Talk:Dilawar (torture victim)

message: The use of the pejorative "torture" to refer to the enhanced interrogation is practically a weasel word.  Also, all the sources are extremely left-wing.  The clear bias of this article necessitates a frank discussion about its neutrality.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.104.129 (talk) 07:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know what you mean dude. Beating a chained-up prisoner's lower extremities to a gooey pulp is really no worse than a fraternity hazing. And obviously biased anti-American libtard sources like the Army pathologist don't belong in Wikipedia - we should stick to reputable sources like Free Republic. Sigh. <eleland/talkedits> 06:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

text: In fact, "enhanced interrogation," a euphemism, is what would be weasel words. Torture is the correct term. —DavidConrad (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I added the  tag to the 'Torture' section. I also removed the one reference in that section as it did not verify any of the statements in the section, rather just gave a further definition of the detainee's injuries which was also wikilinked. Please don't remove the tag without providing references for the statements in the section, and ideally discussing them here on talk as well. Thanks! Anchoress · Weigh Anchor · Catacomb 19:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced tag

message: Another contributor decided to over-ride the default state for the navigation templates on dozens of articles, and "collapse" them, by hand.
They didn't provide any explanation for these edits at the time.  But later, they claimed the templates were "too long" and lapsed from compliance with NPOV.
Not being an expert in navigation templates, I checked, at Wikipedia_talk:Navigation_templates#When should navigation templates be collapsed?, and reported back to 
the talk page where the controversy was first discussed.
It seems the only contributor not willing to leave navigation templates in their default state was the contributor who collapsed all the templates in the first place.
FWIW, I have made several requests to this contributor to explain their NPOV concern -- so far no joy.   Geo Swan (talk) 14:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: uncollapsing templates as per [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Navigation_templates&diff=prev&oldid=350315946]

message: I improved the article but got reverted two times without an explanation what was wrong with the improvements. Please do explain what was wrong with it otherwise i am going to change it back to the from me suggested form. Thank you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.217.236.61 (talk) 04:46, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I already replied to you on your talk about this question. But I repeat my reply here: "You took out a NY Times citation and portions of text. This is a radical change. Please explain your actions on talk". So here we are. Please explain your actions as I described them in my edit summary, your talk page and now here. Please also note that we have a 3 revert policy, also abbreviated as WP:3RR. Editors are not allowed to revert more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 04:54, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

text: In fact you did not add it back as you claim. You left it out. You also took out portions of the text. Please justify why. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 05:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

text: In fact you also removed another citation by the National Catholic reporter. Please explain this also. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 05:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Since you seem to not know what text and reference you removed, I will link to them and paste them here. Your edits keep removing the following section (text and reference):  As you can see this removes text, which you did not replace in your subsequent edits, and seemingly the reference by Townsend, even though it still exists in the article. I had not checked for the reference by Townsend if it remained in the article after your edit but somehow it did, thereby the discrepancy of my claim that you removed it but somehow the same reference remaining in the article. Anyway, since I have now showed you the text that you removed you can now correct your edits accordingly. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 09:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dilawar (torture victim). 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/20061001015147/http://www.cjr.org/issues/2006/5/Umansky.asp to http://www.cjr.org/issues/2006/5/Umansky.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Dilawar (torture victim). 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/20100116063618/http://www.supportmpscapegoats.com/salcedo.html to http://www.supportmpscapegoats.com/salcedo.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061008044132/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511032003?open&of=ENG-DZA to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511032003?open&of=ENG-DZA
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) 18:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified