Draft talk:Tauqir Sharif/Archive 1

Archive 1

Personal life

I am opening a discussion in order to reach consensus as to whether a separate section for 'Personal Life' is required in this article, as the information about the person's personal life amounts to about two lines of text and is covered elsewhere. Amirah talk 15:34, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

On second thought I agree to keep this section and move the short paragraph about obtaining a passport for his daughter to it, as that is not really part of 'aid work'. Amirah talk 15:44, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Section headings

I suggest that the sub-heading 'Syria activism' is changed to something like 'Aid work in Syria' because most of the sources in the section describe his activities in Syria as 'aid work' rather than 'activism'. AbbyDixon (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

[1] AngusWOOF can you demonstrate the logic of how you arrive at the assumption you have made in your edit summary which reads, 'the revocation and the HTS capture were connected to his work in syria'. The HTS capture may have been, but where does it say in any source that the revocation of his citizenship was in connection with his work. Infact it says 'due to secret evidence' and that he has been accused by the Home Office of being 'aligned with an al Qaeda aligned group.' It does not say that this alleged alignment has anything whatsoever to do with his work.

I'd like to warn you to be very careful about making assumptions such as this, particularly involving BLP's. You have altered the structure of the article based on your assumption. If you have no evidence in any source to back this up you are making a serious mistake and it would be necessary to question if you are making assumptions based on your own point of view of the subject, and your tendency to do this shows a clear bias in your point of view.

The matter of citizenship deprivation and the allegations which go with it are a very serious matter in a person's life, and when you distort the reported facts about them to suit your own possibly bias point of view, then you are actually distorting the jist of the article in a way that could have far reaching consequences. 85.255.233.200 (talk) 06:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

I see your eagerness to 'scrub' this article for promotional tone when there is no clear evidence that there is any promotional tone as tenditious of pushing the POV of a perfectly neutral article in a negative direction, if you possibly can.85.255.233.200 (talk) 07:52, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

85.255.233.200, my point is these events are taking place in the context of his work. These accusations and arrests are trying to imply that Sharif's career is more than just being an aid worker, while Sharif himself denies that and says he is just doing his job. As per the 2020 BBC article [2], "Tauqir Sharif, from east London, was detained last month by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and charged with funding "projects that incite division"." The 2017 Home Office memo to revoke his citizenship is because he was in parts of Syria and the UK started associating him with Al-Qaeda, [3] In both events, he defends himself saying he is just an aid worker / just doing his job. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 08:11, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

It's not like he's doing his aid work, then suddenly appearing in some other location and stirring up controversy from being present in that second location. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 08:13, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

We are talking about two entirely separate issues here, firstly, citizenship deprivation by the UK government and secondly Sharif's 'arrest' and detention by a designated terrorist organisation. See Tahrir_al-Sham#Beginning_of_decline,_leadership_passes_from_Abu_Jaber_(late_2017) last sentence in this section, 'On 31 August, Turkey declared HTS a terrorist organization.' Also, in the list of designated organizations 31 May 2018. [4]. So what you are saying about what these 'arrests' are 'trying to imply' about HTS accusations that Sharif's being 'charged with' "projects that incite division" implying that his career is 'more than just being an aid worker'. To me it doesn't imply anything of the sort because the accusations were made by a designated terrorist organisation and therefore do not have validity. Are you saying something different? 85.255.233.200 (talk) 12:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

The BBC article which you have provided the link to above also says 'HTS is an alliance led by al-Qaeda's former affiliate in Syria. Formerly known as al-Nusra Front, it is designated as a terrorist organisation by the UN, US and others.'

Regarding his passport deprivation the article says that 'Britain stripped Mr Sharif of his citizenship in 2017, accusing him of links to a group aligned with al-Qaeda.' This statement doesn't say that the alleged links to al-Qaeda were connected in any way to his work, nor does it imply that his 'career' is more than just being an aid worker. 85.255.233.200 (talk) 12:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

The second BBC article which you have linked to above [5] where you refer to the response he gave to, 'Asked by the BBC whether he was aligned to a group linked to al-Qaeda, Mr Sharif said: "Of course not." "I mean I came out here to help the innocent, people that were being massacred by the Bashar regime. I am an aid worker." His response to the question was 'Of course not'. Then he went on to talk about why he went to Syria and what he doing there in terms of his aid work.' How does that in your mind establish any link between his aid work and the alleged alignment to an un-named al-Qaeda aligned group? It doesn't make the allegations to be linked to his aid work. It is not said anywhere in the allegations that they are linked to his aid work. He is merely asserting why he actually went there and what he does there.

It is vitally important in the context of this bio that editors don't read connections into it which are not actually in the sources. It is clear by the sources that Sharif has not even been told the 'secret evidence' behind the allegations himself or even the name of the group he is alleged to be aligned to. How do you expect somebody to respond in such circumstances? After asserting his innocence he has simply referred to what he identifies as (an aid worker) and his intentions in going there (to help innocent people). 85.255.233.200 (talk) 13:01, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

85.255.233.200, I am not trying to read into whether he is actually associated or connected with said groups. That's not for me or any editor to decide, but I have the same news articles as what is presented in the article. The Wikipedia article should report what the event was, when it happened, what happened within there, and the outcome and effects. According to the sources, it is in the context of his being in certain areas within Syria, which would be work related, as he has said in the news articles that he was in said area for work purposes.

It's like if a guy works on the Disneyland premises, and then some incident happens where they think he's an employee of Disney, and he denies that because it's not true. It's fair to say that this can be subsectioned at "Career at Disneyland". That's all I'm saying is going on with placing it under "Career in Syria". AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:43, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Another option is to group those two activities under a "Legal history", "Legal issues", "Controversies" section. Then it's not really associated directly with his career. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree, it is not possible to establish from the sources whether he is aligned to an al-Qaeda aligned group. What we were discussing was not that though, it was whether the alleged alignment is work related. It is not possible to establish that either. Comparing it to a 'Career at Disneyland' does not fit. The Wikipedia article can only report what is in the sources. His life in Syria is not entirely 'work related'. You were the one who added the section on Personal Life, so I would think that you should see that. According to him, his reason for having gone there is work related and if we thoroughly read and study all the available sources I think we would agree that much of his life is 'work related', but not all. His work is a part of his identity, that is a basic sociological concept which applies to most people and he demonstrates it in the way he answers questions.

He also speaks in interviews about having a social life, hobbies, a family life, a home, going to a shop and queueing for food etc. These things may be partly related to his work, his wife has also participated in aid work, he may also use his horses for work related activities (therapy), some or most of his friends may be work related (other aid workers for example). If we see a video or picture or read in the text of an article that he is riding a horse, we cannot assume that his doing so is 'work related', he may also ride horses for non-work related reasons. If we see him playing with his children, we cannot assume it is 'work related'. If he is going to the mosque, we cannot assume it is 'work related', it may be just a part of his religious life as a Muslim. We cannot assume that every single one of his friends and acquaintances or associates are 'work related'.

Just because he went there to do 'work', and does work there, that doesn't mean that every aspect of his life is 'work related'. The alleged alignment may refer to any aspect of his life. We know by the articles that he identifies with his work and that he identifies with his British culture, his family and friends both within Syria and outside it and he identifies with being Muslim. He has also identified in the BBC source as not being white in response to the allegations. British culture is not entirely work related, it may be more so for British expats in developing countries or war zones, but that would be original research to say that his life is so.

Your comparison to a 'career at Disneyland' is not accurate, for a start nobody has alleged that he 'works for' or 'is employed by' an al-Quaeda aligned group. Making such comparisons is dangerous because you are now bringing a new aspect into it which is also not said in the sources. The words of the sources are 'aligned to' not 'works for' and not 'aligned to through his work' either. Although, as his work is a major part of his life, we cannot rule out that the alleged alignment, if one exists at all, may be work related, but we can also not assume that it is, because it is not said in the sources that it is.

I agree with your suggestion that these two issues (ie. Citizenship deprivation and 'Arrest' and detention by HTS) should be grouped under a different section, not under 'Work in Syria'.

85.255.233.200 (talk) 21:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.252.129.162 (talk)

I've moved this under "Legal issues" as consistent with other notable people. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:17, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. 148.252.129.162 (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2021 (UTC)