Talk:Torture chamber

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whose insane analogy is it in "Chambers as torture outlets" that compares torture to a medication. Attribute it to whatever loon came up with it, or remove it. - Nunh-huh 03:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

In fact, nothing at all is attributed in the article, which has at present no citations. The tone needs work/cleanup as well; it sounds like someone's pontificating rather than conveing information. - Nunh-huh 03:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Your tone is not conducive to any meaningful discussion. There is no reason to use such terms. The analogy is used to indicate that torture has a forcibly calming effect on the oppressed population. Same as a tranqullizer in a person. If you don't understand this then there is no reason to discuss this any further. Dr.K. 03:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as citations are concerned, I just started the article. I didn't even have time to finish it before being slapped by all these tags. This is no way to encourage creativity and new article writing in Wikipedia. Dr.K. 03:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Creativity is actively discouraged. Articles are not essays: they should incorporate the opinions of recognized experts rather than your own. - 05:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. But the analogy refers to an artificial "calming" effect through fear of the oppressed population. You don't have to be an expert to recognize that. 10:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You have to be an expert to get your opinions in a Wikipedia article. -- Nunh-huh 18:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tone?

This article sounds way too philosophical. The tone is inappropriate for Wikipedia - it reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. I've added an Essay-entry template. -Maelin 00:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

The Film section is particularly bad. Also, a quick Google for "torture chamber paradox" yields no hits at all. Without citations, this counts as Original research. -Maelin 01:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your points, can you suggest a few changes? What's wrong with the film section? Also the paradox is a logical fact. That noone has pointed this out in so many words doesn't invalidate it imo. If we had to google every single header section in Wikipedia I'm sure we would find many similar blanks. Dr.K. 01:46, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia is a repository of factual information, whilst this article reads more like philosophical musings on torture chambers. The film section is the strongest example. Such a section should probably just mention notable torture chambers in film history. This one, however, seems more like a Film Studies discussion of film and torture chambers. Sentences like "Movies are analogous to dreams" really have no place in Wikipedia. In fact, I'm unconvinced a "film" section is really appropriate in the article unless the appearances of torture chambers in films have been significant in public culture. An example would be if a film featuring a torture chamber was controversial as a result of its appearance.

Secondly, the paradox is also too philosophical. An article about torture chambers should not discuss the philosophical issues of dictatorial governments - for one, philosophy, if mentioned at all, should only be described, not argued. People come to Wikipedia articles to learn about their topics, not to be presented with philosophical arguments. The way the paradox is presented makes it appear to be a documented phenomenon. If I could go to a well-educated philosopher and say, "What is the torture chamber paradox?" and be given an answer, it would be appropriate. But Wikipedia is not the place to present your own new ideas, even if they are just new phrases for old ideas.

Finally, a lot of this philosophical musing on torture, if it really does belong somewhere in WP, belongs in the torture article. This chambers article, moreso than the torture article, should be concerned with practicalities of torture, not philosophical considerations. For more information, try What Wikipedia is not and the Guide to writing better articles. Good luck! -Maelin

Thanks for the links. Believe me I've seen them before. I can, however see your point about trying to be philosophical on some sections. To cut to the chase I edited this article so as to save it from oblivion. It was ready to depart to Wiktionary. I thought that it belonged here as it is also linked to many other articles here. I am not an expert on torture, neither quite frankly I want to be. I don't even like the subject! But I think that the torture chamber provides the context for torture. It's the forensic evidence that torture took place. If a chamber existed so did torture. That's why I wanted to keep the article here. So that people don't think that torture is some abstract idea. The Nazi chambers are a physical manifestation of torture in the Nazi era. This can't be denied as long as the chambers exist. Same goes for Pinochet, Ioannides et al. So it is necessary as long as there is a Torture article then there must also exist a chamber one. I don't like writing about movies either, even though I do like going to them. So why don't you try your luck editing the article yourself. I appreciate your courtesy to install the tags so that I have the chance to edit the article first, but if you don't like the paradox section, well, delete it. Same goes for the film section. Good luck! Dr.K. 03:49, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Clarification. I don't think that the whole Film section should be deleted. For example the Torture article refers to the Hostel movie. I think this reference should appear in the chamber article as well, that's why I included it. Same goes for the other movies currently there. It is necessary to include them because they demonstrate the impact of the torture chambers on popular culture. Popular culture is an echo of society's conceptualization of torture. Dr.K. 04:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Maelin for your constructive criticism. Even more for your constructive and polite criticism. I am impressed. Given that you are a new Wikipedian your tone and cadence in criticising an article are remarkable. If you would like I would like to nominate you as an administrator. To put it in layman's terms you are a Natural. Thanks again. Dr.K. 12:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Not necessary, but thanks for the offer. Wikipedia already diverts too much time from my studies, I don't need responsibilities to take more *grin*. -Maelin 11:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Once again, this article seems to be a listing of personal observations. ("the Memory Address of Torture"? please!) Just accreting more of this stuff is not addressing the concerns to which you have now been alerted more than once. If this is to stay, it needs to be cleaned up, not added to. Please don't remove the tags until someone other than yourself agrees that the concerns have been addressed. - Nunh-huh 18:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I Think I cleaned this up according to the concerns expressed in the past and I have extensively edited it. If you don't like this memory address analogy which modernizes the article content fine. My concern is that once you slapped the tag it will remain there forever since noone will feel concerned enough to remove it other than the parties involved in the dispute. I can take the memory address sentence out. Do you have any other suggestions for cleanup so that we can finish this Marathon? Dr.K. 18:36, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

That is the point of the tag. It remains until someone other than you thinks the problem is resolved. Obviously you saw no problem in the first place, so you are hardly the person to determine when the problem you couldn't see is resolved. Please don't remove it again. Someone else will remove it when the problem has been solved. My suggestion: you seem a bit too involved to be able to clean up this article. Let others do it. - Nunh-huh 19:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

The things remaining are all facts with citations. How can this be an essay? Dr.K. 20:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've removed the essay-entry template because the article is encyclopedic now. If anybody feels up to doing some research, the Torture chambers through history section could use some more information, perhaps on famous torture chambers of ancient castles, etc. -Maelin 11:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)