Talk:Camp Delta (Guantanamo Bay)

message: Sources sub-page  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minerva (talk • contribs) 22:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

message: How do you feel about merging Camp Delta, Camp X-ray Camp Iguana, and Camp Echo as a subsection to  Guantanamo Bay? Wouldn't it be better to have one, well-written, NPOV article, without all the mispellings and typos. Joaquin Murietta 22:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: Based on the discussion and lack of objections at Camp X-Ray, I merged Camp X-Ray to this article. Please discuss whether to merge this article with Guantanamo Bay.Also merged to this article Camp Echo. Again, shall we edit this into something better and then merger to Guantanamo Bay? Joaquin Murietta 15:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Please discuss

message: There are a lot of articles, news articles, legal papers etc. cited under External references. Do we need all of them? Which ones? Joaquin Murietta 02:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I won't touch them.Joaquin Murietta 15:31, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comments on Sourcing

message: Should we start a new article, drag all this over to it and put a redirect on Camp Delta's page? Someone commented over on Guantanamo Bay that the prisons deserve their own topic. Joaquin Murietta 15:34, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Should we merge this topic to [[Prisons of Guantanamo Bay]]?

message: #This comment on the top appears dated to me. Should it be rewritten to past tense or maybe even deleted? As of July 22, 2005 there are "about 510 prisoners at Guantánamo." Please advise. Joaquin Murietta 15:40, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The most recent estimate I have read was 502.  That would reflect the repatriation of Sami Al Laithi.   502 is about 510.  --  Geo Swan 19:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Response -- why not say that the prisons house approximately 510 prisoners, rather than insert a dated source? Joaquin Murietta 23:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please be more specific about what is, in your view, POV.  Blanket labelling of whole articles as POV don't help other contributors focus on what you see as a problem.  Other contributors, who aren't familiar with your editing history, can't even know whether you think the POV is unbalanced to favour the detainees or whether you think it favours the camp authorities.  --  Geo Swan 19:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

text: That's a good suggestion, and I appreciate your input.  By the way, I don't plan to make any changes to the text described above. I  was responding to George's question (Please be more specific about what is, in your view, POV.  Blanket labelling of whole articles as POV don't help other contributors focus on what you see as a problem).  Joaquin Murietta 07:33, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: More editing questions

message: Hello -- there was a request for a visit from the medcabal about the "torture" dispute  made two days ago. As far as I can tell (the discussion is very long!) this particular dispute has been resolved to everyone's satisfaction. Please inform me if I'm wrong; best thing is to contact me on my talk page.
One remark: the word "torture" is tough. I would recommend when describing the information from a particular source using the language you find there. If you think a source describes torture but doesn't use the word, don't feel free to use it yourself.
I looked over the article myself, and it seems to need further work. For example, paragraphs seems rather strangely strung together, e.g.:
:Physical conditions for detainees at Camp X-Ray are claimed to meet basic standards for maintaining health, but the prisoners are held in small, mesh-sided cells with little privacy, and lights are kept on day and night. Detainees are said to have rations similar to American forces, with consideration for Muslim dietary needs. James Yee, a Muslim chaplain in Guantanamo Bay from the U.S. Navy, was arrested on September 10, 2003, and charged with sedition, aiding the enemy, spying, espionage, and failure to obey a general order. Later, the charges were quietly dropped. Yee maintains his innocence, and has written of his experiences and described mistreatment of inmates at Guantanamo Bay. [12]
In any case, I think the article needs more work, and in particular, better organization and sourcing. The problem here is that a lot of groups (the US government, famous human rights groups, etc.) who would be in other articles considered "authoritative" sources are disagreeing. However, what the article has so far is impressive, and I wish everyone luck on improving this important article.
Sdedeo (tips) 01:04, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "medcabal"

message: It has been suggested to move Guantanamo Bay to the correct spelling of Guantánamo Bay and create an own article for U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay. ROGNNTUDJUU! 18:29, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move pages

message: "That panel included John Roberts. The panel made the ruling one business day before President Bush nominated Roberts to fill the vacant post on the US Supreme Court."
These last two sentences are non-encyclopedic at best;  If there is a connection between the nomination and the ruling then it should be stated and those putting forward the suggestion should be quoted, (eg. "It is believed (Bloggs) that the panel's ruling may have [influence|been influence by] John Robert's nomination for a post in the US Supreme Court.") 
If there is no connection between them there is no need to mention either fact here (there is no mention of the other members of the panel, nor what they were doing the next day!)  
Either way, I think we need to clearly state the truth here, rather than including two unconnected facts and leading people to connect them based purely on suggestion and insinuation.
I have not made this change as I know this is quite a strongly debated article and didn't want to jump in with both feet! JeffUK 15:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I will remove the aforementioned text tomorrow unless anyone comes up with a source --JeffUK 10:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would have been a lot easier to find a source if you had objected back when the passage was first written.  My recollection is that several observers published comments on the connections.  In the interests of collegiality and good faith would you mind allowing more than one single day to look for a source?  --  Geo Swan 13:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Of course, which is why I posted on here before diving in.  As long as we're looking for sources it may as well stay in. --JeffUK 22:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Military Commission hearings Section- Last sentence

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Camp Delta (Guantanamo Bay). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101226002438/http://fff.org/comment/com1006c.asp to http://www.fff.org/comment/com1006c.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified