Talk:Guantanamo Bay homicide accusations

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

merge[edit]

The original suggestion of a {{merge}} from [[Camp No (Guantanamo)}} was placed on Talk:Camp No (Guantanamo). Geo Swan (talk) 21:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An essential identical {{merge}} suggestion was placed on the Michael Bumgarner article. Geo Swan (talk) 21:44, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WRT to the suggestion the Michael Bumgarner article be merged here... Bumgarner was already notable long before Horton's article was published, having been the subject of profiles in a number of publications. I a

WRT to the suggestion that Camp No be merged here... other camps that are part of the Guantanamo Bay detention camps, have separate articles devoted to them. Why should this one be merged, and not the others? Note, some coverage of the camp, like Paul Callaghan's article in The Guardian, focusses on Shaker Aamer, who survived his visit to Camp No. In Callaghan's article the three deaths are peripheral.

I suggest that a merge is not the appropriate solution if there are independent articles, on separate topics, that overlap, and a contributor is concerned that the overlap is leading to, or could lead to, duplication, contradiction, and/or a future maintenance problem.

I suggest a better solution is for a discussion to take place on those article's talk pages, where an agreement is reached that on the specific aspects where the articles overlap it is agreed that all but one of the articles should have a short paragraph providing context on the overlap, followed by a {{main}}, or {{seealso}}. I have no problem with this article be the one the others direct to for discussion of the accusations. But I think all the details that don't specifically relate to the accusations should remain right where they are.

There are other reasons someone would look up Bumgarner, that to read about the murder accusations. There are other reasons why someone would look up Camp No. A merger justified solely by an overlap is a disservice to those readers. Geo Swan (talk) 21:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Credibility of Horton article[edit]

The current page editorializes from content picked up in an article from Alex Koppelman at Adweek. There he writes that some media source passed on the Hickman story about Camp No and what he and the other Army guards saw that night. However, while one media source says he didn't find the story credible, and another anonymous source essentially says he disagrees, Koppelman's article does not say "The story had been rejected as not credible when first shopped to several reporters..." Some "passed" on it, and there is no further comment. To draw the conclusion that all found the story "credible" is not supported by known facts. 68.122.42.231 (talk) 20:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Jeffrey Kaye[reply]

Good point -- especially since it also mentions Seymour Hersh passing on it. There had to be something other than credibility.
-- Randy2063 (talk) 23:40, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest putting detailed accounts here[edit]

I'm going to be moving more detailed accounts of the Seton Hall report here. I think the criticisms should be in one place. There is no article addressing the NCIS report, and the Seton Hall press release related to Death in Camp Delta summarizes some of the issues well. Have already referenced this as the main article in the one on Guantanamo Bay detention camp suicide attempts, Michael Bumgarner, Camp No, and other related articles. The lead from this article should be put in those to cover the issues, but we should not be going into details in each one.Parkwells (talk) 19:50, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposals[edit]

It does not appear there is enough content to support a separate article on Camp No - perhaps it should be covered only here and in the main Guantantamo Bay detention camp article. If Bumgarner is to have a separate article, it needs to be treated as a full bio. There was a long article about him in the NY TImes magazine in 2006, from which I'm taking some material.Parkwells (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Guantanamo Bay homicide accusations. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Guantanamo Bay homicide accusations. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Guantanamo_Bay_homicide_accusations&oldid=1207471907"