Talk:Hoeryong concentration camp

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Korea High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.KoreaWikipedia:WikiProject KoreaTemplate:WikiProject KoreaKorea-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject North Korea.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Human rights Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Correction and Detention Facilities (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Correction and Detention FacilitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesTemplate:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesCorrection and Detention Facilities

Are you sure that "kwan-li-so" stands for education? It seems to me that it is quite similar (and therefore maybe a Korean loanword) to the Chinese guanlisuo 管理所, which means "administrative office". Nils

Frankly this article is a mess.

I have inserted more than a few requests for citations. I'll give it a couple of weeks and then all unreferenced text will be removed. Parrot of Doom (talk) 20:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did the information need to be removed? Many of the claims were contained in the first refrence (guardian article). Remaining allegations are supported by a documentary by Discovery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_of_the_Secret_State It seems most of these weren't uncited but rather lacked in text citations. Is there any objection to reverting to the version before you deleted all that information and fixing the few unsupported qualifiers ('all' in the article vs 'all we could find' in the source)? It seems the deletion was unneeded, is there any wikipedia policy that information should be removed for lack of intext citation when the few refrences provided succinctly support an article of a few paragraphs?--24.29.234.88 (talk) 11:08, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My view is that of wp:verifiability. The article as I first encountered it read little better than the ramblings of a ten year old child. The 'citation needed' requests were left on the page for several weeks, more than enough time for any interested parties to amend the lack of references.

All is still available in the history section, so feel free to reinsert anything you like - so long as it conforms to wp:verifiability, and with wp:reliable sources (not blogs, or other wikipedia articles, which are unreliable sources). I feel quite strongly about this, it is to the detriment of Wikipedia that so many articles are either unreferenced, or referenced from unreliable sources. Parrot of Doom (talk) 22:38, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been completely revised and expanded with numerous reliable sources. I hope now it will meet expectations. If anyone reading this is interested in the topic and speaks another language, would you take into consideration to translate this article? It is important, that more people get to know about Camp 22 to support Amnesty International and other human rights organizations and leverage North Korea to end these human rights violations. - Gamnamu (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More information

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31880905/ns/world_news-asiapacific has more information about this camp. -JasonQ87

oops, I meant http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/feb/01/northkorea

-JasonQ87

Coordinates given are off

The coordinates given in the article are wrong and lead to some installation on mainland China, not North Korea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parantatatam (talk • contribs) 12:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The provided coordinates 42.537967 N 129.935517 E (or 42°32′17″N 129°56′08″E) are correct and lead exactly to Haengyong-ri. Check this direct link to Google maps to see Haengyong-ri (at the green arrow) located around 10 km east of the Chinese-North Korean border. - Gamnamu (talk) 11:55, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Closure

Korean media have reported that the camp was closed in the spring of 2012; however considerable doubt has been cast on that by detailed analysis of satellite photographs, see http://blogs.wsj.com/korearealtime/2012/10/24/new-photos-indicate-camp-22-is-still-open/ As we are not in the news business, it is not necessary that we report blow-by-blow accounts or come to a definitive conclusion pending definite confirmation. User:Fred Bauder Talk 15:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree with you. This HRNK Update with satellite image analysis supports the reports on major changes of Camp 22, but does not rule out downsizing or consolidation. So after some months I suggest to briefly mention these reports. But still the most important point is not clear: What happened to the tens of thousands of prisoners? And until this is not clear I think we should not write about the camp in past tense. -- Gamnamu (talk) 09:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved, without prejudice for any new evidence in the future of possible names used most by sources. (non-admin closure) Apteva (talk) 18:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Camp 22 → Hoeryong concentration camp – I propose that Camp 22 be moved to Hoeryong concentration camp. I have two reasons. One is to disambiguate Camp 22. There's no knowing whether Camp 22 is the military camp or the school campsite or not. The other is for consistency with others in Category:Concentration camps in North Korea. Sawol (talk) 06:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What name is most used by sources? bobrayner (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Content warnings

I'm not sure what Wikipedia's policy is on this type of thing (If someone can post something below, that'd be good), but given this article includes some pretty graphic descpitions of some very nasty things, I think it would be good if it included some type of Warning at the start. 123.50.154.0 (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hoeryong concentration camp. 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/20130228031922/http://nkdb.org:80/bbs1/data/publication/Political_Prison_Camp_in_North_Korea_Today.pdf to http://nkdb.org/bbs1/data/publication/Political_Prison_Camp_in_North_Korea_Today.pdf

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} 14:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"It is now one of the few government permitted destinations on Google Maps meaning people are able to get directions to it using the service"

The quote has The Mirror (a tabloid) as a reference, and nothing in the article says anything about "government permitted destinations". It suggests that the North Koreans government has something to say in this. I removed this, as this is probably spam/vandalism/trolling.