Talk:Kaechon internment camp

NPOV Dispute - Human Right Situation

I think that this section especially, and the whole page to some extent, is not neutral. It seems to be very extreme, fairly difficult to believe (I haven't checked the sources though) and likely written by someone who does not speak very much English - I'd be willing to bet that it was written by somebody in the government of South Korea. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.250.121 (talk) 03:33, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The human rights situation in North Korean prison camps is indeed very extreme and hard to believe. I did not believe it neither at first, but when you read more and more about the totalitarian nature of the North Korean regime and you read many witness accounts from similar camps, this forms a consistent picture into which even such extreme brutality fits. So before you dispute neutrality, please first read the sources (there are sources for almost every sentence and you will find more on Human Rights in North Korea), then google for more information about North Korea and then finally make up your mind.

People and authorities in South Korea by the way care much less about human rights in North Korea than people in Europe (where I live; unfortunately not native English) or North America. So your last remark reveals a bit your ignorance of the situation in Korea. But then you should not rush into such unjustified conclusions. Gamnamu (talk) 08:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, 99.237.250.121 has not checked anything. Editors who don't refer to facts should be banned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.10.231 (talk) 12:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Send them to the camp, I say. If you can find it...--Jack Upland (talk) 15:35, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Nonsensical propaganda

So it works like this: People get imprisoned in the camp, strictly seperated by gender and age. But then the guards bring women and men together so they can have sex and then they keep the offspring imprisoned, seperated by gender and age, and again bring men and women together to have them breed. And then once again. I mean, it's hell in there:

For 22 years, Shin lived at a political prison camp and did not know how to express his feelings. “I didn’t have anything such as emotions. Although I live freely now, there are many things that I still do not understand. I didn’t know words such as ‘sad’, ‘happy’, ‘I miss you’ and ‘pain.’” -> http://www.dailynk.com/english/read.php?cataId=nk02500&num=2313

But they're made to have sex so the ultra-evil Korean-punishment-system can have it's 3-generation-punishment? And we know that from what, one or two people..? I say: Anti-Korean-propaganda at it's finest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.38.176 (talk) 19:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you should read more carefully: Prisoners are not “made to have sex”, but they are exceptionally allowed as reward in case of hard work and complete submission. Not everything you do not believe is propaganda, perhaps you just lack the knowledge. You could easily find more than enough information from human rights organisations about the situation in North Korean prison camps. -- Gamnamu (talk) 11:46, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps and maybe all sorts of things are wrong with me and whatnot, yet your depiction makes even less sense measured with plain logic: People who behave best get the most cruel punishment as a reward, while those who break the camp-rules are being spared. Humbug. I might accept that children born in the camp are not allowed to leave and abused for slave-labour (that's still barely reasonable, because such kids could just be raised by the evil system to become perfect followers), but this 3-generation-punishment clearly is propaganda to make the enemy look ultra-evil. Torture and execution aren't enough (the US does that themselves), so this bloodcurdling barbarity is invented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.122.42.181 (talk) 15:21, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Cannot follow your thoughts: Why is it a punishment to be allowed to marry and have sex? It’s bad to know that your own child would also have a hard life as a prisoner, but in such savage circumstances the potential parents may not think about this in detail. They are just happy, if their child is not aborted by force or killed at birth. Maybe they have illusions that their child may get the favour to be released someday or they hope that a miracle happens and their family line does not disappear. The punishment of close relatives is often used in North Korea to make people consider the fate of their relatives before breaking a rule. The prisoners are very useful for the regime as productive hard working slaves and because of the bad family background (ancestry is very important) they want to isolate them from society. Hope this explains. -- Gamnamu (talk) 13:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree it is nonsensical. Only someone who assumes its true (and therefore literally "cannot follow" any contrary argument) would believe it.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:45, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

When I have added fully referenced material from Harden's book about Shin this is greeted by a fact tag!!!--Jack Upland (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Many human rights organizations, e. g. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and so on, and also the United Nations Commission of Inquiry believe Shin's report. All these references are linked in this article, so it is well-sourced and fully referenced. And Shin's report is consistent with reports by other former prisoners about other prison camps. I don't know why you want to discredit Shin's testimony, but as long as you do not provide any serious sources with facts supporting your claims I see no reason to put the NPOV tag. -- Gamnamu (talk) 16:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

The unilateral removal of an NPOV tag like you have just done is sufficient proof of its necessity.--Jack Upland (talk) 17:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

If you set an NPOV tag, this should be explained on this talk page with detailed and clear reasoning and sourcing and not just based on "I do not believe it" and "it does not make sense to me". There are many very reliable sources referenced like the human rights organizations. I trust their judgments more than your personal judgement. Not all facts from the Shin Dong-hyuk page must be repeated here. If you find important facts based on reliable sources missing here, you can add them, but this does not mean there is an NPOV issue now. Why don't you study the many reports about the human rights situation in North Korea in detail? I think then you find many reported facts less unbelievable than you do now. Quite some people judged reports about North Korean abductions of Japanese citizens as unbelievable and nonsensical propaganda until Kim Jong-Il admitted the kidnappings. In an environment where some few people have very much power, e. g. the camp guards or the government, and do not need to justify their behavior, they could even make arbitrary decisions, which do not necessary follow a certain logic. -- Gamnamu (talk) 10:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I accept your point about the Japanese abductees. That was unbelievable, but, as you say, the regime confirmed it, though claiming it was the work of rogue elements (like the Blue House raid, incidentally). Nevertheless, until the abductions were confirmed, the Wikipedia page should have noted that the North Korean government, and its supporters in Japan, strenuously denied the claims. This is what the NPOV policy is. (Please understand I'm not arguing about the abductee page as such: I'm just using it as an example.)

With regard to the alleged camp, a major source for this is Shin. He was also a key source for the recent Kirby report, as you note. This is unacceptable. Articles must not be based on single sources, and they must acknowledge notable differences of opinion. It is notable that a man who Shin apparently agrees is his father denies Shin's entire story. It is notable that Harden says that Shin lied repeatedly to human rights groups and South Korean intelligence. This is not original research. It is a faithful report of secondary sources. Until there are more independent sources about this alleged camp the NPOV tag must stay.--Jack Upland (talk) 17:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Shin is fine so long as its framed as Shin's testimony. His credibility on this topic is perhaps the strongest in the world right now, the UN described him as the world's "single strongest voice" on the atrocities inside North Korean camps. There's no good reason for that NPOV tag other than you don't personally believe Shin based on your own original research contrary to the world's experts. -- GreenC 18:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

OK. Shin, who is an acknowleged liar with minimal knowledge of North Korea is the source for this rubbish. And that's it. How dishonest are you???--Jack Upland (talk) 12:26, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Shin is one of several resources for the existence of this camp. And it is only you who calls him a "liar", because understandably he initially concealed his own role. There is more than enough material, e. g. UN COI HRNK, NKDB, Amnesty International and much more. Your comments reveal your limited knowledge about North Korea. But this cannot be the only reason for the nonsense you write. -- Gamnamu (talk) 17:09, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, you aren't telling the truth. This is what Blaine Harden says in Escape from Camp 14:

Shin was so shocked by the news [that his mother and brother had been caught trying to escape] that he found it difficult to speak... "No, I really didn't know," Shin said... This was the story that Shin told when he arrived in South Korea in the late summer of 2006. He told it consistently, he told it often and he told it well... After the NIS [South Korea's National Intelligence Service], Shin told his story to counsellors and psychiatrists..., then to human rights activists and fellow defectors, and then to the local and international news media. He wrote about it in his 2007 Korean-language memoir... There was, of course, no way to confirm what he was saying. Shin was the only available source of information about his early life... On a cloudless morning...Shin revisited and revised the story... Shin said he had been lying about his mother's escape. He invented the lie just before arriving in South Korea... He wanted to explain - in a way that he acknowledged would damage his credibility as a witness - how the camp had warped his character.

A liar is simply someone who tells a lie. I don't see how I'm being unreasonable in using that description. According to Harden, Shin told this lie consistently. But Harden apparently believes the second version of Shin's story is absolutely true. However, the fact that Shin changed his story has been commented on by Felix Abt, who notes that this is common among North Korean defectors. Shin's father has apparently branded Shin a liar too, claiming the entire story was made up. I don't pretend to know what the truth is, but Shin is clearly not a reliable source. Of course, you can produce quotes from Shin to explain this away, but that is circular logic.--Jack Upland (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

These are the facts: Shin did not tell the truth about one single (but important) fact, the escape of his mother and brother. He told this lie several times over a long time. Later he told the truth about this fact, although he knew this could damage his credibility. This is all that Blaine Harden says. Everything else is just your interpretation. Does this make Shin unreliable? I don’t think so. Certainly it is not nice to lie about anything, but in this case it is psychologically understandable that a victim of such a human rights crime tries to conceal his own role and responsibility to protect himself. And of course he feared the unfair judgment of people who do not know about the human rights context and just superficially judge by some few words they heard or read. Experienced and neutral human rights organizations certainly understand better to find out the truth in the report of a concentration camp survivor than a tourist who had a guided tour in Pyongyang or a businessman (F. Abt) who cooperates with the government. The TV appearance of Shin’s father is so obvious propaganda, that I thought even you would not believe this. Occasionally this was published when the United Nations commission proposed to refer to Kim Jong-un to the ICC. All North Korean (state-owned) media continuously insult and discredit people who criticize the government or the country.

You did not even read my comment: Read the linked material and you could find all answers, if you want to know them. Search the internet and you will find more. There are many more witnesses besides Shin Dong-hyuk, who testified the existence of Kaechon internment camp, e. g. Kim Yong, Ahn Myong-chol, O Myong-o and others as mentioned for example in this report, that you certainly did not read. Besides DPRK government sources (and they reject all human rights criticism) and single people supporting it, I never heard any doubts about the existence of this camp. There is absolutely no indication that anything mentioned in this article is not true -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

How can you say, "These are the facts"? Shin admits he lied, but then says that he is now telling the truth...??? How do you know he's not telling a new lie??? What if Shin tells a new story next year? Will you say: "Well, OK, Shin admits he lied originally, and now he admits he lied to Harden, but this latest story is the truth - because he said it was"??? I don't understand why you're confident about someone who admits to being dishonest. I don't pretend to know what the truth is. But you do. Is this a reliable source? No, it's not.--Jack Upland (talk) 11:22, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

We have the United Nations, countries, institutions, publishers, experts, etc.. all who say Shin is credible. This "lie" you keep talking about is overblown, it has not effected his credibility in reliable sources. You come across like a political crank with an agenda. As does Felix Abt. Of course there's a kernel of truth to what you say but you've take it to such overblown extreme that it can't be taken seriously. Your asking us to believe Jack's POV (that the lie is so aggresious that it invalidates everything he says) and to ignore the United Nations, countries, institutions, publishers, experts, etc.. all who say Shin is credible, even if he did once lie. -- GreenC 15:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

And guess what!!!??? Shin has now said that the version he told Harden was a lie.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:28, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Adding Google maps coordinates

..will be a good idea. 39.5711° N, 126.0555° E — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandosalama (talk • contribs) 16:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

You can find the coordinates in the upper right corner of the article. Click on the coordinates to navigate to an overview page, where you could select e. g. Google Maps Satellite to see where the camp is located. -- Gamnamu (talk) 09:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

But unfortunately the co-ordinates are wrong. They just show a village. Oops!!!--Jack Upland (talk) 15:36, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Mr. Jack Upland thinks that everyone else, including numerous human rights organizations, is wrong, just he himself is right. Your fault if you trust his judgment. All other people can compare the coordinates with annotated satellite images, e. g. in this report (pages 209 – 215) -- Gamnamu (talk) 17:09, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

My apologies to all my confused followers. I was being sarcastic.--Jack Upland (talk) 19:46, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

You have "followers"? Lol. Now that's funny. -- GreenC 22:03, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Probable Hoax

This allegation is complete nonsense and does really not deserve to be answered, but just for people who do not know anything about North Korean political prison camps I take the effort to still give answers (indented in the following text) -- Gamnamu (talk) 16:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC).

• The satellite photo shows a model village surrounded by extensive ploughed fields and a neighbouring industrial complex.

The satellite photos show prisoner houses, mining and factory facilities and fields in the camp surrounded by a fence. This is very well analyzed and annotated e. g. in the report The Hidden Gulag (pages 209 – 215). All human rights organizations are convinced the camp exists. Why does the DPRK government not let them see the place, if this is just a normal “model village”?

As is well known, North Korea is extremely restrictive about what it allows visitors to see and photograph. Nothing in particular can be inferred from a lack of access. This is the same twisted logic that was used in the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The West is "convinced" the rogue regime is hiding the truth. But we do have the satellite photo, which as I have said, and as that report confirms shows a village. It may be that this is some kind of penal colony, where the convicts live with their families and work normal jobs, but I can see no evidence of that. It certainly doesn't look like Auschwitz. It certainly is a village.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah yes, it is “the West”, this somehow reveals your political agenda on this. The camp is large with several penal colonies surrounded by an electric fence. What happens inside the houses cannot be seen on satellite pictures. But the testimonies and analysis is consistent and convincing. If the DPRK could refute these serious allegations I think they would do. -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• The alleged camp is located close to Pyongyang, on the river Taedong. This is the richest agricultural land in the DPRK. It is widely considered to be the most privileged region in the country. This is a very strange location for a pitiless gulag.

Camp 14 is located around 50 – 60 km northeast of Pyongyang. The area east of Kaechon city is a mountainous region (peaks over 1,000 m) mostly known for coal mining (that’s what most prisoners do in the camp) with only a little agriculture on the Taedong river banks. I don’t think this region is privileged. But in other prison camps in more fertile regions the majority of prisoners work in agriculture.

North Korea is 80% mountainous, and the plain around Pyongyang is largest flat area in North Korea. From the satellite photo the fields look quite extensive. I would think farming on level ground near a major river would be preferable to trying to grow crops on slopes. Coal mining is a major industry in North Korea, and coal miners are seen as a key part of the working class (which is supposedly the ruling class in the "socialist" system). The claim that the area round Pyongyang is privileged is made frequently, including in "human rights" reports etc.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Seems besides your Pyongyang tour you don’t know much about North Korea. The privileged area is only Pyongyang (평양직할시) itself, not some rural areas 60 km north, else a major part of the country would be privileged. Coal mining is hard and dangerous work, especially in North Korea, and not a privileged job. “The working class is the ruling class” is maybe the socialist ideology you learned, but in reality these workers are just the workforce mass to enable the privileged life in Pyongyang. -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I did not have a "Pyongyang tour". I travelled the length of the country from the DMZ to Dandong, China, by road and rail.--Jack Upland (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

PS I think it is 60 miles from Pyongyang, not 60 kilometres.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

• The main source for the story is Shin Dong-hyuk. The main source for Shin's story is Blaine Harden's book, Escape from Camp 14. This book is thoroughly unreliable. For example, Harden says the lights were switched off in Pyongyang after he left. However, Harden reveals that Shin repeatedly lied to human rights activists and South Korean intelligence officers. Harden also says that Shin's story is unverifiable.

All the alleged “contradictions” exist just in your mind. Harden’s book is very reliable and facts were checked by human rights organizations, as much as this is possible without on-site access. An electric fence exists as also testified for other prison camps. It is just a question of priorities, what to use the electricity for. Priority no. 1 in the DPRK is state security. So they use it for the fence instead to provide it for heating or for household usage. Did you know that Auschwitz concentration camp had also an electric fence, though Nazi Germany was scarce on electricity, because power plants were destroyed in WWII? Harden said that Shin initially concealed his own role and that he could not verify every single fact (but that is true for almost every biography). But he does not say he continues to lie or his story is unreliable. This is all just your incorrect interpretation.

I have been to Pyongyang, and they had electric lights at night, though they were clearly conserving power. Unlike Harden, I am not so egotistical and foolish to believe all the city's lights were switched off when I left. While they obviously have shortages of electricity (largely due to decaying infrastructure), they have sufficient power to run electric railways, trams, trolley buses, the Pyongyang Metro, bowling alleys, libraries, factories, etc. No doubt they could power electric fences if they wanted to. But Harden appears to have no idea how electric power works, and falsely claims that North Korea used oil-powered generators: in fact, they use coal and hydro. I'm not sure what the Auschwitz example is intended to prove. Clearly Germany was an industrialised country.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, if you accept the report about electric fences as reasonable, then fine. What you want to prove with the electric power discussion I don’t know. Even if you saw something different, this detail does not serve your obvious attempt to discredit him. -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• Harden's account of the camp contains numerous incongruous elements: Shin received a primary school and high school education, but this included no indoctrination about the personality cult etc. Shin's mother and father were married in the camp. They had at least two children. Shin's mother had a house where she provided Shin with home-cooked food. His father was an industrial worker. The camp had tractors, electric power, a variety of food, and was insulated from the North Korean famine of the 1990s. In fact, it sounds like a prosperous village.

Again this is your interpretation and I suspect you want to misinterpret it. Shin received a rudimentary primary and middle school education, where (as he says) he did not learn much. He got ideological indoctrination, but only about life in the camp itself and not about the outside world. Shin and his family only got very small food rations and were always hungry. “Prosperous village”? Are you dreaming? His father worked in the mechanics’ unit. The camp I guess has some old vehicles and machines where absolutely necessary (e. g. mining, sewing). The camp also has some agriculture for self-subsistence. I do not see any single ”incongruous element”.

The incongruity in the account is in the mixture of "slave labour camp" experiences (primitive work, crude conditions, complete ignorance, brutality, hunger) with mundane village life (school, family, meals, home, jobs, modern conveniences). You and the other editors are cherry-picking the "slave labour camp" material from Harden's book, and object when I mention the village material. Your "guesses" and glosses purely reflect your own prejudice. If we use a source in Wikipedia we have to faithfully reproduce what the source says, not "edit" it so that it says what we think it ought to say. Unfortunately with Harden's book this is very difficult as the account is contradictory and unreliable.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

The “mundane village life” exists just in your fantasy. A rudimentary education, a mother living together with her small children, small food rations and hard and dangerous jobs, I would not call this a “mundane life”. -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• According to an account accepted by Shin, his father has appeared on North Korean TV saying that Shin was lying, and that he escaped North Korea after having been accused of a crime.

Shin recognized his father on TV, but strongly rejected what he said. It is a repeated practice that people (e. g. held foreigners or returned defectors) appear in North Korean TV and tell exactly what the government wants them to tell, because (at least) psychological pressure was used. Could you imagine Shin’s father to tell anything critical about North Korea in North Korean media?

Do you expect Shin to confirm his father's story if it is true?--Jack Upland (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

The DPRK government has good reasons to discredit people who tell the truth, because this damages their image. Shin had a good reason to lie about this one fact of his mothers and brothers escape. But what motivation should he have to lie about how the camp looks like? If the story as the DPRK made his father to tell would be true, then he could have simply told that story, just omitting the negative about himself. It is certainly possible to tell one single lie over some time, but it is almost impossible to tell and maintain a complete “hoax” as you seem to claim. -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• Why, given this, should we accept the story as having any credibility?--Jack Upland (talk) 09:10, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

There is no credibility issue, it’s just you who wants to discredit this. But why? There is more than enough material, e. g. UN COI HRNK, NKDB, Amnesty International and much more. Why don’t you read that first before you write such a nonsense and set unjustified flags? -- Gamnamu (talk) 16:51, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Your claim of credibility is purely circular. It is based on the assumption that Shin and others are telling the truth (even when Shin admits to consistent lying). All these "human rights" reports share the same assumption, and use Shin and others like him as major sources. They are clearly not neutral, do not assess the evidence, and routinely make glaring factual errors.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Your reasoning is not at all serious. Shin doesn’t admit to “consistent lying”, he admitted that he did not tell the truth about one fact. Of course the human rights reports rely on testimonies. But they use all available evidence (tell me if you see any evidence that they do not access) and most of them are as neutral as possible. So what do you want to tell us? You think that all human rights organizations are cheating and providing erroneous reports based on false testimonies? Then we do not need to discuss further, because human rights organizations and their reports are a well-accepted source for Wikipedia articles. -- Gamnamu (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

That is the quid. Most of these "human rights" NGO have serious bias issues as documented, for example, here and here. But they are taken in Wikipedia and almost anywhere as the truth. --emijrp (talk) 12:07, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

"But they are taken in Wikipedia and almost anywhere as the truth." Thank you for confirming this. There are some minority views who are so biased they can't even say "human rights" without putting it in scare quotes, but the vast majority of the world respects these institutions even if they don't always agree with their statements or findings on specific issues. -- GreenC 13:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Can we turn to a specific issue? You mention that Shin's father worked in the mechanics unit. The source, The Hidden Gulag, which you provided above, identifies a paper factory, a food factory, a textile factory, a rubber factory, a shoe factory, a ceramic factory, and a cement factory. But this is not mentioned in the "Description" and "Purposes" sections of this article. (The textile factory is mentioned later when the article tells Shin's story.) On the contrary, these section give a totally different impression. The "Purposes" section says the prisoners perform "hard labour", and adds, "The labor at the camp is performed in mines and farms with primitive means". What about all these factories??? This is what I mean by cherry-picking sources. And when I previously added information into the "Description" section along these lines, this was removed or minimised by other editors.--Jack Upland (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, you are quickly switching topics, some lines above you talk about a “possible hoax” and now you want to discuss the wording. I hope this means that we are through with the ridiculous “hoax” discussion. This is your first serious contribution on this page and the first time you mention any specific issue as justification for your tag. I absolutely agree to mention the different factories in the purpose section. I think these are just some missing details and this was not left out intentionally. Based on your feedback I have reworded the section and included this information.

The details of which machines are used in the different factories are not reported. But it is reported that prisoners have to do hard work in long shifts to fulfill high quota. I would not expect modern automatic equipment in the camp (as this is difficult to get in North Korea and would probably be used by privileged workers, e. g. in Pyongyang). The words “mechanics” and “factory” could also mean hand-operated tools, e. g. non-electric sewing-machines. Mechanics unit I guess means that Shin’s father worked in a unit to repair the tools for mining, e. g. the coal carts; that would be part of the mines then.

Your changes, I think mention points, which I would not see as being so important, e. g. “there were no portraits of the Kim leaders” (is this detail not included in the more general “all outside information is cut off”?) And you yourself do some misleading cherry-picking, e. g. “mechanized agriculture” (when prisoners have to do manual labor on the fields), “the camp has electricity and running water” (when only the guards and interrogation facilities have this), “Shin’s mother lived in a house with multiple rooms” (when most prisoners including Shin when he was 11 lived in dormitories and earlier the family lived in just two rooms), “Shin went to primary and secondary school” (when he received just basic reading, writing and arithmetic education and had to work when he was 11). This I think is not neutral, as it tries to make the place look better than it is. --Gamnamu (talk) 16:47, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, it's the book that says primary and secondary school, not me (for example). And I think it is interesting if the personality cult which pervades the DPRK is absent in Camp 14. Harden's book states this several times. I think this is different from saying that they have no knowledge of the outside world. With regard to the factories, I think this omission was deliberate, as is demonstrated by your continual attempts to deny mechanisation. Factories implies some degree of mechanisation (and we have mention of a sewing machine). The book mentions a tractor. We are also told that there is a hydro-electric dam - apparently to serve the camp. I don't think my contributions were cherry-picking if they sit beside the other material in the article. Yes, they would be misleading if they were taken in isolation, but I was never attempting to do this. As I stated, I am not trying to "make the place look better than it is": I think there is an incongruity in the information provided by Harden, which leads me, along with other evidence, to describe Camp 14 as a probable hoax. The contradiction in the position of you editors who are arguing against me is that you say my opinion is irrelevant, but you yourselves are continually saying "I guess", "I think", "I would not expect" etc. These guesses are generally reflective of your own assumptions that the camp is just a primitive labour camp, which is not borne out by the sources you yourselves cite.--Jack Upland (talk) 16:25, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Shin Dong-hyuk

As Shin Dong-hyuk has dramatically changed his story - see here - I propose that all sources that rely on his testimony be minimised in the article. He now says he spent much of his life in Camp 18. We cannot determine whether information given in Shin's account relates to Camp 14, 18, or is a "fictive element".--Jack Upland (talk) 10:38, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I have removed a lot of the material about Shin's life, and explained his partial recanting of his story. As it stands, however, all the references used in the article (with the possible exception of a couple I couldn't access) are based on Shin's testimony. Some of them have other sources. Most of them are dedicated to telling his story. It is quite possible that the information in the article could be supported by other sources that don't rely on Shin. Until that is done, however, I think this article must be considered unreliable.--Jack Upland (talk) 11:41, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

No Chance of Release

Imprisonment at Kaechon internment camp is for life with no chance of release. Prisoners are forced to do hard labour and have to work until they die.

I can't find any source for this. And both "witnesses" were apparently released to Camp 18. By all accounts, there is a variety of labour - in factories, etc - not hard labour.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:43, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

I've removed this.--Jack Upland (talk) 11:14, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kaechon internment camp. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/mar/16/escape-north-korea-prison-camp

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:01, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kaechon internment camp. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120309142353/http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA24/001/2011/en/2671e54f-1cd1-46c1-96f1-6a463efa6f65/asa240012011en.pdf to https://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA24/001/2011/en/2671e54f-1cd1-46c1-96f1-6a463efa6f65/asa240012011en.pdf

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) 05:28, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

NPOV, MOS, and tone

@Dark-World25: some edits have been made since you added the tag covering these issues (I split it into three). Are you satisfied or do you think some problems still remain? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)