Talk:July 2009 Ürümqi riots
This level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
July 2009 Ürümqi riots is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 5, 2010. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Q1: Why does this article use the spelling "Uyghur" instead of "Uighur"?
A1: Although "Uighur" is the most common spelling in English popular media, "Uyghur" is already the standard spelling used across Wikipedia, and is maintained here for consistency within the project. Furthermore, while "Uighur" is common in news articles, many academics and most Uyghurs themselves tend to use "Uyghur"[1][2]. However, quotations or article titles that use that spelling are kept as such here. Q2: Why is this event not categorised as "terrorism"?
A2: There are to date no reliable, verifiable sources categorising it in that manner. Specifically, the most common definition of "terrorism" requires that an act be planned intentionally and ahead of time to achieve political ends. There is not yet any definitive proof of this, despite official rhetoric. Q3: Why is this event not categorised as a "pogrom"?
A3: In English usage, the word "pogrom" evokes specific notions of attacks against Jews; very few sources (only partisan ones) have used this term in the context of the Urumqi riots. Q4: Why is there no mention of the ethnicity of victims in the lead or in the infobox?
A4: The information is included in the body of the article. Giving such information in the lead or in the infobox is excessively detailed, and its inclusion could be inflammatory. Furthermore, there is consensus not to state any numbers as "fact" until there is more corroboration of the numbers, which originate from Xinhua, and at least one academic publicly stated (in mid-August) that reported ethnic breakdowns were not "yet" reliable. Q5: There were several erroneous photographs in the media. Why talk about only one?
A5: All media mistakes have to be notable and verifiable in order to be included in the article. "Notable" means that news of the media mistake must be significant enough to change audiences' perception of the riot—most media errors are isolated incidents and are quickly forgotten. "Verifiable" means that it must not be original research, and has to be published by reliable sources not counting partisan sources—Chinese state media or Uyghur activists. The Shishou riot photograph was re-used by many media sources before they realised it was an error, and that photograph's use by Rebiya Kadeer generated significant attention and discussion, so it merits inclusion. Most other gaffes have not generated that amount of attention. Q6: Why does this article avoid the term "Han Chinese"?
A6: Even though "Han Chinese" is the commonly-used English term for the Han ethnicity in China, use of the term here suggests that Uyghurs are not Chinese. Thus, use of the term "Han Chinese" advocates the notion that Uyghurs should be segregated or separated from Chinese society, which is against Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Q7: Why are Xinjiang and Uyghur history not discussed in the article?
A7: Detailed analysis of Xinjiang history and Uyghur history here only serve to promote grievances from both sides of the riot, which is outside the scope of this article and against Wikipedia's neutrality policy. |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on July 2009 Ürümqi riots. 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/20110608155032/http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/07/09/how_china_wins_and_loses_xinjiang?page=0,0&obref=obinsite to http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/07/09/how_china_wins_and_loses_xinjiang?page=0,0&obref=obinsite
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110622095008/http://www.cfr.org/china/uighurs-chinas-social-justice-problem/p19760 to http://www.cfr.org/china/uighurs-chinas-social-justice-problem/p19760
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090713190636/http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/world/MI125641/ to http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/world/MI125641/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141220121949/http://www.aa.com.tr/en/news/38906--turkey-and-iran-concerned-over-developments-in-xinjiang- to http://www.aa.com.tr/en/news/38906--turkey-and-iran-concerned-over-developments-in-xinjiang-
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110716034324/http://www.securitymanagement.com/news/china-legislature-outlines-police-powers-curbs-local-security-powers-006110 to http://www.securitymanagement.com/news/china-legislature-outlines-police-powers-curbs-local-security-powers-006110
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110809143839/http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2009/11/25/4376537-could-the-uighur-unrest-spread to http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2009/11/25/4376537-could-the-uighur-unrest-spread
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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:24, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on July 2009 Ürümqi riots. 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/20090713175919/http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/10-Jul-2009/Some-elements-out-to-harm-SinoPak-ties to http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/10-Jul-2009/Some-elements-out-to-harm-SinoPak-ties
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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Infobox image
editIs there an image we could use for the infobox? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Issues with FA status
editFollowing a conversation with @Z1720 at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/July 2009 Ürümqi riots, I'd like to raise some issues with this article. On a quick look I'd be concerned to see this on the front page in its present state for two reasons: 1/ Despite MOS:CITELEDE, there does seem to be a lot of citations in the lead 2/ the aftermath section doesn't really go beyond 2010. Hope that makes sense and that the article could be improved since it's a really interesting topic. Mujinga (talk) 13:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)