Talk:Benyam Mohammed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents 1 POV 1.1 Not "obvious" 1.1.1 Not obvious why his alleged extraordinary rendition is POV 1.1.2 Not obvious why external links were removed 1.1.3 Not obvious how Mohammed's participation in the hunger strikes could be POV 1.2 The value of meaningful explanations of edits 1.3 Wikified dates -- external link format 1.4 Google hits 2 Removed NPOV Tag 3 Placed Dispute Tag 4 Charges filed 5 Malfunction in References: #12 (On Main Page) 6 Eritrea or Ethioia?

[edit] POV

I have edited this to cure the obvious POV issues and have added basic facts for any bio, such as date of birth, full name, the dates of events. The problem, Geo Swan is that when you create these hundreds of politically motivated stubs, for the sole purpose of getting more hits on Google, that you forget to include the basic information. Joaquin Murietta 15:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not "obvious"

No one would question the value of improving a biographical article, by adding in the birth date, and the dates of other significant events. JM can pat themself on the back for having added some dates to this and other biographical articles.

But I think JM is making mistakes that they can justify removing material, in order to restore what they regard as a NPOV, merely by claiming the need for those changes was "obvious". -- Geo Swan 19:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not obvious why his alleged extraordinary rendition is POV

JM removed the information that Mohammed had been identified as a subject of the controversial technique of extraordinary rendition, without saying why. I restored that information. It is verifiable. The Amnesty International link identifies his that way. -- Geo Swan 19:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not obvious why external links were removed

In particular, JM removed a bunch of external links, without giving a justification for their removal. I have restored them. I don't see any downside to including links that talk about the subject of biography. I replaced one link which quoted five paragraphs from Mohammed's August 11th statement to another link that quoted all eleven paragraphs. -- Geo Swan 19:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not obvious how Mohammed's participation in the hunger strikes could be POV

Before JM's edits the article talked about Mohammed's participation in the current hunger strike and the previous hunger strike. JM removed the references to the hunger strike, without explanation. Mohammed's claim to participation in the hunger strike is verifiable. That passage, IMO was not written in a POV way. If my best effort to write it in an NPOV way, I would welcome any civil explanation of what I did wrong

I expanded that section. I think I did it in an NPOV way. If JM, or anyone else, can find an offical reply to Mohammed's statement, or an official denial that the first hunger strike was ended through negotiation, of course they should expand that section to reflect that. -- Geo Swan 19:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The value of meaningful explanations of edits

I've explained my edits. I encourage JM, if they choose to add or delete anything to do the same. Maybe if they identify what they regard as problematic we can arrive at a compromis that leaves everyone satisfied?

[edit] Wikified dates -- external link format

There is a team working hard to wikify dates, to enable articles to be processed mechanically, in new ways. This team has automated tools to assist them. It takes them about one minute each for them to examine an article, approve the changes to the wiki dates. Let me suggest it is a courtesy to them to refrain from undoing their work. JM routinely undoes the date wikification in the external links of articles he edits. I'd like to encourage them, as a courtesy to others, to stop doing so. JM also routinely unlinks the name of the actual publication in the external links of the articles he edits. This is not only the way everyone else edits article, but, it is useful in cases where the publication moves an article from the current server to their archive server, to have a link to the publications home page. -- Geo Swan 19:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Google hits

Creating stub articles in order to score google hits? This idea would never have occurred to me. I guess some people do use a simple count of google hits to determine the importance of a person, or event.

I always tell the truth. I never have a secret agenda. I contribute to articles on detainees in the "war on terror" for the same reason most other wikipedians contribute to articles. Most of contribute to articles in topics we are interested in, where we think we know something, that other people might be interested in it too. -- Geo Swan 19:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removed NPOV Tag

I have removed the NPOV tag. The article as it stands seems to me to be well balanced and well sourced. There is nothing there that cannot be verified by reference to the sources cited. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Agree with your edits. Agree with removal of tag. Joaquin Murietta 15:05, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

except for the last phrase. Please compare. Also it is peripheral to Beyam Mohammed. Also removed current tag.

Joaquin, I have compared the versions. Without an explanation of the reason for resumption of the hunger strike the last sentence becomes orphaned and meaningless. The reasons for the strike resuming are well documented in the sources listed and should be included. I have reworded slightly. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Agree with your new langauge because the detainees believed the US authorities failed to honour promises to meet their demands as opposed to The hunger strike started in July 2005, and resumed in August 2005 when the US authorities failed to honour promises to meet the demands of the detainees.Thank you for your edits which now have made the article NPOV Joaquin Murietta 22:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Placed Dispute Tag

I thought we had a neutral edit on 18 October. After that, the addition of the self-serving quote skewed this article back. Dispute veracity or need for the lenghty quote, as opposed to linking to it. Joaquin Murietta 05:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

We still have a neutral article. Are you really disputing the veracity of Mohammed's statement, released by Clive Stafford Smith and reported in the Guardian? The hunger strike is a significant issue, detainees may die as a result. The quotation clarifies the context in which it was resumed. If you feel this unbalances the article, source a suitable US government statement that balances it and add that to the article. If it is verifiable, great. Regards. --Cactus.man ✍ 07:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I am going to repeat my request to JM to explain their edits. -- Geo Swan 06:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, what exactly is disputed in this article? The veracity of the quote cannot be questioned. If it is the need for the quote, I am open to persuasion. But just slapping a tag on (numerous) articles then leaving them for weeks is not acceptable. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

• No response, removing tag. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:23, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charges filed

I added the reference to the Guardian regarding the charges filed yesterday and the description of the allegations of the complaint. Joaquin Murietta 07:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Did a minor edit to this section JM, some re-wording and spacing. --Cactus.man ✍ 12:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Took out a comma and added parens, CM. Joaquin Murietta 15:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Yep, an improvement. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Please understand that Binyam Mohamed is an Eritrean not Ethiopian. When Eritreans get in trouble, they claim to be Ethiopians.

[edit] Malfunction in References: #12 (On Main Page)

Please note: Reference #12 is not functioning. Please update reference. Thank you. Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.202.93.114 (talk) 19:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eritrea or Ethioia?

? Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 20:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

All the references I've read (including those in the reference section of the article) state Binyam is Ethiopian, or does this question mean something else?--Sully (talk) 23:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)