Talk:Enforced disappearance/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Origins - Catch-22

I could be wrong but it is my belief that the origins of the term come from Catch-22 by Joseph Heller. The book was released in 1955, well before Operation Condor. From Chapter 34:

"They're going to disappear him," She said.
Yossarian squinted at her uncomprehendingly. "They're what?" he asked in surprise... :"What does that mean?"...
"I don't know.... I just heard them say they were going to disappear Dunbar."...
"It doesn't make sense. It isn't even good grammar."

The character, Dunbar, of course is never heard from again. BobFalconi 19 May 2006. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobfalconi (talk • contribs) 14:30, 19 May 2006

War on Terror

I removed POV quotation marks on the War on Terror section. The War on Terror (Global War on Terrorism) is an actual term, of an actual conflict/operation. It is not a slang term, nor an opinion. It is a stated fact. Awards are being given to service men and women for their actions and accomplishments in the War on Terror. Quotation marks, just show POV bias. Like Neo-Nazis talking about the "holocaust".

user:jerry.mills — Preceding unsigned comment added by jerry.mills (talk • contribs) 19:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Northern Ireland

This section is cited as lacking in sources. However, it has a link to a Wikipedia article about Jean McConville, an individual who is known to have been disappeared in NI. That article does identify its sources. The "no sources" tab should be removed and perhaps replaced with a "see main article Jean McConville" one. -- User:A_Lizard — Preceding unsigned comment added by A lizard (talk • contribs) 23:09, 31 December 2006

Metaphorical use?

Upper mid-level government officials who are unpopular, or who have spoken publicly against their superiors are frequently disappeared (e.g., former FEMA Director Michael D. Brown or former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill).

Are Brown or O'Neill considered "disappeared" by anyone other than the person who wrote that? I think there is a difference between forced disappearance and leaving a government position. Peoplesyak 00:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it would be nice if whoever wrote that could point to an actual usage example. Sounds kinda weak to me. Nicolasdz 08:08, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I recommend this part be deleted under (WP:VERIFY) unless someone can show an example of it being commonly used. Even then, it's relevance to the article is probably debatable. Mosz0r 20:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I just finished editing it to improve clarity, but I agree that it doesn't seem to fit with the subject, is unsourced, and is a much lighter subject than the extremely serious article topic, forced disappearance. I'm going to go ahead and remove it as unsourced, POV, and irrelevant. Lawikitejana 22:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Sources

No están ni vivos ni muertos, están desaparecidos (they are not alive nor dead, they are disappeared), is a often quoted phrase, attributed to Jorge Rafael Videla. Unfortunately the closest thing to a source is

TRONCOSO, O. (1985) El Proceso de Reorganización Nacional. Cronología y documentación. Volúmenes 1 y 2. Biblioteca política argentina, Centro Editor de América Latina, Buenos Aires.

as cited in

LÁPIDAS EN LA PRENSA. UN DUELO INTERDICTO LEÍDO DESDE LOS AVISOS NECROLÓGICOS DEL DIARIO PÁGINA 12.

by Gabriela Alvarez. (dead link).

If someone finds a stronger reference, methinks is worth mentioning here. User:Ejrrjs says What? 22:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Yet more war on terror stuff

The stuff about US soldiers and civilians being held in "black sites" really, really needs a (reputable) source. As it is, that's the realm of conspiracy theory. Heck, Jose Padilla is accused of terrorism, and his imprisionment is publicly known; the details of his treatment are just starting to come out, but one would think that he'd be a prime candidate for "dissapearing" a US citizen. 67.160.28.212 17:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

war on terror

I have been warned of vandalism by deleting the US segment of this article, so let me explain why I continued to do so. This segment of the article is extremely biased. "the so-called "War on terror" ? Give me a break, whoever wrote this has a clear bias against the United States' decision to go to war, and this bias shows in this segment of the article. Secondly, the source that this was written by was a speech given by the Secretary General of Amnesty International to her supporters, hardly an unbiased source to quote from. The speech is full of generalizations and opinions, none of which belong as an official source on an encyclopedia page. Lastly, the quote at the end of the article is AN OPINION of the speaker, and this is not proof that forced disappearances have been found in the US War on Terror. The detainees as Guantanamo have been repeatedly justified as being enemy combatants, many of which have already been released, and the notion that their detention is considered a "forced disappearance" is ridiculous and only shows the bias of the person that wrote this. I request that this segment be reviewed and edited accordingly. Erik 21:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

i didn't write this, and i agree that some changes could be made, but i strongly object to deleting it because of the political implications.
content: "ghost detainees" is precisely what this article is about: the method of snatching a suspect from a street without due process and holding him captive in a black, or secret, location is the very definition of a "disappearance". however, that part needs to be sourced properly. i'm not sure the reference to guantanamo is very well placed, since those prisoners aren't really "disappeared" (although there are other irregularities in how they are treated legally). on the other hand, the quote - from an important source in relation to the subject - explicitly connects the WoT to "disappearances", and is thus relevant to the article.
neutrality: a quote is a quote, it is supposed to represent the point of view of the speaker. in this case, amnesty international, who are obviously among the most expert sources you could find on this kind of "disappearances" - whether you agree with this particular quote or not. you also say that the guantanmo prisoners "have been justified as being enemy combatants" - by whom?
anyway, yes, i'd be happy to see this paragraph rewritten somehow, but not deleted.Arre 02:50, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the above comment. It makes sense to include alleged "extraordinary renditions" carried out by US operatives in this section (cf. the Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr case for an example of what I am referring to), although I believe that the people being held in Guantanamo fall into a slightly different category than "desaparecidos." Nicolasdz 08:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I have re-written the War on Terrorism paragraph. I agree that it makes sense to talk about the US practice of rendition in this context, as it clearly fits the bill of a "forced disappearance." I removed the reference to the War on Terrorism in the main article section, since it's only vaguely related. I chose to keep the Amnesty International quote, since it's relevant commentary, but I think there might be better, more relevant quotes that are better suited for this article. Mosz0r 20:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

US section: Facts

User User:The Epopt added a number of {{fact}} tags into the opening paragraph of the "United States' "war on terror"" section, asking for citations. Those citations are currently available at the main articles, whose references are at the beggining of the section ( extraordinary rendition, ghost detainee, and war on terror ). If the user continues to doubt of having valid citations regarding those topics, I suggest him/her to take the matter to the corresponding articles, in order to keep things centralized. Thanks for your understanding. Mariano(t/c) 07:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

United States' "war on terror"

Wouldn't it make more sense for this section to be named "Extraordinary rendition" instead? Extraordinary rendition predates the war on terror and was conceived and first used during the Clinton administration, but this section might easily mislead the reader into thinking that the practice only started after the 9/11/2001 attacks. This fact should be clarified in the section. It would be valid to point out, however, that extraordinary rendition reportedly become much more common after 9/11 as part of the war on terror. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Reastlack (talk • contribs) 21:40, 11 May 2006.

The US section makes no sense because it doesn't even qualify with the definition of forced dissapearce in the introduction, of which a primary factor is its extra judiciality which leads to murder and disavowal of knowledge that this act happened. The detainment of terrorist suspects is done through judicial channels. Guy Montag 17:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Extrajudiciality is not a requisite. Maybe the intro needs to be changed. In Argentina, many people were first arrested under the guise of a legal anti-terrorism operation, and then disappeared. Relatives went to the police and sometimes managed to locate them before they vanished. In the case of the U.S., there's a whole Guantanamo devoted to people who are in a legal limbo (they're neither common criminals nor prisoners of war), who cannot communicate with their relatives, and who are detained during an indefinite time, without recourse to the laws of the U.S. or their own countries. That this is more or less similar to e. g. the Dirty War's practice of disappearing people is debatable, but the reader who is concerned about the possible "disappeared" status of these War on Terror prisoners needs to see this issue addressed here, with as much objectivity as possible. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 03:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Soviet Union

I placed a {{disputed-section}} tag on the section on the Soviet Union.

The text now claims the all, or a major part, of Gulag prisoners were victims of forced disappearance. The article on the Great Purges does not mention forced disappearances, nor do any other sources I am aware of. In all its activities, the Soviet Union tried to maintain a legalistic face on even its most criminal activities. The victims of the Gulag where in most cases convicted in trial, sometimes show trials. Disappearances without trial, if they happened, were an exception. (The most notable is the case of Raoul Wallenberg.)

The thing most resembling forced disappearance was conviction without the right to correspondence. Even in this case the state did not deny its responsibility in the "disappearance" of the convict.

Damnatio memoriae or "airbrushing" did happen, but this is something very different from the forced disappearance covered in this article. -- Petri Krohn 08:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

If this is so, then ought the reference to Guantanamo Bay be removed? I personally dislike the camps, but the deciding factor given here is the denial of the government of the practice - we all know the camp is there and at least the British captives' names were given to their families. Wee Jimmy 22:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
The US governmet does not deny the existence of Gizmo. It has until recently however kept secret the identities of the prisoners, and thus denied its involvement in the disappearance of any individual captive. -- Petri Krohn 00:32, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Soviet fixed. `'mikka (t) 03:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Thats not the understanding I have about the Soviets. You're right that they did, for large parts of their history attempt to maintain a facade of legalism but a large number of dissidents and even, during the Stalin era, people who were simply not conformist enough recall being imprisoned with people who had committed greater offences, who never saw a trial. As far as I am aware, the show trials often occured after the fake charges were 'admitted to' in private confessions. So when the disappeared didn't admit to the charges despite the best intentions of their interrogators, the disappearance became permanent.--Senor Freebie (talk) 09:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

DPRK

What about North Korean abductions of Japanese? 70.16.178.78 23:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Central America

I'm wanting to create a section on forced disappearance in Central America, but I feel overwhelmed. There's a lot of material for Guatemala (see below for just a few examples) and there surely are many for El Salvador as well; certainly there are many articles on the related issue of the children of the Salvadoran conflict who were stolen or commandeered, then adopted domestically or abroad. Can someone else help? I will also post requests for assistance at the related WikiProject(s)'s pages.

Section: United Nations and the Organization of American States (OAS)
"In November 2000, the Committee against Torture expressed concern about a 'deterioration' of the human-rights situation in Guatemala, and recommended, among other things, that independent commissions be established to monitor the performance of the police and to investigate cases of kidnapping and 'disappearances.' "
"...The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights issued four case reports on Guatemala. In one, it urged the government to reform provisions of the civil code that imposed unequal spousal and familial obligations on women and men. In the other three, it called for the government to investigate and punish extrajudicial executions, forced disappearances and other serious human rights violations committed by the security forces during the 1980s and 1990s, and to compensate victims' families."
States in introduction:
"In 1966 at the University of San Carlos, the University Student Association (AEU) presented writs of habeas corpus seeking release of detained members of the political opposition. The government never produced the prisoners, but it did attack the AEU leadership, which suffered a series of killings over the next few years. In the early 1970s, the AEU formed the Committee of Relatives of the Disappeared. After years of providing a lone voice in criticizing the practices of the government of Colonel Carlos Arana Osorio, the group was forced to disband after non-uniformed men walked into its office on March 10, 1974, and murdered its director, Edmundo Guerra Theilheimer. In the late 1970s the level of violence increased anew and activists formed the National Human Rights Commission. This group also ceased operations due to government threats against its leadership and the forced disappearance of its founder, Irma Flaquer (Cáceres 1980: 201; Americas Watch 1989a: 44)."
The Bibliography of sources lists, among other references:
Asociación Centroamericana de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos (ACAFADE). 1988. La práctica de la desaparición forzada de personas en Guatemala. San José, Costa Rica: ACAFADE. [The practice of forced disappearance of persons in Guatemala - report by the Central American Association of Family Members of the Detained-Disappeared] Lawikitejana 23:03, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree that there needs to be a section on Central America. The number of disappeared in Guatemala and El Salvador in particular but also other countries, often with CIA support, needs to be documented. Hopefully you, I and others can start this ASAP!--Mezaco 01:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Restructure / clean up introductory section

The introduction is awkwardly written and in places reads like an essay rather than an encyclopedia:

A forced disappearance occurs when an organization forces a person to vanish from public view, either by murder or by simple sequestration. The victim is first kidnapped, then illegally detained in concentration camps, often tortured, and finally executed and their corpse hidden. In Spanish and Portuguese, "disappeared people" are called desaparecidos, a term which specifically refers to the mostly South American victims of state terrorism during the 1970s and the 1980s, in particular concerning Operation Condor.

"First kidnapped, then illegally detained, ..." is inaccurate. Someone who is "disappeared" is publicly or secretly abducted, never to be seen again. It isn't for the title paragraph to speculate on what happens after the abduction. Later sections should describe what has happened historically. The mention of a particular type of disappearance (Operation Condor) is also inappropriately specific for an introductory section.

I think it's a good and fairly well balanced article, but the introduction needs a fairly thorough rewrite and would likely be much shorter afterward. Any specifics should be pushed down into later sections of the article. Joseph N Hall 19:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

"Illegally detained?" Illegal according to which laws? The laws of the kidnapping party? The laws of the place from which the detainee was kidnapped? Unenforceable human rights law? "Illegally detained" just seems contrived. Why not make sure to mention "illegally kidnapped," "illegally tortured," "illegally executed," and the corpse "illegally hidden"? The author obviously alludes to the War on Terror with superfluous, labored language. Regardless of the absurdity of the War on Terror, I'm deleting "illegal." The word makes the sentence smack of poor authorship.

Shouldn't China be on this list?

hi everyone how are you??????i'm fine.i wanna know about you.write me soon!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.163.89 (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I agree, shouldn't the Dalai Lama-chosen Panchen Lama be on here?Children of the dragon (talk) 19:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I'll get on that. I have a few other projects so if someone does it before me then, way to go. Dragonnas (talk) 06:27, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Wow, I was going to start a discussion on this as well. There were quite a few credible reports of forced disappearances during the 2008 Beijing Olympics.   — C M B J   06:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

desaparecidos

Shouldn't be there a separate article about desaparecidos, as in the spanish wiki? the fact is that redirect brings here but when i mention desaparecidos i specifically mean those under argentinian and other south-central american dictatorships. Maybe a separate article sould be develped and leave here only the current short paragraph with a "see also" template.--Desyman44 (talk) 01:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Extreme Extraordinary Rendition?

A number of former CIA agents and people from related agencies have made statements to the effect that the USA has had a deliberate policy of shipping some terror suspects to countries that 'disappear' their prisoners such as Egypt. Robert Baer comes to mind at first as a definitive source on this even if the comment he made on the subject was somewhat off-hand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Senor Freebie (talk • contribs) 09:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Israel?

Does the case of Mordechai Vanunu constitute a Forced disappearance? He eventually surfaced and was convicted of I think treason ... served his sentence and was released. So its not 'forced disappearance + murder' but he certainly was kidnapped by government agents clandestinely and hidden from the world for some time. That seems fairly close to a traditional forced disappearance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Senor Freebie (talk • contribs) 09:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

This raises an important point that does not seem to be well addressed by the article. What is the distinction between a forced disappearance and any other kidnapping, e.g., the Vanunu case? Between a forced disappearance and any other kidnapping and murder, e.g., the Lindbergh kidnapping case? Between a forced disappearance and any other missing persons case? 96.35.172.222 (talk) 08:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

add the philippines too.

Philippines should be on the list. Kidnapping is lucrative business back in the Philippines. Their have been lots of left wing politicians and media people disappearing since the 1960's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.37.17 (talk) 04:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced

Per WP:V all unreferenced content must be cleaned up and the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Please include references when inserting anything to this article.Luis Napoles (talk) 02:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Luis, it is understood that all information should ideally be referenced - and it is unfortunate that most of this article is not. However, what you have done is ---> "selectively" remove certain passages (those on the U.S., Operation Condor, or Pinochet's Argentina), while leaving all the other unreferenced passages which conform to your WP:POV. Such inconsistency is disingenuous at the least and perhaps much worse. If you question the veracity of a certain claim then you should tag it as "dubious", however the mere fact that a ref is not located after a passage, does not grant an editor carte blanche ability to selectively and inconsistently chop up an article based off of their own personal bias.   Redthoreau (talk)RT 03:42, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
The WP:V explicity states that the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material.Luis Napoles (talk) 10:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
But you are removing sourced material on the excuse that you don't like the location of the supporting footnote. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Iran - Post-election 2009

I imagine the section on this page about Iran will need to be expanded soon. At present it seems a bit early - everything is still so chaotic, it's hard to sort out the facts. Nonetheless, I came across an article quoting a group of UN Human Rights experts:

“The majority of those arrested are reported being detained at Tehran’s Evin prison, where many are being held incommunicado without charge or access to legal representation or their families. The experts are concerned about the risk of enforced disappearances given that the whereabouts of many of those arrested remain unknown.”

Source: The Vancouverite Vitriolum (talk) 23:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

External links

Hi, I recently cleaned out many of this article's external links in accordance with our guidelines and quite a few constitute reliable sources so I thought I'd list them here if anybody wants to use them to build up the article.

Global coverage

Regional coverage

Selective coverage of state repression

Country coverage of state repression

ThemFromSpace 01:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Introduction shouldn't include third paragraph

Often forced disappearance implies murder. The victim in such a case is first abducted, then illegally detained, and often tortured; the victim is then killed and the body hidden. Typically, a murder will be surreptitious, with the corpse disposed of in such a way as to prevent it ever being found, so that the person apparently vanishes. The party committing the murder has deniability, as there is no body to prove that the victim has actually died.

This is speculative and certainly shouldn't be in the lead. Mnnlaxer (talk) 15:34, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I disagree, it should stay. The paragraph does not cite a source, but as it is in the lede, it does need to – it summarizes the material in the Examples section and linked articles. We could add a note stating that keeping prisoners incognito may be considered forced disappearance and a crime against humanity, if that indeed is the case. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Damnatio memoriae

I am removing the section on Damnatio memoriae per the discussion I started in 2006. (see Talk:Forced disappearance/Archive 1#Soviet Union) Having your face removed from Soviet iconography is not a crime against humanity, the topic of this article. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 01:48, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Mexico

I changed 'people have been disappeared' to 'people have disappeared'. NOTE: I added 'Please revert if necessary' to the Edit Summary because of the controversial and highly sensitive nature of this topic. Respectfully, Tiyang (talk) 06:12, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

US rendition system

Why isn't that mentioned here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.174.181 (talk) 00:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Because it doesn't exist? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
How convenient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.116.190 (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
it does exist, the people who know about it dont anymore though — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.159.199 (talk) 07:08, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Cite? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I know; that doesn't exist any more, either. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:46, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Extraordinary rendition is not a disappearance, if that's what you're referring to. It might, however, result in a later disappearance. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:51, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Your source doesn't say extraordinary rendition is forced disappearance. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 06:48, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
How are [this http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/009/2011/en] or [this http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/093/2007/en] for cites? It sounds to me like Amnesty has officially called it. Enfascination (talk) 21:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

isn't china thought to be a big disapperer?

the word china does not even appear in the body of this article. I was reading about the uygher riots from 2009. whoever wrote that article's intro seems to think disappearances are happening in china. ok waddap? skakEL 16:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

The article should cover forced disappearances committed by the Soviet Union aswell. It includes modern Russia, but the practice was far more common under Stalin. --Mors Martell (talk) 18:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Both China and Japan should be in the examples since for China it probably is on going for various political, religious, or ethnic minorities; and in Japan's case, during WW2 for various occupied areas like Germany under Nazi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.99.66.56 (talk) 03:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

What about Cambodia, Vietnam, and Cuba? It seems that disappearances at the hands of Marxists, the most murderous of all time, don't count.Van.snyder (talk) 20:33, 16 December 2013 (UTC) Then there's the original modern murderous socialism, the French Revolution.

Chile

I moved the Colonia Dignidad bit from Argentina to Chile, and also made minor additions and changes here and there. However, I really suggest somebody trims the Chile section a bit, since a couple of paragraphs appear to be more related to old-fashion executions and assassinations rather than disappearances per se. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.89.68.246 (talk) 16:09, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Disappearing political rivals is also a way for regimes to engender feelings of complicity in populations.

As someone who condones the bending of every grammar rule, I still have to say that you really can't use "disappearing" as a transitive verb like that in English. Maybe "forcing the disappearance..." or some other solution. For one thing, most people will just read "disappearing" as an adjective, and scratch their heads. AtomAnt (talk) 13:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

No, this usage is fine. It may not be much older than the Cold War, but this usage is common in this context.219.167.56.18 (talk) 17:45, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Forced disappearance. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Forced disappearance. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 20:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

china

I brought this up four years ago. A small link in the kidnapping infobox to 'Kidnapping in China' is still the closest any article comes to recognizing the govt of China disappearing people. I'm gonna read that next.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Forced_disappearance&diff=prev&oldid=512032523

skakEL 12:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Forced disappearance. 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) 17:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Forced disappearance. 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) 09:16, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm missing Saudi-Arabia, Jamal Khashoggi

Jamal Khashoggi entered the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul on 2 October 2018, but did not leave the building. ... 

Initially the Saudi Arabian government denied the death, claiming Khashoggi had left the consulate alive, but on 20 October admitted that Khashoggi was killed inside the consulate...

95.222.214.24 (talk) 15:16, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

2020 Portland arrests

I removed a paragraph regarding arrests in Portland in July 2020. As the government acknowledged the arrests to the media (see, e.g., this NPR article), they do not meet the definition of "forced disappearances." There is an argument to be made for citing them on other pages of this wiki describing government tactics, but not this one, at least as of the date of this edit. —CrazyDreamer (talk) 05:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

United States Post Katrina arrests, and Imprisonments

Some 7000 people were secretly imprisoned without charge or trial after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Thousands are known to have been held for as long as 7 months. Their imprisonments were denied, and the prisoners were transferred around the state of Louisiana, and around the country to prevent families from finding where they were under a claim of "lost in the system". An unknown number are known to have died, and were killed while in custody. 3 are known to have been killed by police after an escape from a northeren Louisiana prison work camp during an attempted recapture. The ACLU was involved in securing court orders from a federal court of appeals for the release of most of them. The dates mandated by the court for the release (Last January 6 2006) were disobeyed by several prison authorities and scoffed at by Jefferson Parish sherriff Harry Lee who said "I'll let them go when I feel like letting them go". The prisoners were not released until the ACLU began appeals to get federal military assitance to secure their release. There has never been a full accounting for all the prisoners. Some may still be illegaly imprisoned.

98.164.95.72 (talk) 21:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Er, could you give a link to that? 209.169.144.65 (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 11 December 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Forced disappearance → Enforced disappearance – Personally, I prefer "forced disappearance", but the other spelling has been consistently more common since around 2003. (See NGRAMS results or Google Scholar since the beginning of 2020 (2,000 for "enforced" compared to 1,400 for "forced". These results don't change significantly with the plural form). In part this may be due to the 2010 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which has 98 signatories. (The earlier Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons only has 16 signatories). This move will require a bunch of follow-up category moves as Category:Forced disappearance has quite a few subcategories. (t · c) buidhe 23:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

  • Support per nom. Showiecz (talk) 07:51, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Note: WikiProject Human rights has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 14:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Enforced_disappearance/Archive_1&oldid=1192094321"