate ranks (either in the Philippines or the United States), the PBA D-League, or in other domestic and international leagues. The off-season usually lasts a couple of months before the next season begins. In some cases, there may be a mid-season break to give way for players who are members of the Philippine national team to play in FIBA tournaments, as such the season may be lengthened. There have been calls from within the league to revert back to the two-conference format used from 2004 to 2010 to shorten the season and have it in sync with the FIBA calendar again.

Game rules
The PBA uses its own rules for its games, independent from FIBA or the NBA. Most non-professional leagues in the Philippines primarily use FIBA rules, so called "amateur rules", although recent professional leagues, such as the MPBL and PSL, have used FIBA rules for its games. The Games and Amusements Board (GAB) has its rules for the size of the basketball court and equipment, which the PBA adapts.

Game rules have previously been predominantly influenced by the NBA, such as the rules on illegal defenses. After PBA players have been allowed to represent the Philippines in FIBA tournaments, the league adopted a portion of the FIBA rules, including allowing zone defenses, so that the Philippine national team will not be disadvantaged in FIBA competitions.

Player eligibility

Eligibility to participate in the PBA is generally limited to natural born Filipino citizens born in the Philippines. There are player quotas for natural born Filipinos born outside the Philippines, while naturalized Filipinos and foreigners can only play in certain conferences. Coaching is restricted to Filipinos, although longtime foreigner residents and holders of certain visas have been granted exemptions.

Natural-born Filipino citizens are generally eligible to become part of a PBA team through the PBA draft. Foreigners as well as naturalized Filipino citizens with no Filipino parents can not join the league through the PBA draft; both who could only play as imports, and only on certain conferences.

Filipino players who are aspiring to join the PBA through the draft and are born outside the Philippines are classed as Filipino-foreigners regardless if both their parents are Filipino citizens at the time of their birth. They have to submit documentary proof of their Filipino citizenship from the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Immigration prior to their rookie draft. Filipinos with foreign ancestry who are born in the Philippines are not subject to the same requirements. A team can have a maximum of five Filipino-foreigners players in its roster. Starting the draft for the 2022 season, the Filipino-foreigner cap was increased to seven. Filipino-foreigners would only need a passport and be of Filipino heritage.

Foreigners and naturalized Filipinos can play as imports, but only on import-laden conferences. If a player who is not a natural-born Filipino plays in an all-Filipino conference, it can lead his team forfeiting the wins in games where he took part. Imports are directly hired by teams, and are not drafted. In some conferences where imports are allowed, a height limit is imposed. An import who is over the height limit will not be allowed to play. Most imports are African Americans, but there had been tournaments where other nationalities have played in.

Coach eligibility
Head coaching role for teams in the PBA is generally only available to Filipino citizens since foreigners who are classified as non-resident aliens are barred from serving the role as head coach. It is possible for a foreigner to be a head coach of a PBA team by acquiring permanent residency such as in the case of Tim Cone and Norman Black who married Filipinos and being a holder of a Special Resident Retiree's Visa (SRRV) such as in the case of Rajko Toroman who became eligible for an SRRV after residing in the country for at least five years. The restriction on foreigners has been in place since 1991.

Other regulations
Players of the PBA sign a Uniform Players' Contract (UPC) when they sign in with a team franchise which plays in the league. The team manager of the concerned team also signs this contract. The UPC includes the bill of rights and privileges as well as obligations and responsibilities of the PBA's players and teams. Players under an active UPC cannot transfer to a team outside the PBA. Consequentially, this prohibits players from taking part in a league other than the PBA (also known colloquially as ligang labas or "outside league"). Although occasionally, players are allowed to temporarily suit up in such games if they secure permission from both their teams and the league management, especially for participations involving charity.

Awards
The league awards outstanding Filipino players of the season in the annual Leo Awards. The awards include the Most Valuable Player and the Rookie of the Year. At the end of each conference, the league also awards the Best Player of the Conference for Filipinos and the Bobby Parks Best Import for foreigners.

The PBA Hall of Fame was instituted in 2005 during the 30th anniversary celebration of the league.

Records
There are all-time records written in Philippine Basketball Association records, as well as distinctions like the PBA career scoring leaders, PBA 2,000 Assists Club, PBA 500 Three-Points Club, PBA 600 Most Games Club, and PBA Top 40 Rebounders. Unlike other leagues, the PBA records of individual players combine both elimination round and playoff round statistics instead of placing them in separate categories.

Media coverage
The PBA has been covered by television networks and other media companies since its opening day. One Sports is their current television partner. Games are being aired on live television via One Sports and PBA Rush, with livestreaming via Cignal Play, Pilipinas Live (worldwide), and Smart LiveStream. Following their departure from TV5, the PBA games are currently broadcast on RPTV.

1975–1999
The PBA's first broadcast partner was Kanlaon Broadcasting System (KBS; now known as Radio Philippines Network or RPN) in 1975. Banahaw Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) broadcast the PBA in 1976 before returning to KBS in 1977. This is then followed by a four-year stint with Government Television (GTV), later renamed to Maharlika Broadcasting System (MBS) in 1980, which lasted from 1978 until 1981.

In 1982, the league awarded the broadcast rights to Vintage Enterprises, Inc. to produce the broadcasts for various television networks under the network's Vintage Sports brand. The PBA on Vintage Sports was first aired on BBC in 1982 and 1983. This is then followed by MBS, later renamed to People's Television Network (PTV), from 1984 until 1995. Vintage's last stint came with the Intercontinental Broadcasting Corporation (IBC), which broadcast the PBA from 1996 until 1999. In 1997 and 1998, ESPN Asia also aired PBA games in a "parallel broadcast".

2000–2011
Vintage would go on to be acquired by Viva Entertainment in 1999. From 2000 until 2002, PBA games were aired under the PBA on Viva TV branding, but remained on IBC. IBC would then join forces with the National Broadcasting Network (NBN; PTV's previous identity from 2001 to 2011) in 2003, but the former would drop out the same year in October.

For the 2004–05 season, the PBA awarded the broadcast rights to the Associated Broadcasting Company (ABC), which would go on to become what is now known as TV5 in August 2008. The 2007–08 season would also be the last season of ABC/TV5's first stint with the league. Solar Entertainment Corporation then won a bid for the league's broadcasting rights, which saw the network split the games between C/S 9 (later renamed to Solar TV and Basketball TV). In February 2011, Solar was looking to find a new broadcast partner, thus for the remainder of its contract, ABS-CBN's sister channel Studio 23 would be broadcasting the two remaining conferences of the 2010–11 season.

2011–present
After the expiration of Solar's contract, TV5 became the league's broadcast partner once again. It first began under the AKTV programming block of IBC in the 2011–12 season and would run until the 2013 Commissioner's Cup due to the expiration of a blocktime agreement between MediaQuest Holdings (owner of TV5) and IBC. Although IBC would go on to also broadcast the 2013 Governors' Cup with TV5 broadcasting the Finals of both Commissioner's and Governors' Cups. AksyonTV simulcasted TV5's coverage for the 2013–14 and 2014–15 seasons, followed by Hyper beginning in January 2016 and ending with the 2016 Commissioner's Cup. From 2013 until 2016, select games were also simulcasted on Fox Sports Asia.

Shortly after the opening of the 2016 Governors' Cup, PBA Rush was launched, which is a PBA-dedicated cable channel that features game simulcasts and replays as well as its own dedicated programming. Sports5 then partnered with ESPN to broadcast games on the newly-created ESPN5 channel ahead of the 2017 Governors' Cup Finals.

Beginning with the 2023–24 season, TV5 has partnered up with multiple networks to broadcast the PBA games as TV5 President Guido Zaballero stated that the channel began shifting its focus on entertainment and news programs such as the Korean dramas Revolutionary Love and Diary of a Prosecutor. The PBA entered into an acquired agreement with ZOE Broadcasting Network and ABS-CBN Corporation to air the league's games on A2Z starting November 5, 2023 until February 11, 2024. TV5 Network, Inc. entered into an acquired agreement with Nine Media Corporation (NMC) to broadcast the selected PBA games on CNN Philippines every Saturday and Sunday beginning in January 2024, a deal that was cut short due to the network's shut at the end of that month.

Current broadcasters
ESPN5 would be renamed to its current form One Sports for the PBA's 2020 season, giving the league its own current branding, PBA on One Sports. Following the shut down of CNN Philippines at the end of January, RPTV took over all live broadcasts, weekdays and weekends, beginning in February.

Streaming and radio
TV5's stint brought the PBA into the streaming scene. The PBA games can be viewed on Smart LiveStream, Cignal Play, Pilipinas Live, and iWantTFC. The worldwide broadcast for PBA on TV5 is also aired on Kapatid Channel and AksyonTV International. Radio broadcast are being aired on Radyo Pilipinas 2 (DZSR) selected provincial stations of the Presidential Broadcasting Service.

Administration
The league is currently headed by a Commissioner, and the Chairman of the PBA Board of Governors. The Commissioner handles the marketing and administration aspects as well as the technical, game related concerns of the PBA and its developmental league. The Chairman of the PBA Board of Governors is elected, together with the Vice Chairman and Board Treasurer before the start of the season among each of the league's representatives to the board.

By tradition, from 1994 to 2017, the incumbent Vice Chairman and Treasurer will assume the Chairmanship and the Vice-Chairmanship respectively the following season.

title: Philippine Basketball Association


text:
Talk:Reichenbach Falls

What about the falls?
This is an article about Sherlock Holmes. Shouldn't that be a piece of trivia near the bottom of the article about the falls? See Niagra Falls for examples of FA quality articles regarding waterfalls. Padillah 18:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

 * It should certainly be in a section of its own. If you've got any more information about the Falls themselves, feel free to add it. --McGeddon 19:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Might as well call this Reichenbach Falls (Sherlock Holmes)

 * I disagree strongly with this assessment. While I would love to see more information added to this article, the location is far more notable as the site of the fictional Sherlock Holmes's (possible) demise than it is as a real-world waterfall, as Holmes is easily the best-known fictional detective in history and probably one of the top 50 best known fictional characters, having been adapted and re-adapted dozens of times. To compare Reichenbach Falls' article to that of Niagara Falls is a bit silly, and ignores the point that any discussion of the falls without heavy emphasis on why it is most broadly known is, by definition, a heavily non-NPOV approach. Reichenbach is the fourth highest waterfall in Switzerland. while Niagara Falls is the most powerful falls in North America and probably the most widely known waterfall in the world (one could argue the point, with Angel Falls coming at least a close second and regionally, I'm sure it varies around the world). The latter has a rich history in terms of its cultural and regional impact on the development of that part of the United States and Canada, having been the source of myths, legends, much of the early work on hydro-electric power, and a thriving tourism industry, while the former... is kind of tall, as these things go.

 * As a point of reference, the third-tallest building in Switzerland is the Sulzer Building. It has no article. -Miskaton (talk) 23:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 28 June 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved by strong consensus. No support at all in fact. Andrewa (talk) 12:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Reichenbach Falls → Reichenbach Fall – It is singular; German: Reichenbachfall (sing.), not Fälle ; https://s.geo.admin.ch/741a0492ad ZH8000 (talk) 12:25, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). ZH8000 (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Contestion is not valid: there are indeed singular usages of fall with the meaning of a watterfall: "fall sg., usually in plural: falls   - waterfall". -- ZH8000 (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * German usage is utterly irrelevant. What is it called in English? 216.8.145.227 (talk) 14:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

 * That's an utterly stupid remark. Of course it does. Well, at least as long as seriousness, proved sources, factual history, objectivity etc are considered as major attributes of an ecyclopedia. In other words: as long as WP is not just another source of fake news. -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Oppose – In the absence of strong evidence showing that English-language reliable sources primarily use the singular form, the title should remain as "Falls", as the article says that the topic is "a series of waterfalls" (and since we shouldn't change the title without a good reason). The practice in other languages is irrelevant. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I aknowledge that there are many, or even a majority of English sources, which use the plural form (probably just out of habit). According to all English dictionaries there obviously are also singular applications, even in English language. I just take the stance that potential errors, even if they were made centuries ago, or even reproduced by many or even the majority (the majority is not always right), shall not be kept alive just for the sake of conformity.
 * Your argument that the topic is "a series of waterfalls" is IMO not valid and not used that way by geographical experts, since – even in German – this is not the reason to call a current of water over a series of cliffs in plural form "Wasserfälle", but rather the fact that waterfalls have several inflows (not necessarily called differently). In the case of the Reichenbachfall this is clearly not the case, since only the single Rychenbach feeds the fall. -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Oppose. English language sources never [rarely] use "Reichenbach Fall". Station1 (talk) 00:08, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * That's simply and very easily falsifiable: Tate Modern title about works of JMW Turner: "The Reichenbach Fall" (a very serious source), even JWM Turner called it that way The Fall of Reichenbach, British Museum: "View of the Reichenbach Fall, people coming from haymaking in the foreground" (sic!), in books, e.g. The Reichenbach Problem by Martin Allison Booth: "“The Reichenbach Fall!” Holloway had to shout above the water's clamour to be heard", just to name a very few. Even the two shown paintings in the article by Sidney Paget and JMW Turner speak a different language!! – Holy sake: just try a simple google search "Reichenbach Fall -sherlock -wiki" -- ZH8000 (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * In the first 2 external links you cite, the phrase "Reichenbach Fall" does not appear, but "Reichenbach Falls" does. The British Museum does use "Reichenbach Fall" in describing a circa 1830 Swiss print titled La Cascade inférieur du Reichenbach, but in other cases they use "Reichenbach Falls". In The Reichenbach Problem, a work of fiction, "Reichenbach Fall" appears once in a quotation, while "Reichenbach Falls" appears four times elsewhere. Nevertheless, I've altered my comment to be more literal. Station1 (talk) 17:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Pardon-me, but there is something incomprehensible in your response (In the first 2 external links you cite, the phrase "Reichenbach Fall" does not appear, but "Reichenbach Falls" does.). Tate Gallery titles a collection of paintings by Turner with "The Fall of the Reichenbach" (singular, not plural). Turner calls several of his paintings "The Reichenbach Fall". The British museum does the same. SO there is obviously a reason why they did so. You can't neglect that. -- ZH8000 (talk) 12:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't find "Reichenbach Fall" anywhere on the Tate Gallery web site, even when searching for that phrase. I do see "Reichenbach Falls" in several places. There are some early 19th-century Turner works titled "The Fall of the Reichenbach" or similar, but even most of those use the plural "Falls". Station1 (talk) 06:06, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Oppose 1) Google ngrams shows that falls is definitely more popular, per WP:COMMONNAME. 2) OED lists only falls as a synonym of waterfallNoun 5. Chambers, OED, Merriam-Webster, and Randomhouse/Dictonary.com list falls as the preferred usage. So using a dictionary as an argument is inconclusive (but leans towards falls). 3) As a series of waterfalls, falls is still more appropriate. Very few falls are ever without the s Ribbon Fall, Bridalveil Fall, Illilouette Fall, Nevada Fall, and Vernal Fall are the only ones I can find, and for some reason they're all in California. menaechmi (talk) 20:37, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * After a look at the history of those five articles, it appears that in some cases they were created with "Fall" originally, and in some cases they were moved to their current titles by someone saying they should use "Fall" because of official names given by the U.S. federal government. I didn't notice any common authorship among the people who conducted those actions. Wikipedia, of course, cares more about common names than official names, and there is presumably no official name for the Reichenbach Fall(s) in English. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:23, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * All 5 falls are in Yosemite National Park. Illilouette is definitely an error and I'll move that once this RM closes unless there's an objection. The other four got their official USGS names on June 30, 1932 based on decision cards prepared by the same person on August 19, 1931. In each case the "recommendation" shows only the first word ("Vernal", etc.), with the word "fall" appearing on the line for "thing named", so, rightly or wrongly, they seem to be exceptions to the rule. Station1 (talk) 04:47, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

 * By differentiating the singular from the plural case it is hardly relevant to count how often they appear in any text, isn't it?! -- ZH8000 (talk) 12:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Reichenbach Falls


text:
Talk:Special Operations Executive

List
The list of agents on this page is of such a length that I feel it would benefit from being divided into the various SOE Sections. At present I don't have sufficient data to do this myself, but whoever has added all of the names which do not yet have their own pages may well have it. Petermanchester 11:44, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I am currently undertaking the addition to this page of as many books and films as I can recall and/or discover on the subject of SOE operations, as well as agent biographies that I am able to add. Petermanchester 22:05, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

As of this writing, the link titled "Special Operations Executive Records Release 8th Feb 2002" in category "external links" seems broken. The current URL http://www.pro.gov.uk/releases/feb2002-SOE/list.htm says 404. Hope this helps maintain this impressive article. Alain Becker (FR) 03:42, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Yup, it's broken, and it doesn't look like it's going to come back. The whole site seems to have moved to http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk, and lists of releases before 2003 have been cleansed. Their online catalogue (PROCAT) is dead, so I can't search for the missing info.  As a consolation prize, I added a link to the nearest thing I could find, a list of 2003 document releases relating to SOE. --Heron 10:52, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

They do seem to have been making changes. However, there's a search page active, for the moment, at ,http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search.asp CVA 19:07, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think Roger Courtney has a role here, with the SBS, but can't figure out how. Guttlekraw 06:49, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've added details of two books by MFD Foot and a description of Mackenzie's book. As a personal opinion I'm not sure why we have books and films on a joint list. I feel films generally are very inaccurate and tend to "glamorise" the subject. I'd like to suggest we have separate "books" and "films" lists. There are now so many books (of varying quality) some of the very reliable ones are in danger of being "lost" in a ever lengthening list. What do contributors think of the idea of dividing the bibliography into three sections : official publications/academic histories ; autobiographies of those who actually took part ; biographies / popular books written by authors without personal experience ? Cefas 26 Mar 06

Have not received any comments so have amended article on lines suggested above. Cefas 14 April 06

FANY "The SOE included a number of women (who were often recruited from the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry); its F Section (France) alone placed 39 female agents in to the field, of whom 13 did not return. " I always understood that female SOE agents were placed in FANY after recruitment because female members of the British Armed Forces were not allowed to carry arms. FANY had a more relaxed attitude to rules and regulations. It was thought that if capture they might get some protection from being members of a uniformed force. Of course it did not help. FANY did supply personnel to staff SOE UK radio stations but that was probably because they were considered very trustworthy because of their backgrounds. --jmb 23:38, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I included a section on this in Women's Auxiliary Air Force as most were WAAF's attached to FANY--Pandaplodder (talk) 13:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

France
The phrase "The F Section, under British control, recruited agents who were not prepared to accept the leadership of General De Gaulle" could be better expressed. Some people not liking De Gaulle wasn't the only reason for the two sections. If anything I thought F section came first & RF was started because De Gaulle didn't want to work under British control. -- SteveCrook 09:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Saw a set of TV series on the Military Channel which detailed many failures of SOE and why SIS thought SOE is strictly an amateur operation. It seems the general opinion that all the failure of Section F was due to the incompetence of section chief Maurice Buckmaster whom someone said was not intelligent enough to be in the intellegence work. He repeatedly ignored warning notice from France and warning signals from British agents. He also retained highly suspicious and compromised personnel in key positions. The failures of Section F resulted in the capture and death of hundreds of French and British agents. ~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by VimalaNowlis (talk • contribs) 03:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Denmark
The Danish Resistance was able to mount few covert actions before the end of the war. Most of the actions conducted were railroad sabotage to halt German troop movements from and to Norway. However, there were examples of sabotage on a much larger scale especially by BOPA. In all over 1000 operations were conducted from 1942 and onwards. The Danish resistance also saved nearly all of the Danish jews from certain death in German KZ camps. This was a massive overnight operation and is to this day recognized among jews as one of the most significant displays of public defiance against the Germans. They did assist SOE in its activities in neutral Sweden. For example, SOE was able to obtain several shiploads of vital ball-bearings which had been interned in Swedish ports.

One of the two striked through parts cant be right

Tha slughy 22:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Chamberlain
The Neville Chamberlain article states "he had a key role in the formation of the Special Operations Executive", yet this article doesn't mention him at all. --J Clear 12:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

 * In M R D Foot's SOE The Special Operations Executive 1940-46, the forerunner of SOE was agreed in March 1939 for sabotage and leaflet work in the Czech borderlands and Austria. It says that Chamberlain did not object.  Then in 1940 - By a curious irony, the last details had already been handed over by Churchill to be settled by a personage whom Dalton particularly detested.  The forging of a weapon intended to create the utmost difficulties for Hitler was undertaken by the man who is commonly derided as having been too soft in his treatment of Hitler at Munich: Neville Chamberlain.  --jmb 18:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Mistakes and Points
FRANCE "SOE's operations in France were directed by two London-based country sections. F Section was under British control, while RF Section was linked to General de Gaulle's Free French government in exile."

>>

This is not true (see "A Life in Secrets" -Sarah Helm). de Gaulle's group was in no way linked with the SOE. In fact de Gaulle was at direct odds with SOE's F Section. He believed the British were carrying on illegal operation in France because they were not linked with his Free France (supposedly the exiled government). At the end of the war de Gaule went to the point of ordering some SOE agents off French soil. SOE (F) also allowed agents to do field recruiting which meant many native French worked with SOE on the ground.

 * SOE preferred not to work with the UK-based Free French as it was notoriously leak-prone, and had a reputation for being very un-security conscious. This went back to normal military operations such as the Invasion of Madagascar when FF personnel were heard openly discussing the forthcoming landings, in pubs and nightclubs. After this, the British stopped informing de Gaulle about forthcoming operations and naturally, he resented this. The relationships between SOE and the French Resistance personnel on the ground however, were on the whole, excellent, despite some political differences, some groups being Communist.

 * SOE also initially co-operated with the American OSS when it arrived on the scene but after a number of operations in Occupied France where the OSS operatives inexperience caused a number of Resistance and SOE people to be arrested by the Gestapo, this stopped. After that, SOE refused to co-operate with the OSS unless they would co-ordinate their activities under the umbrella of SOE, which they declined to do, and the OSS were then forced to organise their own operations in isolation. US personnel were at a disadvantage operating undercover in Occupied France, as simple things such as the way a person held their knife and fork could be noticed in places such as the pavement cafes and restaurants that abounded in places like Paris and most French towns. The French eat-out far more than many countries, especially in the evenings, and surprisingly, cutting one's food first and then using only the fork afterwards (a way of eating common among Americans but unusual in Europe) was a dead give-away to the Gestapo and Milice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.40.253.120 (talk) 13:36, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ... and another thing, at the time many American men (even many non-Jewish ones) were circumcised, which was also a dead giveaway as all the Gestapo had to do was to get a suspected person to drop their trousers and underpants - if the person was circumcised that meant he was a Jew.

 * By the time the OSS was present in Occupied Europe, All the circumcised males had already been sent off to Auschwitz-Birkenau, Dachau and the-like, for the gas chambers, so being a circumcised male in Occupied Europe was not likely to result in a long, and peaceful existence - just think of the pissoir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.57.101 (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

--

"SOE included a number of women (who were often recruited from the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry); F Section alone sent 39 female agents into the field, of whom 13 did not return."

>>

Actually while some were recruited while in FANY (First Aid Nursing Yeomanry... Im not joking that was the initials used) - SOE mainly used FANY as a cover for their women spies. England's laws did not permit women to take part in combat or field operations (other than drivers and nurses etc.). So to get around this the women enlisted in SOE were also enlisted in FANY to give them a cover. This also allowed SOE to get money and such for the women.

---

"The memorial's Roll of Honour lists the names of the 91 men and 13 women members of the SOE who gave their lives for France's freedom."

>>

This is a quick statement but should be fleshed out a bit. "gave their lives for France's Freedom" is not accurate. The main point of opperations was to prepare for D-Day. The agents where giving their lives for their country (mostly British citizens though born in other countries).

Also these people were almost all murdered in hitler's concentration camps in very gruesome ways.

Many problems with this article but I need to stop here for now, Mike

When was it closed?
I read this article to find out more about the SOE after reading this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7585387.stm

It states that the SOE was closed during Clement Attlee's stint as PM. Any chance of checking this and expanding the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.46.101 (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Cichociemni may 1943.jpg
The image File:Cichociemni may 1943.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --00:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Killing of British SOE officer by partisans
I dispute the following statement in the article: "Some SOE liaison officers in the field were executed by undisciplined ELAS groups". I submit that the statement is false in its entirety. If the contributor denotes Greek people liaising to the SOE, then this would be too general and should be deleted. Yes, there were numerous killings amongst Greeks during (and after) WWII and a lot of them could be characterized as killings of people liaising with the British (the SOE). But it is misleading to label the people kileld as "SOE liaison officers". However, it the contributor denotes British officers, I do not know of any such case! The contributor references for this (novel) claim the book The Bitter Sea by a Simon Ball, published in 2009. I do not know of this work, nor of the author, and would appreciate an extensive quote of the relevant claims therein. Note please that the book, in the same wikipedia entry, is (tellingly) placed under the category "Books by authors without personal SOE experience"... In any case, this is the first time I come across such a claim. There is no mention of any British officers getting killed by ELAS partisans, "undisciplined" or not, in any memoir by any author who had personal SOE experience. Nor by any historian, for that matter. -The Gnome (talk) 07:51, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Ball's book was published recently. It is not a novel. Full details (including its isbn) are given; it should be easy enough to obtain from bookshops or libraries. One well-attested murder by ELAS troops was that of a New Zealand officer named Hubbard. (OK, not a British officer, but serving under British command; the New Zealand government did not have any independent links with guerrilla forces.) The murder took place in or shortly before October 1943. The incident is mentioned also in the autobiographies of liaison officers John Mulgan and Nicholas Hammond. I do not have these sources immediately to hand, but will add them to the bibliography once I have re-studied them. Both Myers and Woodhouse also mention the incident, although only in passing. The statement (in so as as at least one SOE liaison officer was killed) is indisputable. HLGallon (talk) 08:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC) Also described in Denys Hamson, We fell among Greeks, published in 1946. This is another first-hand account. Again, source not readily to hand, will be added to the article once I have got hold of a copy. HLGallon (talk) 11:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

 * This is rather weak, as evidence goes, I'm afraid. (By the way, I did not imply that Ball's book is fiction. The word "novel" was used in the sense "new; recent".) Only one book, by one author explicitly mentions the killing of one New Zealander --of whom we only know the surname. It is clear that an amendment must be made until such time as someone, e.g. you, offers a better piece of evidence. Wikipedia is hopefully used as a means of learning. It is, therefore, counter-productive and not up to Wiki standards to state "Some SOE liaison officers in the field were executed by undisciplined ELAS groups". Such a statement can exist in the article when we have some credible evidence, from people who have been in Greece at the time, e.g. Woodhouse, that (a) more than one British SOE officers were killed (so far you bring up one surname), (b) they were indeed killed and did not die under other circumstances, and (c) they were killed by ELAS troops. Calling people "ELAS irregulars" is a very broad term and can be made to include any Greek on the mountains at the time who was carrying a gun! To cut to the chase, the overwhelming historical evidence, by every first-hand source or historical account, shows that ELAS troops and auxiliaries, under strict orders from its leadership, treated the British officers cordially (and certainly did not mistreat them in any way, let alone murder any of them!). The Greeks reserved the killings and the other atrocities for amongst themselves. If there was an isolated incident (of which, moreover, next to nothing is known until Wikipedia brought it forward) about one liaison officer, the generalisation being attempted here is arbitrary and un-historical. ~-The Gnome (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, New Zealanders were particularly popular amongst the Greek population after the gallantry shown by the New Zealand soldiers in the Battle of Crete. The allegation that a New Zealander was "killed by ELAS" seems all the more preposterous for this reason. The subject deserves a much more thorough research. What are this man's (Ball's) credentials as a historian? Could you, please, quote the relevant paragraph in his book? -The Gnome (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Damn! Ball's book has gone back to the local lending library. However, I'm still trying to get hold of Hamson, Hammond etc. The killing took place shortly after the outbreak of fighting between ELAS and EDES. Hamson, so far as I recall, stated that an ELAS unit claimed that Hubbard and the rest of his party, who were mistreated but not attacked, were betraying them to EDES. The unit was probably acting without the knowledge of EAM/ELAS's central committee (hence "undisciplined"). By all means remove the assertion; but it will go back in once I have hold of the sources I mentioned and suitably referenced them. HLGallon (talk) 11:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm removing the allegation and will stay on the subject. You just cost me $12 because I ordered Ball's book, to check it out :-)... -The Gnome (talk) 22:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * We can lay this to rest, it seems. I bought the book cited as the source of that claim in Wikipedia, originally, namely “The Bitter Sea” by Simon Ball. (The author, according to his short bio, teaches history at the U of Glasgow.) On p. 249, here are all the passages where the name “Hubbard” is mentioned : “ When Wilson got back to Cairo from Tunis, the immediate crisis he had to deal with was the news that a young New Zealand liaison officer in Greece, Lieutenant Hubbard, had been murdered by Communist insurgents, ‘who were like half-crazed beasts’. … Even before the death of Hubbard, Wilson had taken steps to ‘militarize’ the effort in Greece. … The incoming commander [of special forces] was on a tour of inspection in Greece at the time of Hubbard’s murder…” The sole source for the alleged murder, as cited in that book, is “HS5/689, ‘’Death of Lt. Hubbard’ 13 October 1943, (Report Not Sent)”.
 * We see that (a) the Ball book is the only one alleging an assassination of an SOE officer by Greek partisans, (b) the source cited for that allegation is a report which was never sent, (c) the heavy-handed “politicalising” of every event at the time by both sides led often to distortion of facts, and (d) this incident was not mentioned inn the report of the incoming special forces commander while on tour in Greece (the book cites his report but the report does not mention any death of a Lt. Hubbard). In view of the above I can say that we can confidently delete from the entry any mention of “British SOE liaison officers assassinated by ELAS partisans”. The plural is clearly wrong but even the one alleged incident is very dubious in its authenticity. At best, it’s an isolated incident, without premeditation from the partisans, and thus irrelevant to the history of SOE’s history in Greece. -The Gnome (talk) 15:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Gorgopotamos
The article states : "With aid from these two organisations [ELAS and EDES], Myer's [sic] party destroyed the Gorgopotamos railway viaduct on 14 November, 1942." However, firstly, Eddie Myers and the SOE operatives never had the numerical or operational capacity to carry out this act on their own and use Greek partisans only for "aid". The operation was carried out by ELAS and EDES detachments under the planning and guidance of SOE, as described in the relevant Wiki entry. Secondly, the date givn is wrong. Thirdly, the SOE party which planned the sabotage act and participated in its execution was led by Eddie Myers (not Chris Woodhouse, as the Gorgopotamos entry implies). Therefore, the two entries should be reconciled, in that the above-quoted sentence in the current article should be amended to read "On 25 November 1942, as part of 'Operation Harling', 150 Greek partisans and a party of SOE officers, following a plan drawn up by Eddie Myers, blew up the railroad bridge at Gorgopotamos, cutting off the enemy-controlled route linking Thessaloniki and Athens." -The Gnome (talk) 22:51, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

EDES v. ELAS
″Eventually, the British Army occupied Athens and Piraeus in the aftermath of the German withdrawal, and fought a street-by-street battle to drive ELAS from these cities and impose an interim government under Archbishop Damaskinos. SOE's last act was to evacuate several hundred disarmed EDES fighters to Corfu, preventing their massacre by ELAS.[87]″

Whatever the truth of what happened in autumn 1944, the Foot reference, which I have as page 340, a long way from page 236, so a mere change in edition is unlikely to have brought this about, only provides minimal support to the text. Foot has no reference to an imminent massacre. If as implied SOE had successfully fought for control of Athens, why was an evacuation necessary?86.153.79.140 (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)Optymystic (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

SOE in Yugoslavia
The section on the Chetniks needs to be internally referenced and cited more extensively. The debates on the extent on Chetnik collaboration became re-politicized during the 1990s Balkan Wars. MarieHooper (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Books rated in "References"
There are various ratings (written by Wiki contributors) for the books cited in the References section, which seem to be crossing the line into POV territory, e.g. "Best book on the subject", etc. Unless there's a Wiki policy exempting books from such statements of personal points of view, I move to remove all the "blurbs", honest as they might be. -The Gnome (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

SOE's French Indo-China Section
overlooked (as usual) french spec ops against the japanese in indochina from 1944 to 1945 (former Jedburgh and CLI/Gaur commandos dropped in Laos by Force 136), evidence here, but you can find more in french language and in english using google and google books. who searches finds. Cliché Online (talk) 18:33, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

SOE operations in Syria and Lebanon 1941-43
An Information request:

Between the years of 1940-1943 the SOE run intelligece operations in Syria and Lebanon that were under the Vichy regime.

Under the framework of the cooperation between the SOE and the Political department of the Jewish Agency, a network of jewish agents was estblished.

These operations were conducted by dozens of jewish agents thet served in the "Syrian Department" of the Palmach (the elite fighting force of the Haganah).

Their mission required a uniqe military preperation that included: reconnaissance, sabotage, utilization of various wepons, operating communicators and military tactics trainings.

The chief instructor of the Course was the SOE officer - Nicholas G. L. Hammond.

Does anyone have a farther information about these operations and actions? In general and from the SEO side?

(The informaton that I gave is from the information center of the Palmach - that I transelated from hebraw) נקפדון (talk) 05:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by נקפדון (talk • contribs) 08:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

SOE in Portugal
I wrote too books about SOE operations in Portugal. First concerning Operation Longshanks in Marmagoa Harbour in 1943;a second one about John Beevor clandestine network organized from Lisbon in 1941. It is my firts time here in Wikipedia so I do not know how to share more details about my reserach. José António Barreiros joseantoniobarreiros@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by José António Barreiros (talk • contribs) 22:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Landing fields
A translation of the French WP article « Liste des moyens aériens du SOE » would be useful.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 04:57, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Arthur Christie
"* Arthur Christie. Mission Scapula SOE in the Far East ISBN 0-9547010-0-3.
 * A true story about an ordinary soldier seconded into MI5 and sent on a mission to Singapore just before it fell. With Freddy Spencer-Chapman". This book has been written by his son Maurice A. Christie: "The wartime memories of Arthur Christie, written in the first person by his son Maurice A. Christie. Arthur Christie credited as author on cover." London: M. A. Christie, 2004.

(copac) fuller details are needed and it might not qualify for that section.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

suggested additions
Please could I suggest a couple of ammendments? I notice that Colonel Maurice Buckmaster is not mentioned in this article, although he was prominent in the leadership of the French section of SOE, as it says on his wikipedia page.

Also, in the bibliography section, there is no mention of Captain Peter Churchill's books on his training, operational career and capture.

217.36.4.10 (talk) 13:24, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Suggested addition to Major JCF Holland
Major "Jo" Holland was present at the inception of SOE, as GS (R), later MI (R). Although this is noted in your article, there is no mention that he was responsible for bringing his friend Major Gubbins to the fledgling operation. (They had served in Ireland together in 1919/20). I have found considerably more detail about Holland at the beginning of M.R.D. Foot's book: "SOE: An Outline History of the Special Operations Executive 1940-46." I have also read that Holland founded the commandos. One of the first tasks put to them by Lord Gort (with Gubbins and Millis Jefferis) was to produce pamphlets on guerilla warfare. Conceived through extensive research by Holland in worldwide subversive techniques and written by Gubbins, they were produced in the spring of 1939 and distributed all over Europe and beyond. In the midst of clashing personalities at the beginning, these three men worked well and productively together. As a general note, Holland was awarded the DFC in WW1 and ended WW2 as a Major General and Companion of the Bath. I feel he deserves more mention.

24.222.253.66 (talk) 13:39, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Length of time in field
Elsewhere on Wikipedia, I read that the average length of time of service for a planted SOE wire transmitter in France was 3-6 months before capture. I came to this entry expecting to find this data but it's not here. Any idea what entry on Wikipedia would have this piece of information? I can't think of another topic that would cover this same area. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 03:26, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Where else did you read it? In which article? Did they cite any references or was it just one of those "Wikipedia Facts" without any references? -- SteveCrook (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Department EH
Doesn't need to be its own article. Can be included in the history of the Special Operations Executive. — Mr. V (t – c)   09:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Categorisation
Should this article (and its associated Category:Special Operations Executive personnel be categorised under Category:British spies ? Alekksandr (talk) 19:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Probably not. The Espionage article says "Espionage (colloquially, spying) is the obtaining of information considered secret or confidential without the permission of the holder of the information." Espionage is what spies do, and we list espionage as one of the activities of the SOE. However, MI6 (SIS) was the main British spying agency during this period, and the article indicates that obtaining secret information was not the main purpose of most of SOE's operations, which "revolved around sabotaging and subverting the Axis war machines through indirect methods". Spying is arguably not a defining characteristic of the SOE.

 * On this basis, I favour removing espionage from the lead and the infobox. In the Dissolution section we say "...took the view that SOE was a more effective organisation than the SIS but that it was unwise to split the responsibility for espionage and more direct action between separate ministries...". This implies that SIS did the spying and SOE undertook "more direct action." Verbcatcher (talk) 01:08, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

 * Yes. They carried out the business of spying.  WP categorization is navigational, rather than ontologically defining. It doesn't matter if another group was "more spyish". Andy Dingley (talk) 08:30, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

 * After asking this question, I realised that 'Category:Special Operations Executive personnel' is a subcat of 'Category:British intelligence operatives' which is itself a subcat of 'Category:British spies'. OTOH, Special Operations Executive does *not* fall within 'Category:British intelligence agencies', which is a subcat of 'Category:Espionage in the United Kingdom'. I suggest that this is inconsistent, and that one of these situations should be brought into line with the other. Does anyone else wish to comment on which way the issue should be resolved? Alekksandr (talk) 13:05, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Fight for resources
I believe the section on air operations is best left to describing air operations. To state "SOE was engaged in disputes with the RAF" is not adequate to describe the situation. Harris was attempting to regain aircraft so that Bomber Command could take on what he and others considered their primary mission, which was the strategic bombing of Germany. He and others in the RAF believed this was a war winning mission. The Navy, however, wanted aircraft to help patrol the approaches to England and help in their war against the U boat menace, and the Army needed aircraft for their struggles in the desert. The SOE was a minor player when vying for resources, but yes Harris would not want to allow Bomber Command's strength be attenuated for the SOE or any other entity. Nevertheless, two squadrons, their aircraft, pilots and support crews were tasked with this mission. The paragraph reinserted is interesting, and yes it is supported by citation, but it seems misplaced and not descriptive of the general situation. Gunbirddriver (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Crews, not aircraft. SOE operations used aircraft (Stirlings, Whitleys, etc) that were suicidal for anything else, or en masse, and bomber command had little interest in them. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

 * The replaced paragraph is essential background to air movements and operations. SOE's air (and other) operations did not spring suddenly into existence fully developed, they emerged from inter-ministry and inter-arm squabbles (hence the contentious paragraph), and trial and error. The section discusses SOE's air operations as a whole, not merely techniques and aircraft types. HLGallon (talk) 20:50, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

 * Yes, but the opening paragraph seems to give the wrong impression. The Foreign Ministry requested the support from the RAF on behalf of the SOE after the fall of France (July 1940). The RAF did not want to use resources for this purpose. Churchill became involved in the argument. The SOE got their resources. The first mission was flown the night of Oct. 19, 1940. Gunbirddriver (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

 * The "general situation" is precisely described in the opening paragraph. Portal curtailed some of SOE's early operations; Harris kept almost all the bomber types and units to himself (as you concede in your first comment). This explains why SOE had the exclusive use of a mere two squadrons, with perhaps thirty aircraft, operating from the UK, while Bomber Command regularly flew 700 or more planes nightly. (Other Special Duties aircraft operated in the Mediterranean and later the Far East, also on a comparatively small scale.) In light of this, the opening paragraph must remain. I fail to see what "wrong impression" it gives.

 * I may say that the section requires some copyediting. It is disjointed and therefore repetitious; the narrative flits between the Special Duties squadrons, Tempsford and Tangmere aerodromes, the cockpit of a Lysander, to a description of stored delivery equipment and techniques, back to the Lysander, back to Tangmere, back to the Special Duties squadrons etc. etc. I will leave it for a couple of weeks rather than bludgeon improvements through. HLGallon (talk) 23:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

I am just looking to improve the article. I do not mean for anyone to take it personally.

To respond to your question, before I began editing the page I did find the first paragraph of the section misleading. It read as follows:

''SOE was engaged in disputes with the RAF from its early days. In January 1941, an intended ambush (Operation Savanna) against the aircrew of a German "pathfinder" air group near Vannes in Brittany was thwarted when Air Vice Marshal Charles Portal, the Chief of the Air Staff, objected on moral grounds to parachuting what he regarded as assassins. Although Portal's objections were later overcome (and Savanna was mounted, unsuccessfully), Air Marshal Harris ("Bomber Harris"), the Commander-in-Chief of Bomber Command, resented the diversion of bombers to SOE purposes (or indeed any purposes other than the offensive against German cities). He too was over-ruled and by April 1942, SOE had the services of 138 and 161 squadrons at RAF Tempsford.''

Let's look at it:

SOE was engaged in disputes with the RAF from its early days.
 * This conjures the image that the SOE was arguing for aircraft just as the Royal Navy was arguing over aircraft. The SOE was a secret organization. Its existence was unknown. That is why it was the Foreign Ministry that made the requests to the RAF for the aircraft, not the SOE. Churchill was involved early. It was Churchill who told his aides he wanted to "set Europe afire" in resisting Hitler. Being both Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence, the RAF was not going to be able to refuse his request. The SOE would get their aircraft, pilots and crews.

In January 1941, an intended ambush (Operation Savanna) against the aircrew of a German "pathfinder" air group near Vannes in Brittany was thwarted when Air Vice Marshal Charles Portal, the Chief of the Air Staff, objected on moral grounds to parachuting what he regarded as assassins.
 * By Januray 1941 pick-ups and drop offs of agents were already underway. As stated previously, the first mission was in October of 1940. The second sentence propels us forward in time beyond the time when aircraft and crews were procured and operations begun. In addition, according to the wiki article on Operation Savanna, it was undertaken at the request of the Air Ministry. Portal's argument was one air officer against another, and not SOE vs RAF. In any case, his argument against "Savanna" was on moral grounds, and not over whether or not the aircraft and crews should be made available to form the transport force. Thus, their are multiple problems with the second sentence.

Although Portal's objections were later overcome (and Savanna was mounted, unsuccessfully), Air Marshal Harris ("Bomber Harris"), the Commander-in-Chief of Bomber Command, resented the diversion of bombers to SOE purposes (or indeed any purposes other than the offensive against German cities).
 * The third sentence reinforces the idea that the events are taking place after Savanna, sometime in 1941.

He too was over-ruled and by April 1942, SOE had the services of 138 and 161 squadrons at RAF Tempsford.
 * Apparently Harris had to be overruled, and by April 1942 we have the air transport service.

I find that misleading. Regardless, I do not need to be involved in editing the page. You can bludgeon away without delay. Gunbirddriver (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

 * Your assumptions regarding the paragraph are just that: assumptions. For a start, do you really believe that SOE was so secret that any of the service heads was not aware of it? Your claim that the dispute involving Portal involved air officers only seems to be based on the Wipedia article on Operation Savanna, and this is an inadequately sourced article. Nobody disputes that air operations had taken place before "Savanna" or that Harris's objections took place after it; these are irrelevancies.

 * I can best quote you the supporting cite :

 * "In January, 1941, SO2 [SOE's operations branch at the time] was given the task of attacking German aircrews belonging to Kampfgeschwader 100 [actually Kampfgruppe 100], a bomber squadron stationed near Vannes in Brittany. SO2 had no suitable agents available and Gubbins asked Colonel Passy, de Gaulle's Chief of Intelligence, for four volunteers to undertake the mission, which was codenamed SAVANNA... Intelligence sources had reported that the aircrews were accustomed to travel nightly to and from the airfield in two motor coaches, which it was now proposed to ambush and destroy. There was, however, a last minute intervention by the Chief of the Air Staff, who wrote to Jebb [SOE's Chief Executive Officer] 'I think that the dropping of men dressed in civilian clothes for the purpose of attempting to kill members of the opposing forces is not an operation with which the Royal Air Force should be associated.' Portal's scruples were overcome but as a result of his intervention the parachute drop did not take place until the middle of March ..."

 * gives the rest of Portal's letter to Jebb: "I think that you will agree that there is a vast difference, in ethics, between the time-honoured operation of dropping a spy from the air, and this entirely new scheme for dropping what one can only call assassins." The same source also emphasises that subsequent discussions took place between Jebb, and Portal and Harris (who was at the time Portal's deputy). HLGallon (talk) 05:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

 * Harris had instructions directly from the Chiefs of Staff that his Command was to bomb Germany, and these instructions over-rode all others, especially others that might prevent him carrying out this primary-purpose. In addition, Harris had a considerable number of his men then-resident in German POW camps and any operation of questionable legality that might jeopardize the correct treatment of these, and future RAF POWs, would not be likely to meet with his favour.

 * At the time, whilst no doubt a valuable contribution to the war effort, there were no illusions about SOE being able to win the war. Bombing Germany OTOH, was thought in many high places possibly capable of achieving this alone. Harris had inherited from his predecessor (Peirse) in 1942 a force in Harris' opinion of inadequate size and quality for carrying out the tasks required of it, which had recently radically changed with the issuing of the Area Bombing Directive. Harris' first task therefore was to build up the size of Bomber Command and to as speedily-as-possible introduce the new Lancaster and phase out the less efficient types such as the Stirling and to a lesser extent, the Halifax. All the while he was doing this he was required to continue to bomb Germany, the doing-of-which caused his force to suffer losses which were partially negating his attempts to build up the force. The Lancaster was just starting out in production and so deliveries at first were slow, and so it took several years before Harris had enough aircraft to spare for other uses, until then the other users had to make do with hand-me-downs such as the Whitley, and the older Halifaxes made surplus as their squadrons were re-equipped with the Lancaster. That is also BTW why no-one else ever got to use the Lancaster.

 * Thus criticism of Harris is valid only if one completely ignores Harris' own position and existing orders or the limitations under-which he was required to operate, or if one fails to understand the perceived order-of-magnitude difference in military importance of the organisations in question, viz, RAF Bomber Command, or SOE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.53.138 (talk) 10:03, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

 * Excellent points. References to Portal and especially Harris in the article are not intended as criticism, but indications of how their actions and views affected SOE, which is of course the subject of the article. A blow by blow, letter by letter discussion would distort the article and be distracting. Evidently you have better sources than I do on this aspect of the RAF's wartime service, and if you can distil the controversy into a sentence or two, they would be welcome in an article which necessarily covers a very wide subject. HLGallon (talk) 20:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the (unusually for Wikipedia these days) polite and courteous reply. Actually I was only supplying a bit of context for editors, some of which is not obvious, and which often gets ignored by historians or is not even noticed by them. For example it is a fact that Harris would only have had a very-sketchy idea of what SOE was actually doing, it being a secret organisation well outside of his purview, in addition he would not have been aware of any SOE successes, or otherwise, as he was not privy to Ultra.

 * Much is made of Harris' unwillingness to transfer his force over to other targets later in the war, but he was in no position to know what Ultra information was revealing. IIRC, Portal knew of Ultra but Harris didn't, and Portal wasn't allowed to tell him. The only other Allied commanders aware of it were IIARC, Alan Brooke, Montgomery, George Marshall, and Eisenhower.

 * The problem with much criticism is that it is often made from a very parochial POV with no consideration for the limitations other people and organisations were operating under. This is understandable for a history of a particular organisation or personality however it can be very misleading.

 * From Harris' POV SOE was, at least initially, just another small Whitehall organisation making demands on his Command at a time when he was in no position to help them.

 * FYI I used to edit Wikipedia a number of years ago but eventually gave up. Much of my information comes from having had access to an excellent UK public library for many years with plenty of time to read up on the subject, and with a book selection of authors that went from the infantry Private up to civil servants and Cabinet Ministers. I also have a friend with similar interests who is a frequent visitor to TNA at Kew, and so occasionally I will come into information that is not yet generally available, some of it only being recently de-classified. So most of what I add to talk pages will be reasonably accurate with an occasional lapse due to memory. My additions are mainly intended to encourage serious editors to dig around for more information, as much of what is out there is not necessarily true or accurate and often contains an agenda that is slanted one-way-or-the-other.

 * For example, much post-war criticism of British leaders and commanders is made with 50/50 hindsight based on information it was either not possible for the leaders to know at the time, or is based on a lack of the information that was then-known to the leaders and commanders, but not to their subsequent critics - Montgomery for example being privy to Ultra intelligence from a time shortly before El Alamein but being unable to reveal this - and therefore the fuller-extent of some of the information on which a number of his decisions were based that was known to him, but not to others - in any of his subsequent writings, the existence of Ultra itself only being de-classified three years before his death. One of the most amusing things about many of his critics is that they automatically assume that he was in no position to know more about the battlefield situation than they themselves did.

 * This is perhaps a long-winded way of stating that criticism is only of any worth when it is valid. Any fool can be a critic and it is only when one learns sufficiently about a subject that one becomes in a position to judge what criticism is valid, and what isn't. A good guide is to ask yourself "What do they know?", and "How do (could) they know this?".

 * One more point you may find useful. The over-riding aim of the British government at the time was to end the war in an Allied victory with as little loss of Allied lives as was humanely possible. All other considerations came secondary to this. Including SOE. If SOE had been regarded as that essential to winning the war Harris would have been ordered to supply more aircraft for SOE's use, and he would almost certainly have done so. I should also point out that prior to Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 when Britain and her Empire had been fighting alone, the RAF bomber force was seen within government as the only possible way of fighting back against Nazi Germany, and so RAF Bomber Command was accorded the highest importance as a possible (at the time, the only) way of winning the war. The result of this would later make itself felt over Germany as what Harris' had earlier referred to as "the whirlwind" and which was to continue on the task of bombing German cities for the rest of the war becasue it was independent of Allies who might suddenly decide they no longer wanted to 'play ball', as had happened earlier in 1940, thus-disrupting all existing British plans for the conduct of the war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.53.138 (talk) 05:02, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Special Operations Executive. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141031120317/http://www.glbtq.com/arts/am_z_ies_h.html to http://www.glbtq.com/arts/am_z_ies_h.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081029063628/http://web.mac.com/davedepickere/World_War_II,_analyzed!/Canadian_Secret_Agents_in_the_Second_World_War.html to http://web.mac.com/davedepickere/World_War_II,_analyzed!/Canadian_Secret_Agents_in_the_Second_World_War.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Note article
See https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1469303/Did-British-intelligence-send-its-own-spies-to-their-deaths.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.21.214 (talk) 13:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Also see https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/let-s-dare-to-tell-the-truth-about-the-soe-lbn5b593t . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.21.214 (talk) 13:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Paid subscription is required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.21.214 (talk) 13:31, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

CE
Did a "quick" ref edit, rm CS1 maintenance tags, ref = none for unused sources, left a couple of stray citations as don't know the references. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 20:16, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Importance of article
The importance of this article in the Wikiproject Espionage is currently rated "low." The importance of the OSS article in the Wikiproject Espionage is currently rated "top." I would opine with some confidence that SOE is as important -- or more important -- than the OSS, so I've changed the importance of this article to "Top." Smallchief (talk) 11:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Landing strip length
161 Squadron operations: Landing strip lengthof Westland Lysander: "It handled very well at low speed and could use landing grounds only 400 yards (370 m) long." vs. "The Lockheed Hudson had a range 200 miles (320 km) greater and could carry more passengers (ten or more), but required landing strips three times as long as those needed for the Lysander (450 yards vs. 150 yards)." What now? 150 or 450? --Castellanus (talk) 22:49, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The guy who flew the most SOE missions said he needed 150 yards from touch down to turn around with a Lysander [] 400 yards doesn't seem like short take off landing to me. I'll change the article to ref the 150 meters. Smallchief (talk)

Cornelius James Murphy
Cornelius James Murphy, SOE 1939-1946:
 * http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/soe-d-q-and-press-propaganda.35024/
 * http://www.psywar.org/sibs.php https://archive.ph/9yqx
 * ....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
 * ....0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

In pop culture
There is only one item named in pop culture, and that apparently is only a single event in the item. One novel that is entirely about women in the SOE is The Lost Girls of Paris by Pam Jenoff. Kdammers (talk) 06:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

 * Also: Susan Elia MacNeal's The Paris Spy (2017) Kdammers (talk) 06:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Special Operations Executive