Talk:Enhanced interrogation techniques

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Enhanced interrogation techniques article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 3 months

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

United States High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Intelligence / North America / United States

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

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

Countering systemic bias: Global perspective Low‑importance

	This article is supported by the Countering systemic bias WikiProject, which provides a central location to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.Countering systemic biasWikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic biasTemplate:WikiProject Countering systemic biasCountering systemic bias
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Global perspective task force.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as High-importance).

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations: Law Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject International law (assessed as Low-importance).

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Andrew Kaczynski (January 7, 2017). "Trump national security pick Monica Crowley plagiarized multiple sources in 2012 book". CNN.

Archives

Archive 1 (June 2007–Dec 2008)
Archive 2 (Dec 2008–May 2009)
Archive 3 (April–June 2009)
Archive 4 (July–December 2009)
Archive 5 (2010)
Archive 6 (2011 – )

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Enhanced interrogation techniques. 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: 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) 09:03, 21 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Steven G. Bradbury 2013-07-27.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Illustrations

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The New York Times published an article that incorporated several of a Guantanamo inmate's drawings of some of the tortures to which he was subjected.^[1] Some one or more of these illustrations would be a valuable addition to the article.

A good example from the article may be found here.

I do not want to go to the trouble of determining that Wikipedia-legality of adding such an illustration and learning the method of doing so, but perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I might go about this. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 01:39, 7 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

References

^ Rosenberg, Carol (4 December 2019). "What the C.I.A.'s Torture Program Looked Like to the Tortured". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 December 2019.

As a euphemism

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I am given to understand that the phrase "enhanced interrogation techniques" is also a euphemism for torture used by the Nazi regime in the 1930s and 1940s. The English language version of this euphemism is treated well here, but should there be a section on the German-language use of the same phrase to describe prior torture? Mccartneyac (talk) 21:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Although the article does mention Nazi-era torture under "Verschärfte Vernehmung", I agree there's potential for greater coverage outside of Andrew Sullivan's column. There is an article on the German wiki de:Verschärfte Vernehmung that could be used as a basis for expansion.-Ich (talk) 11:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 26 September 2024

Latest comment: 2 months ago8 comments8 people in discussion

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 discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved - no clear consensus for moving, neither numerically nor in terms of argumentation, and the only !vote made in the past week was an oppose !vote. he arguments on either side as to the present name being POV appear a wash - on the one side the point was made that reliable sources treat this title as a euphemism, on the other the point is made that the article acknowledges this and the title relates to a specific kind of torture referred to by this euphemism. (non-admin closure) FOARP (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Enhanced interrogation techniques → Use of torture under George W. Bush – It seems like the last time this was debated, much of the content of the page and the WP:RS consensus was not present. Now, the article itself shows near unanimous agreement that EIT = torture. I don't have a good replacement name, but the current name has about as much support as "Shower Rooms in Nazi Germany". For example: "According to ABC news in 2007, the CIA removed waterboarding from its list of acceptable interrogation techniques in 2006." If these techniques were "enhanced", why are they no longer used? Even the group the put that name out there doesn't believe in the techniques anymore. It was a branding exercise, not a meaningful summary or specifier on the techniques used. Compare to Enhanced driver's license and Enhanced Fujita scale. I just skimmed the article and the only people I could find calling it not-torture in the modern-ish era are: Bush administration officials, and NPR in 2009 (15 years ago). NPR has since published the term in scare quotes^[1], leading one to wonder how useful the descriptor is. I notice the page for Armenian genocide is not the "events of 1915" (one of the Turkish euphemisms for the genocide), for example.

References

^ https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/17/544183178/psychologists-behind-cia-enhanced-interrogation-program-settle-detainees-lawsuit. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Anonymous-232 (talk) 05:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)). — Relisting. SilverLocust 💬 08:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. FOARP (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Note: I took the liberty of converting the suggestion to WP:SENTENCECASE, assuming that was just a trivial matter of typography rather than something the nominator would consider important. Regarding the mention of "the last time this was debated", I did not find a formal RM discussion in the Talk page archives, except this from 31 August 2012, which was a single remark followed by a rapid procedural closure based on the submitter being a blocked user and their proposal conflicting with the title of an existing broader-scope article, and this from 18 December 2014, which was a single remark suggesting to broaden the scope of the article and give it a longer title, with one negative reply. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 12:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Weak support The current title fails WP:NPOV by using the perpetrator’s framing, however it does appear to be the common name.

Kowal2701 (talk) 14:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Comment the current wording fails WP:NPOV but the proposal also risks presuming the interpretation and there was never any prosecution over this particular allegation. I could be convinced but I am also wondering if there are other proposals for article titles that would encourage people to read passed the headline and understand the complexities of this issue. Jorahm (talk) 16:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Strong support for change—the current title 'enhanced interrogation techniques' fails to maintain a neutral point of view. The phrase 'Torture under the George W. Bush administration' would serve as a more precise title.

JD John M. Turner (talk) 09:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

support per nom—blindlynx
Oppose. This is addressed in policy at WP:NPOVNAME. Is the title neutral? Obviously not. But per policy, it needn't be. We correctly contextualize this propaganda term starting with the first sentence of the article. VQuakr (talk) 21:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oppose. The current title is more specific and the more likely name to help people looking for this information than the generic title suggested for the move. Obviously 'enhanced interrogation techniques' is a euphemism for torture; this is the article on the torture that went by that euphemism. 00:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)— chro • man • cer
Oppose This article is not about any kind of torture under Bush, but about the specific program that is marketed under this trivializing name. The proposed title would be symbolic, but also would make it unclear what exactly the article is actually about. Killarnee (talk) 10:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

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.

Add topic

[1] Rosenberg, Carol (4 December 2019). "What the C.I.A.'s Torture Program Looked Like to the Tortured". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 December 2019.

[2] ttps://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/17/544183178/psychologists-behind-cia-enhanced-interrogation-program-settle-detainees-lawsuit. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

[1]

[1]