Talk:Guantanamo Bay detainment camp library

Military history: North America / United States Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyright violation???

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Consider me dumbfounded at the accusation of copyright violation. The article is referenced by multiple sources.

The only part of this article I imagine is thought of as a copyright violation would be the letter by the detainee excerpted in the huffpost's very special sob story. I fail to see how the huffpost could claim a copyright on the excerpt, and I doubt that the detainee expressed any terms. If it's fair use for the huffpost then it should be fair use here.
-- Randy2063 20:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

What Andy Worthington had to say about the copyright issue.

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I wrote to Andy Worthington, the historian who wrote the article, that quoted the letter, that another wikipedian is concerned is a copyright violation. He said:

"I can tell you, however, that the Abdul Aziz letter was declassified by the military and has no copyright issues attached to it. It was first posted on Cageprisoners."

Well, if the concerned wikipedian is worried the material was violating Andy Worthington's copyright, I think his reply should set their worry at rest.

If the concerned wikipedian is worried the extensive quote was violating the Guantanamo captive's copyright:

This didn't occur to me when I posted the material. Maybe I should have been.
In retrospect however, I have read arguments that prisoners have no realistic expectation of privacy. I know the LAPD tapped the phone prisoners in the LA county jail accessed. for several consecutive years.^[1]
Abdul Aziz almost certainly meant for his letter to be made public.

Cheers! Geo Swan 22:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

^ The LAPD's use of the wiretap was actually pretty questionable. Officers monitored the prisoner's phone 24/7. If a prisoner's conversation with an outsider suggested their outside contact was currently in possession of drugs, or weapons, the officers monitoring the tap would phone 911, on an ouside line, and make a wink-wink, nudge-nudge, "anonymous tip". So far as the 911 record keeping went, they would receive a call from an anonymous concerned citizen, that such and such a car, or such and such a house, contained illicit material, and dispatch a squad car to check out the anonymous tip. So far as the record-keeping went the subsequent arrests were based on anonymous tips, not officers violating caller's right to privacy.

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Guantanamo Bay detainment camp library. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070102152851/http://abcnews.go.com:80/International/wireStory?id=2485063 to http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2485063

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Guantanamo Bay detainment camp library. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.boston.com/news/world/latinamerica/articles/2008/04/10/another_gitmo_prisoner_refuses_lawyer/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.miamiherald.com/1377/story/284843.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927234018/http://www.cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=21154 to http://www.cageprisoners.com/articles.php?id=21154
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.miamiherald.com/news/more-info/story/1277709.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/10/28/1895508/defense-paints-different-khadr.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/closeread/2010/10/draco-in-guantanamo.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 05:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic

[1] The LAPD's use of the wiretap was actually pretty questionable. Officers monitored the prisoner's phone 24/7. If a prisoner's conversation with an outsider suggested their outside contact was currently in possession of drugs, or weapons, the officers monitoring the tap would phone 911, on an ouside line, and make a wink-wink, nudge-nudge, "anonymous tip". So far as the 911 record keeping went, they would receive a call from an anonymous concerned citizen, that such and such a car, or such and such a house, contained illicit material, and dispatch a squad car to check out the anonymous tip. So far as the record-keeping went the subsequent arrests were based on anonymous tips, not officers violating caller's right to privacy.

[1]