Talk:Fifth column
Add topicLatest comment: 1 month ago by Schazjmd in topic Discrepancy in "Origins" Section
 | Internal enemy was merged into this article. The discussion was closed on 31 January 2025 with a consensus to merge. The original page is now a redirect to this article. Its history now serves to provide attribution for the content in this article, and it must not be deleted as long as this article exists. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fifth column article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 years  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discrepancy in "Origins" Section
[edit]The "Origins" section of the article currently claims that the term was used in 1906, and then one paragraph later states its "first known appearance" was in 1936. I am not sure how best to integrate this section with the existing scholarship, but it is certainly in need of revision to avoid this blatant self-contradiction. Prayomat (talk) 17:38, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
- The 1906 mention was just added a few days ago. Its cited source supports the content. However, when it was added, the editor did not reconcile the language of the existing text to account for the addition. So, it's all messed up. I'll take a look at tweaking the wording later today. Schazjmd (talk) 17:51, 3 June 2026 (UTC)