Talk:UK MI6 chief Blaise Metreweli warns of 'grey zone' warfare in first speech

AI/LLM generated content

This article appears to show signs of AI-assisted writing. I encourage the author to review WN:AI and Help:AI for guidance. While the use of AI tools is permitted, it must be transparent and aligned with Wikinews' core principles. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 13:40, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright I put the article together by using ChatGPT to summarize those websites and then making some edits.Isn't that allowed or am I supposed to write the whole thing from scratch? Jībanmṛta^message 14:03, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the info. We don't have a policy that allows or forbids the use of AI. We have a proposed guideline on it's use at WN:AI. One of the recommendations is that AI use be declared for transparency.

Some of the things to be mindful of are AI hallucinations and the introduction of verifiable facts that don't exist in any of the sources. All facts must be verifiable using the listed sources.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 17:43, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

2nd half ai added. BigKrow (talk) 22:02, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Review of revision 4959605 [Not Ready]

Revision 4959605 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 18:46, December 16, 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Unsupported statements NPOV: Not ready: Unattributed analysis/interpretation. Unbalanced. Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: There are some interesting issues with this article that underscore why all AI content must be checked by a human, preferably by the contributor using AI, before requesting a review. All analysis, interpretation, speculation, assigning of motives, etc. must be attributed to a qualified source for WN:NPOV. For balance (the other part of NPOV), our article must report on the following: "Russia regularly denies accusations that it is behind drone incidents or cyberattacks affecting Western countries. It also denies any plans to attack NATO, which has been providing weapons, intelligence and other assistance to Ukraine since Moscow's 2022 invasion." All statements must be verifiable from only the sources listed in the Sources section for WN:Source. See specific issues below and let me know what questions you may have. Sentence specific issues are highlighted below. Please consider addressing them and resolving the identified problems: Metreweli highlighted the evolving nature of global threats, particularly from Russia ― Issue: Interpretation requiring attribution for WN:NPOV the "front line is everywhere," describing a security landscape where state actors utilize tactics falling short of open conflict ― Issue: Both sourced, but the interpretation is problematic. attributed to Russian intelligence ― Issue: Unsupported. "Russian agents" are mentioned... We are seeing a concerted effort to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO members ― Issue: Unattributed. Analysis by News org, not permitted by WN:NPOV suggesting that Moscow intends to prolong the conflict to exhaust Western support ― Issue: Unsupported interpretation requiring both source and attribution for WN:NPOV multi-faceted ― Issue: BBC said this, not Metreweli. blurs the lines between civilian and military targets ― Issue: The grey zone describes the area between war and peace. For my review standards and conduct, see: my review standards and conduct. Unless I place {{Under review}} on an article, I claim no exclusive rights to review or re-review an article. All reviewers are welcome to step in and collaborate to get the article ready for publication. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 4959605 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 18:46, December 16, 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Unsupported statements NPOV: Not ready: Unattributed analysis/interpretation. Unbalanced. Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: There are some interesting issues with this article that underscore why all AI content must be checked by a human, preferably by the contributor using AI, before requesting a review. All analysis, interpretation, speculation, assigning of motives, etc. must be attributed to a qualified source for WN:NPOV. For balance (the other part of NPOV), our article must report on the following: "Russia regularly denies accusations that it is behind drone incidents or cyberattacks affecting Western countries. It also denies any plans to attack NATO, which has been providing weapons, intelligence and other assistance to Ukraine since Moscow's 2022 invasion." All statements must be verifiable from only the sources listed in the Sources section for WN:Source. See specific issues below and let me know what questions you may have. Sentence specific issues are highlighted below. Please consider addressing them and resolving the identified problems: Metreweli highlighted the evolving nature of global threats, particularly from Russia ― Issue: Interpretation requiring attribution for WN:NPOV the "front line is everywhere," describing a security landscape where state actors utilize tactics falling short of open conflict ― Issue: Both sourced, but the interpretation is problematic. attributed to Russian intelligence ― Issue: Unsupported. "Russian agents" are mentioned... We are seeing a concerted effort to subjugate Ukraine and harass NATO members ― Issue: Unattributed. Analysis by News org, not permitted by WN:NPOV suggesting that Moscow intends to prolong the conflict to exhaust Western support ― Issue: Unsupported interpretation requiring both source and attribution for WN:NPOV multi-faceted ― Issue: BBC said this, not Metreweli. blurs the lines between civilian and military targets ― Issue: The grey zone describes the area between war and peace. For my review standards and conduct, see: my review standards and conduct. Unless I place {{Under review}} on an article, I claim no exclusive rights to review or re-review an article. All reviewers are welcome to step in and collaborate to get the article ready for publication. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

-- Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 18:46, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Review of revision 4959727 [Not Ready]

Revision 4959727 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 05:07, December 17, 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: Incomprehensible last paragraph. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: The last paragraph is too long. Did you write it yourself? Please see inverted pyramid and rewrite. Please add date when MI6 head started work. Then resubmit for review. Please Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 4959727 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 05:07, December 17, 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: Incomprehensible last paragraph. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: The last paragraph is too long. Did you write it yourself? Please see inverted pyramid and rewrite. Please add date when MI6 head started work. Then resubmit for review. Please Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

-- Gryllida 05:07, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

@Gryllida I have cross-checked every sentence against the sources. Pls review it again. Jībanmṛta^message 06:01, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Ok. Gryllida 11:39, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Review of revision 4960176 [Passed]

Revision 4960176 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 16:25, December 17, 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: In preparing this article for review, I corrected several accuracy and attribution issues: I added the primary-source transcript, replaced paraphrased secondary-source quotations with direct quotes from the speech, clarified attribution where the original wording differed from the sources, expanded or corrected contextual quotes, and provided sourcing for the inserted quotations (see Special:Diff/4960175). These interventions went beyond routine copyediting and were necessary to resolve conflicts among the cited sources. These edits were made to correct factual and attribution issues that would have blocked publication. Given reviewer scarcity and our low publication rate, I applied WN:IAR so the article could be published, acknowledging that this level of involvement moves the review outside the usual standard of full independence. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4960176 of this article has been reviewed by Michael.C.Wright (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 16:25, December 17, 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: In preparing this article for review, I corrected several accuracy and attribution issues: I added the primary-source transcript, replaced paraphrased secondary-source quotations with direct quotes from the speech, clarified attribution where the original wording differed from the sources, expanded or corrected contextual quotes, and provided sourcing for the inserted quotations (see Special:Diff/4960175). These interventions went beyond routine copyediting and were necessary to resolve conflicts among the cited sources. These edits were made to correct factual and attribution issues that would have blocked publication. Given reviewer scarcity and our low publication rate, I applied WN:IAR so the article could be published, acknowledging that this level of involvement moves the review outside the usual standard of full independence. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

-- Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 16:25, 17 December 2025 (UTC)