Talk:The Salt Pit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Salt Pit article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	The Salt Pit is part of the Cold War WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Cold War on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to the people, places, things, and events, and anything else associated with the Cold War. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

This article needs citations badly. — —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackberrylaw (talk • contribs) 2005 October 23, 16:14

Contents 1 !! 2 Anon has a concern about the satellite photo 3 Reason for the name change? 4 fix references -- see talk

[edit]  !!

i second that. article needs dates and info as in from where was this article info recieved. — —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.77.254 (talk • contribs) 2005 November 28, 00:23

Agreed. It also needs to be checked for neutral point of view. I'm not fond of torture or "death in custody" situations, personally, and this is sickening to me. Still, Wikipedia isn't a forum for personal viewpoints. The phrasing of statements regarding the "bright and eager" CIA case officer involved seems biased to me. Anyone else feel the same way?

P.S.: Hyperlinks need to be added to that same section. I'm not touching that until this is resolved, though.Moonsword 02:13, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Both the Washington Post and the Bostom Globe quoted colleagues of the CIA officers using the phrase "bright and eager" while describing him.

The article does have an external links section. You realize that if you felt the wikipedia article was insufficiently detailed you could have read the external links? And, if you were so inclined, you could have added those details yourself. -- Geo Swan 03:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

It's not the "bright and eager" part I'm referring to. That part was cited for clarity on what I was referencing, not the characterization itself. Bad writing on my part. Sorry.I didn't take a close enough look at the links and (mistakenly) thought they didn't refer to that section. The request for hyperlinks was meant for references inside Wikipedia, btw. Anyway, I'm looking up the details now to edit the page. -- Moonsword 15:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I've changed that section and edited it extensively as well as getting more sources. Better? -- Moonsword 16:19, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Anon has a concern about the satellite photo

I thought the Satellite picture was great but it has been DOCTORED UP EVER SO SLIGHTLY!!! Props to whomever did it though because it provides subtle details that make you want to conclude its legit. Look closely, or blow it up on your desktop wall paper as I have. Just below the third building (which looks like the landscape and could possibly be an underground structure there) there are a series of parallel stripes that were added to soften the landscape as if there were mysterious tire tracks and such through the hard-packed dirt landscape. — —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.32.217.190 (talk • contribs) , 2007 April 17, 02:20

[edit] Reason for the name change?

I think the name change, from "the salt pit" to plain old "salt pit", was a mistake. I am going to ask the person who made the change to provide an explanation here. If they don't, or if others join me in agreeing it is a mistake, I am going to request a restoration of the original name.

Cheers! -- Geo Swan 01:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] fix references -- see talk

It is essential that references include the title, author, publisher, date published -- because links go dead.

If the person who placed the reference doesn't include the title, author, publisher and date published, they make it impossible for later editors to search for mirrors, or similar articles that could serve as a replacement.

The references here once did include author, publisher and date published. Someone stripped that information, for some reason. Please don't do that!

Several of the links pointed to the same 2005/3/5 article by Dana Priest, but in two different publications. That was a mistake.

Please always include the title, author, publisher and date published.

Cheers! Geo Swan 16:42, 28 June 2007 (UTC)