Talk:Delaney Hall

New article on recent clashes and food strikes

Draft:Delaney Hall ICE protests Draft:Delaney Hall hunger strike and protests

Please feel free to pitch in. This will replace the May 2026 hunger strike section in this article. I'll get around to it soon if no one beats me to the punch. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 07:44, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it's wise to separate the protests at the facility from the facility with a separate article, which may serve to obscure matters. Thousands of articles far exceed the size of the Delaney Hall article, which has under 50 citations, while your draft has 30 (some of which are repeats). My opinion is that we ought not have a separate article at this time. Rather, please add further relevant details to the existing article. Lindenfall (talk) 23:06, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Support To me it seems like a few day event in the 25-year history of this building is not WP:PROPORTION. A separate article would have enough WP:NOTE to stand on its own. I think the draft's MOS:LEAD is too long though. RastaKins (talk) 01:01, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I expect the draft article, based solely on what has already happened and not on any future events (which are all but certain to occur), to be significantly longer than the Newark immigration detention center incident article (which is also about DH). There is a tremendous amount of news related to the protests this past month that will span over double the length (at minimum) of the entirety of the current Delaney Hall article once finished. So I insist the recent protests have their own article. The content in the final section of this article is 1/10th the amount of text, or less, of what will be in the final version of the draft. This is a significant and independently notable historical event with substantial media coverage and additional media that will be added soon. Please trust me. Later into the process, if you are still uncertain the protests are notable enough for their own article, we should revisit. But literally hundreds of articles have been written about the protests and hunger strike so let's see what it looks like closer to the final draft before making any hasty decisions if that's alright. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 02:34, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

As for the lede being too long, that's fine, I'm happy to revise it, but let's move discussion about draft content to the draft article's talk page if that's alright. The current lede of the draft was something I wrote off the dome and it's not intended to be the final draft by any means. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 02:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose The protest article rips off/copies/rehashes/recycles the material of the original article. Strip that away and the protest article fits nicely in tot he originally if the the editor would orgainize in a better chronological way.Djflem (talk) 14:54, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Did you read my comment above that directly refutes the points you made? I do not want any of this to sound uncivil, but this comment honestly feels quite a bit terse and uncomfortable to read because it does not engage with how I just said that the draft is going to have 10 times more content than it has right now once finished, meaning the argument it is "ripping off" other content is fundamentally off base. But even so, how is splitting material from an original article into a new article "ripping off" the original article? Splitting is not "ripping off" original content. Splitting is something we are allowed to do on Wikipedia per WP:SPLIT (refactoring an article into child or sister articles can allow subtopics to be discussed more fully elsewhere without dominating a general overview article) and the overwhelming opposition to a draft that I have already explained is going to be significantly longer than the Newark immigration detention center incident article, which is also about Delaney Hall, is a bit shocking. Why is there so much hostility to a work-in-progress draft based solely on the current obviously-incomplete state of the draft? I don't understand this. Drafts, by definition, are incomplete, so criticizing a draft which by definition is incomplete on the basis of it being incomplete does not feel sensible. You may as well go to VPP and try to ban splitting articles and the creation of drafts from Wikipedia altogether if your logic is generalized. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  At this point the whole draft is nothing more than material pulled from Delaney Hall article. One bases one's decisions on work that has been done, not promises about what is going to be done. Don't need the emotional reaction (uncomfortable, terse, shocking banning, hostility, & blah, blah, blah) above to evaluate it. Djflem (talk) 21:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Sorry if my reaction was too emotional. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:57, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  The work is poor. The lead is full of uncited statements that are not mentioned anywhere in the body. One cannot just make claims in a lead, not discuss them in the body, and not provide reliable references anywhere. 22:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC) Djflem (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, which is exactly why it is still a draft. How about you refrain from attacks until the draft is finished. Thank you. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 22:02, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Can you please address the issues which make the work so poor? It has been in progress for more than a month and doesn't follow even the most basic conditions for an article.Djflem (talk) 22:11, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  Absolutely, I'm about to do a lot of work on the draft tonight. This will take several days to get into good shape, but the article will start to resemble better form by this weekend, which hopefully should restore your faith. I know how to write a good article and I agree the current version is unacceptable as-is. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 22:14, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  A lot of time spent on an infobox is writing an article.Djflem (talk) 22:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  I am agreeing with you the draft needs improvement, so I don't understand why we need to continue arguing. How about you put in your calendar to revisit the draft this weekend, and you can check to see if it's in better shape by then (it will likely not be completed, but will be in a better state). Until then, please do not add tags throughout the article saying "citation needed" or continue deleting temporarily-uncited information. If you have constructive edits, you're invited to help out. But please assume competence, I know how to cite sources and I'm developing the draft as we speak. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 22:24, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Support. Per RastaKins on WP:PROPORTION, and per WP:SPLIT: the protests already have enough independent, sustained coverage to stand alone, and folding everything into Delaney Hall caps how much notable detail the topic can carry. @Alexandraaaacs1989: thanks for taking the initiative. Happy to help expand the draft if it's useful. Comecoquito (talk) 21:09, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Help is most certainly welcome! Thank you. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 21:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Support future article After reading through the comments that followed my own (above), I'll add that I hadn't read the original post as a WP:RfC, but a request to "Please feel free to pitch in" on the draft. (No need to pitch at it, discouraging a request for WP:COLLAB) I suggest that we wait and see the event in its totality before commenting on a draft in progress. It probably will warrant an article, at which time the existing section should be left with a good synopsis. Lindenfall (talk) 22:47, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the support!

I suggest that we wait and see the event in its totality In response to this, the hunger strike is now over and the protests have largely died down after mass arrests. I think now is an appropriate time to begin writing the article - there's a chance smaller protests will continue for the next few months, and I don't think this should stop us from detailing and publishing what's happened so far. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 23:29, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Finished the article. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 08:06, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Pinging @Comecoquito @Lindenfall so they are notified the article was finished. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 09:46, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the ping. I completely lost track of it. I read the article, it's well cited and clear why it needed to be a separate article. I cleaned up some typos and double links. thank you for all of your extensive work on this @Alexandraaaacs1989, I'm adding it to my watchlist to help out with edits as things move. Comecoquito (talk) 20:47, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your support :) Happy editing! Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 02:24, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

@Alexandraaaacs1989 Thanks for the ping. Now that it's been severed from the Delaney Hall article, I remain concerned about the synopsis left behind there... Will you also be sourcing the three unsourced paragraphs that are now Delaney Hall#Hunger strike, protests, and incidents, so that points are not deleted as unsourced in future? Cheers! Lindenfall (talk) 18:56, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Background of name

Why is it called "Delaney Hall"? Named after a person named Delaney? Why no mention in name of type of organization (e.g., why not called "Delaney Detention Center"? or similar) ~2026-26767-44 (talk) 10:08, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Delaney Hall in Newark was named to honor Geraldine O. Delaney, a pioneer in New Jersey drug and addiction treatment, when the facility opened in 2000. While initially designed as a rehabilitation center, the facility later transitioned to a high-capacity detention center operated by the GEO Group. [see: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/19/nyregion/at-a-new-jersey-halfway-house-a-volatile-mix-fuels-a-murder.html ] — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-32031-93 (talk) 23:30, 28 May 2026 (UTC)