Talk:Rasul Kudayev

Fair use rationale for Image:Rasul Kudaev.jpg

Image:Rasul Kudaev.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Mistake in the article?

The last sentence in the article says he now works under a pseudonym as a freelance journalist. I wondered where I read that before.

I could not load the Moscow Times article where this is supposed to be from, but I got hold a the Yahoo Group version: [1].

I quote:

"Vakhitov, 30, was flown out of Guantanamo in February 2004 after the United States declared him no longer a threat. He returned to Tatarstan, where he says he has been repeatedly harassed, detained and intimidated by Russian security agencies.

He now works as a freelance journalist, translator and editor, writing under a pseudonym so as not to raise the ire of authorities."

So, this last sentence is about Vakhitov, not Kudayev. There is no mention of what Kudayev is doing now. This is obviously a misunderstanding, so I am deleting that last sentence.--Paul Pieniezny (talk) 11:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

explanation

I reverted this excision for several reasons.

First, I believe the good faith contributor has misunderstood WP:VER. We can't be concerned when material does not seem credible to us, when that material is verifiable from authoritative WP:RS.

Second, the edit summary claims:

"You say: "Pentagon claim he had "returned to the fight" Your source for that is the NYT article. Have a look at it. It has been edited and does not verify this anymore. WP:BOP WP:GRAPEVINE"

However one of the NYTimes article said, and still says: Kudayev, Rasul -- Feb. 27, 2004 -- Russia -- Suspected.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 02:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

That's wrong. There is no misunderstanding of WP:VER. I have removed the information here because the cited source does not unambiguously support the information as it is presented in the article.

The article says: "Pentagon claim he had "returned to the fight" This is not unambiguously supported by the NYT's sources or any other source. It should be removed under WP:BOP, WP:GRAPEVINE, WP:NPF. Iqinn (talk) 04:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Further explanation (from WP:NPF):

"Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care. In the laws of many countries, simply repeating the defamatory claims of another is illegal, and there are special protections for people who are not public figures. Any such potentially damaging information about a private person, if corroborated by multiple, highly reliable sources, may be cited if and only if: (1) the allegations are relevant to the subject's notability and (2) the Wikipedia article states that the sources make certain "allegations", without the Wikipedia article taking a position on their truth."

That means the section needs multiple, highly reliable sources. What is not the case in it's current form. Secondly, that the DoD simply "suspect" him is not relevant to his notability.

Another concern: The NYT "misreported" the material that is in the section. It is troublesome to use it without making this very clear and only to use the misreported part without mentioning the content of the appended Editors' Note).

Finally, I have cited WP:GRAPEVINE. Because it clearly says that such material should be removed and not re-inserted until controversies have been solved. Iqinn (talk) 04:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Pentagon claim he had "returned to the fight"

The article says: "Pentagon claim he had "returned to the fight" This is not unambiguously supported by the NYT's sources or any other source. It should be removed under WP:BOP, WP:GRAPEVINE, WP:NPF. Iqinn (talk) 04:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Further explanation (from WP:NPF):

"Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care. In the laws of many countries, simply repeating the defamatory claims of another is illegal, and there are special protections for people who are not public figures. Any such potentially damaging information about a private person, if corroborated by multiple, highly reliable sources, may be cited if and only if: (1) the allegations are relevant to the subject's notability and (2) the Wikipedia article states that the sources make certain "allegations", without the Wikipedia article taking a position on their truth."

That means the section needs multiple, highly reliable sources. What is not the case in it's current form. Secondly, that the DoD simply "suspect" him is not relevant to his notability.

Another concern: The NYT "misreported" the material that is in the section. It is troublesome to use it without making this very clear and only to use the misreported part without mentioning the content of the appended Editors' Note). Iqinn (talk) 02:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• This is a rather complete misrepresentation of the facts, Iqinn. The NYT did not "misreport" the material, they simply corrected some of their wording. In fact, they retracted nothing about Kudayev, and presenting this editor's note as some kind of proof of unreliability is extremely misleading. The section, short and succinct, has no current problems with factual accuracy, and as such, I'm removing the tag. Before reverting, please remember, you asked for outside opinion here, and I'm giving it. Unitanode 13:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• I have added the tag again because we have the same problem on a few other pages. The discussion has been moved there. I would like to ask you not to remove the tag again until consensus has been achieved. This is the link to the discussion.

You are welcome to take part in the discussion there. Iqinn (talk) 21:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• The fact that you're removing sourced material over many pages is a bit irrelevant. That said, I'm not going to edit war with you about it. I may just wash my hands of this mess soon, as it appears you are intractable on the matter. Unitanode 21:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• The material is still on the page and it is just fair to add a tag. And when multiply pages have the same problems it makes sense to centralize the discussion. The link to the discussion Iqinn (talk) 22:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

add image

I added an image to the article. I don't know if it is the same image that was deleted two years ago. I have asked the administrator who performed the deletion to check.

The article I took the image from reports he has been beaten to the point he has been disfigured, and implies the transformation in his appearance is due to beatings. But it also says he acquired serious liver disease in Guantanamo. I want to note here that I recognize that his bloated appearance of his face may be due to the liver disease -- not the beatings. And I want to say that, according to my understanding of WP:VER, we have to stick with the explanation from our WP:RS. Even if one of us was a doctor specializing in liver disease, who assured the rest of us he or she could tell from the photo that the facial bloating was due to liver disease, we would still have to stick with the explanations published in WP:RS.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Rasul Kudayev. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2003/3507-guantanamo-0
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.pravda.ru/accidents/21/96/382/12191_Taliban.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20071019024759/http://fra.controlarms.org/library/Index/ENGEUR460352007?open&of=ENG-2EU to http://fra.controlarms.org/library/Index/ENGEUR460352007?open&of=ENG-2EU
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/recidivism

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) 22:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Rasul Kudayev. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2003/3507-guantanamo-0
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.pravda.ru/russia/politics/09-08-2003/3507-guantanamo-0
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.pravda.ru/accidents/21/96/382/12191_Taliban.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/02/AR2006090200452_pf.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081203165207/http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGEUR460032006 to http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGEUR460032006
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081130023537/http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2006&c=RUS to http://www.amnestyusa.org/annualreport.php?id=ar&yr=2006&c=RUS
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21gitmo.html?ref=americas

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) 06:21, 7 November 2017 (UTC)