Deletion of Guantanamo detainees missing from the official list

Comment: This is a clear example of |original research and perhaps WP:fork | POV fork.  There are no sources that focus on this claim.  The inclusion of this article in Wikipedia is  - by using this original research as the basis of the page, the implication is that the process is flawed, illegal, or something else.  It may or may not be,　but Wikipedia is not the forum for making these claims based upon original research
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYN)

Comment: if it's going to be merged, I'd like to see BWH do the work of ensuring no information is lost, and simply transferred over to the main article. For the past six months he has been consistently nominating one of Geo_Swan's articles for deletion every week, as soon as the last AfD ends (sometimes keep, sometimes NC, sometimes delete)...looking at Geo_Swan's talk page it's difficult to not see some form of user harrassment going on with the constant "I've nominated X, Y and Z for deletion". Nominator has a very long history of trying to have all Guantanamo-related articles deleted, even those ones that are ''clearly'' notable - I would suggest that these AfDs form a  of their own, an attempt to purge as much collected information about the US prison camp from the internet as possible, with a minimum of effort (an article that requires twenty hours of work to create, can be deleted with thirty seconds of BWH's effort, so simple numbers mean he can effectively keep nominating every new article created) - so it would actually do quite a bit to sway my opinion if the nominator says he is willing to take the time necessary to merge these two articles himself, perhaps showcasing a
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: WP:OR|original research, with a bit of  thrown in for good measure
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP)

Comment: The WP:OR  upon which this article is based is used to push a point, be it implicitly or explicitly.  The inclusion of the article itself on Wikipedia is a  and |synthesis of facts
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:SYN)