Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/July 2009 Ürümqi riots

July 2009 Ürümqi riots

This is the archived discussion of the TFAR nomination for the article below. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests). Please do not modify this page unless you are renominating the article at TFAR. For renominations, please add {{collapse top|Previous nomination}} to the top of the discussion and {{collapse bottom}} at the bottom, then complete a new nomination underneath. To do this, see the instructions at {{TFAR nom/doc}}.

The result was: not scheduled by - Dank (push to talk) 21:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Footage of the first day of the riots

Riots began on 5 July 2009 in Ürümqi, the capital city of Xinjiang in northwestern China. It started as a protest that escalated into violent attacks mostly targeting Han people. According to Chinese state media, 197 people died with 1,721 others injured and many vehicles and buildings destroyed. Sseveral Uyghurs disappeared during police sweeps following the riots; Human Rights Watch documented 43 cases but said the figure was likely higher. Chinese media coverage of the riots was extensive and compared favourably by foreign media to the unrest in Tibet in 2008. In the weeks that followed, official sources reported that over 1,000 people were arrested while Uyghur-run mosques were temporarily closed. Communication limitations and an armed police presence remained for several months. By November 2009, over 400 individuals faced criminal charges for their actions during the riots. By February 2010, at least 26 had received death sentences. (Full article...)

Most recent similar article(s): Death of Blair Peach is an event that took place during a different demonstration. It was TFA April 24
Main editors: Rjanag, Seb az86556, Jim101, Ohconfucius
Promoted: May 16, 2010
Reasons for nomination: 15th year anniversary of start of event. TFA re-run
Support as nominator. Z1720 (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this would be an interesting article for the front page, I'm just wondering on two points: why are there so many citations in the lead and does the long-term impact section need updating? Mujinga (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: MOS:CITELEDE doesn't prohibit citations in the lede, although it might be excessive in this article. I think the citations are there because of the controversy surrounding this topic area and the editors who wrote this article wanted to avoid uncited information from being removed from the lede, even if it is cited later in the article. It's also an older article (2010) and since then there has been a heightened expectation to removed citations from the lede when possible. As for updates, I haven't done a search so I don't know and I'm not a subject-area expert so I am hesitant to conduct a source search. Z1720 (talk) 15:44, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really disagree with what you said, but then I'll move to oppose, because many citations in the lead (perhaps indeed to prevent an edit war 15 years ago) and an aftermath section which doesn't really go beyond 2010 make me think this article isn't ready for the frontpage without a bit of updating. Mujinga (talk) 14:05, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mujinga: Can you relay these concerns on the article's talk page, to start a discussion on improving the article? This can also serve as the notification (step 1) of WP:FAR. I would do this myself but in my experience, it is best when it comes from the editor who has the concerns. Z1720 (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Z1720 - sure, good idea! I'm logging off now but I'll get to it in the next days. Mujinga (talk) 14:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:26, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]