This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The original article was non-neutral about conditions in Guantanemo, and also implied that the youngster was arrested by the Americans. This was at variance with the reference to the National Review article:
Muhammad Ismail Agha, aged 15, is back with his family in Afghanistan after two months' imprisonment at Bagram airbase north of Kabul, followed by a year in the U.S. holding facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Human-rights groups have criticized the detention of minors like Ismail, but the lad seems to have profited from his time at Gitmo. He lived with two other Afghan boys in a house with several rooms. Each day the boys were taught English, Pashto, and basic math by Afghan-American teachers. Dietary and religious preferences were scrupulously observed. "For two or three days I was confused," Ismail testified, "but later the Americans were so nice with me. They were giving me good food with fruit and water for ablutions before prayer." Added the boy's father: "My son got an education in America."
Joaquin Murietta 17:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
The article used a non-free image of Ismail Agha, for a decade or so. Recently a contributor removed that image, on the grounds that guidelines on the use of non-free images bars them from being used in {{ infobox}}es. Since their concern was over its placement, I moved it to another section. See [1]. Geo Swan ( talk) 12:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Well-meaning contributors regularly remove images, for all kinds of reasons.
When, as in this case, their justification for removal is not one that would bar using the image, merely a technicality, I think requesting restoration from the deleting administrator is the responsible choice.
If the contributor who removed the image actually thought they could make a case that the image should not be used here, under any conditions, I think they should have said so, in the first place. Geo Swan ( talk) 21:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Closing administrator said: "Except Geo Swan made a case justifying the use of the image. This is not a straight-forward situation of it being a replaceable non-free image; the context of which it is used in the article matters here." and: "And how does one determine consensus? By discussion, which you've taken no interest in facilitating. WP:FFD is there, but I don't see your initiative. It is the next reasonable step."
I offered my best advice to the first contributor to excise the image, here. I said it was the advice I would have offered him or her if we were best friends. Sadly, that contributor seems unwilling to accept that just because they say they have an opinion, other people are not bound to accept that opinion, if they can't make the effort to explain themselves. Geo Swan ( talk) 19:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
At User talk:Explicit the closing administrator said https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Explicit&diff=792417 428&oldid=792373755 "Except Geo Swan made a case justifying the use of the image... I'd rather not waste the community's time by having this file being sent to WP:DRV, which would only result in it being listed at WP:FFD, the latter of which is the approach you should have taken upon the restoration of the image." Here is your frankly inflammatory reply. Closing admin followed up with explicitly suggesting your "next reasonable step" is to take this to WP:FFD.
Don't you use inflammatory language in your signature? Doesn't your general pattern of comments suggest you routinely level accusations against those who disagree with you, rather than good faith explanations?
The closing administrator is not a crony of mine. I have no prior association with them. They gave you clear suggestions, which you chose to respond to with insults, and which you are clearly ignoring here. Geo Swan ( talk) 10:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Aged 15 - on 11 Feb 2004.
[2]
Aged 13 - When taken 14m previously in early Dec 2002.
[3]
So, birthday is between 1 Dec - 11 Feb. Perhaps he's one of the many 1st Jan birthdays in Afghanistan? [4] That would make his birthday 01/01/1989. Not a million miles off the DoD year of 1988. [5] And that circle is easy to square if he was born <6m prior to 01/01/1989 and he (or his family) chose 01/01/1989 as the nearest 1st Jan birthday.
Not suitable for inclusion in the article, but it might help editors understand the various age claims. Bromley86 ( talk) 22:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Actually, thinking about it, we can use the ages given in those sources to generate the Dec 1988 - Feb 1989 range, we just can't narrow it further than that. Bromley86 ( talk) 23:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Looks like I'm going to have to use remote footnotes to do the trick. Mentioning it here in case another editor is wondering what's up with the unusual referencing. Bromley86 ( talk) 00:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: Holding youths with adult captives, and not providing a school teacher for them, was a violation of the Geneva Conventions -- a war crime. It is one of the reasons to be skeptical of DoD claims.
Note: International standards place the age-cutoff for who gets special treatment, due to their age, at 18. The DoD arbitrarily decided to use 16 as their cutoff -- without, so far as I am aware, ever providing an explanation. Geo Swan ( talk) 12:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Note also that his records said he refused to be weighed, on several occasion... All of those occasions when his records say he refused to be weighed? They are all months after he had been repatriated to Afghanistan. Would you believe he is not the only captive to have anomalous weight records, that date to after they were transferred? There are dozens. About half of them record actual weights, when the men had already been repatriated.
All of this is a reason to distrust those bone-scans. Geo Swan ( talk) 02:19, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
The original article was non-neutral about conditions in Guantanemo, and also implied that the youngster was arrested by the Americans. This was at variance with the reference to the National Review article:
Muhammad Ismail Agha, aged 15, is back with his family in Afghanistan after two months' imprisonment at Bagram airbase north of Kabul, followed by a year in the U.S. holding facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Human-rights groups have criticized the detention of minors like Ismail, but the lad seems to have profited from his time at Gitmo. He lived with two other Afghan boys in a house with several rooms. Each day the boys were taught English, Pashto, and basic math by Afghan-American teachers. Dietary and religious preferences were scrupulously observed. "For two or three days I was confused," Ismail testified, "but later the Americans were so nice with me. They were giving me good food with fruit and water for ablutions before prayer." Added the boy's father: "My son got an education in America."
Joaquin Murietta 17:52, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
The article used a non-free image of Ismail Agha, for a decade or so. Recently a contributor removed that image, on the grounds that guidelines on the use of non-free images bars them from being used in {{ infobox}}es. Since their concern was over its placement, I moved it to another section. See [1]. Geo Swan ( talk) 12:18, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Well-meaning contributors regularly remove images, for all kinds of reasons.
When, as in this case, their justification for removal is not one that would bar using the image, merely a technicality, I think requesting restoration from the deleting administrator is the responsible choice.
If the contributor who removed the image actually thought they could make a case that the image should not be used here, under any conditions, I think they should have said so, in the first place. Geo Swan ( talk) 21:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Closing administrator said: "Except Geo Swan made a case justifying the use of the image. This is not a straight-forward situation of it being a replaceable non-free image; the context of which it is used in the article matters here." and: "And how does one determine consensus? By discussion, which you've taken no interest in facilitating. WP:FFD is there, but I don't see your initiative. It is the next reasonable step."
I offered my best advice to the first contributor to excise the image, here. I said it was the advice I would have offered him or her if we were best friends. Sadly, that contributor seems unwilling to accept that just because they say they have an opinion, other people are not bound to accept that opinion, if they can't make the effort to explain themselves. Geo Swan ( talk) 19:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
At User talk:Explicit the closing administrator said https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Explicit&diff=792417 428&oldid=792373755 "Except Geo Swan made a case justifying the use of the image... I'd rather not waste the community's time by having this file being sent to WP:DRV, which would only result in it being listed at WP:FFD, the latter of which is the approach you should have taken upon the restoration of the image." Here is your frankly inflammatory reply. Closing admin followed up with explicitly suggesting your "next reasonable step" is to take this to WP:FFD.
Don't you use inflammatory language in your signature? Doesn't your general pattern of comments suggest you routinely level accusations against those who disagree with you, rather than good faith explanations?
The closing administrator is not a crony of mine. I have no prior association with them. They gave you clear suggestions, which you chose to respond to with insults, and which you are clearly ignoring here. Geo Swan ( talk) 10:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Aged 15 - on 11 Feb 2004.
[2]
Aged 13 - When taken 14m previously in early Dec 2002.
[3]
So, birthday is between 1 Dec - 11 Feb. Perhaps he's one of the many 1st Jan birthdays in Afghanistan? [4] That would make his birthday 01/01/1989. Not a million miles off the DoD year of 1988. [5] And that circle is easy to square if he was born <6m prior to 01/01/1989 and he (or his family) chose 01/01/1989 as the nearest 1st Jan birthday.
Not suitable for inclusion in the article, but it might help editors understand the various age claims. Bromley86 ( talk) 22:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Actually, thinking about it, we can use the ages given in those sources to generate the Dec 1988 - Feb 1989 range, we just can't narrow it further than that. Bromley86 ( talk) 23:04, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Looks like I'm going to have to use remote footnotes to do the trick. Mentioning it here in case another editor is wondering what's up with the unusual referencing. Bromley86 ( talk) 00:11, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: Holding youths with adult captives, and not providing a school teacher for them, was a violation of the Geneva Conventions -- a war crime. It is one of the reasons to be skeptical of DoD claims.
Note: International standards place the age-cutoff for who gets special treatment, due to their age, at 18. The DoD arbitrarily decided to use 16 as their cutoff -- without, so far as I am aware, ever providing an explanation. Geo Swan ( talk) 12:03, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Note also that his records said he refused to be weighed, on several occasion... All of those occasions when his records say he refused to be weighed? They are all months after he had been repatriated to Afghanistan. Would you believe he is not the only captive to have anomalous weight records, that date to after they were transferred? There are dozens. About half of them record actual weights, when the men had already been repatriated.
All of this is a reason to distrust those bone-scans. Geo Swan ( talk) 02:19, 5 August 2017 (UTC)