Talk:Torture trade

Hang on:

This is not an attack page on any individual or groups of people. It's simply a descriptive report of information released in Amnesty International's 2001 report "Stopping the Torture Trade." Perhaps it's the advocacy term "torture trade" you're objecting to. In any case, I'm not done editing the page to make it more "objective" and include sources for all facts cited.

I am not an Amnesty International representative, I'm just trying to create a helpful post for all those interested in researching the issue.

Mbg27 (talk) 21:52, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had marked this as an attack page as it contains negative unsourced information about certain companies. Without sources, such negative information can be considered libel. In light of the fact that the speedy deletion has been removed, I will edit the article to address the blatantly negative information. However, the entire article requires a rewrite to meet neutrality guidelines. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 22:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding citations as I go. Thanks for your patience. Mbg27 (talk) 00:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any further suggestions regarding neutrality guidelines and wikifying? I tried my best to edit the entry in accordance with the guidelines I read about (stating clearly who makes which claims, etc. - but I haven't seen enough research on the counter-argument side, which I would like to include in the entry as well.)

Thanks! Mbg27 (talk) 03:40, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please update the tags to reflect that the information has verifiable and reputable sources now?

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV[edit]

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]