Talk:Death of Eren Bülbül

Revert discussion

@BalamirAlpertunga: Rationale for reverting:

1. Eren Bülbül was 15 when he was killed by PKK, designated as a terrorist organization by not only by Turkey but also U.S. and E.U. - The argument of whether the PKK is a terrorist organisation does not need to be made here; it is dealt with at Kurdistan Workers' Party#Designation as a terrorist group.

- In fact, in no where in the article such a sentence exists "PKK is a terrorist organisation", but as there are countries who claims it is not and the Kurdistan Workers Party evokes as if it's a normal political party acting in legal arena, there would not be any inconsistency in giving extra informations about it between commas, as it is always done in academic articles to inform third parties.

1. son of Ayşe and Hasan Bülbül, one of 12 children. He spent his entire life in Maçka, Trabzon, as he went to local Çatak Primary School and later Maçka Anatolian Religious High School. He lost his father in 2016. He worked in his family's garden and liked sports, an ambitious fan of Trabzonspor. - The reference given is not particularly reputable (its Wikipedia article notes that it uses content from The Daily Mail and The Sun) and does not publish content critical of the Turkish government, so a better source would likely be needed. If a better source can be found, I would suggest putting this under a separate heading of == Life ==. I would probably not include the last sentence, but I am open to other editor's suggestions.

- "...does not publish content critical of the Turkish government" is a quite irrevelant arguement. Firstly, the criteria to be used as a source can not be "critical against someone or in favor of...". Secondly, using "reputable" term as a characterization for any sources can not even be attributed to an academic point of view, that would be quite subjective, which is indeed having been done here. Any source can be regarded as trustable or reputable for anybody, that's to say, attacking source will not undermine its reliability, but referring other sources such as bianet, which i would highly claim reputable, might work.

1. On August 11, 2017, Eren spotted the armed terrorists who was stealing provisions from their storehouse and informed the security forces. Afterwards, he bravely guided soldiers and showed terrorists' location. At that time, PKK terrorists did not hessitate to fire upon a 15 year old kid. During the incident, Gendermerie Senior Master Sergeant Ferhat Gedik rushed to protect Eren and shilded his body against the bullets. Eren was teken to hospital with heavy wounds and became martyr in Karadeniz Technical University Hospital.[4] 41 bullets were taken out from Senior Master Sergeant Ferhat Gedik's body after he died as a martyr to save Eren.[5] - This whole paragraph is not written neutrally; 'terrorists', 'bravely guided' and 'martyrs' just the most obvious points.

- For a 15 year old boy, who was killed by a terrorist organization, designated terorists by E.U. and U.S., helping security forces can indeed be regarded as bravely and does not require reference or neutrality. That exists in the nature of things and in Turkey, martyr is an official term.

1. Later, Eren's mother Ayşe Bülbül said that Eren became the sorrow of the whole country and cursed PKK Terrorist Organization.[6] - Not neutral and the source used is controlled by the Turkish government, so not reliable.

- Ayşe Bülbül's speech does not require any impartial source. If she did not say such a thing, the opponent is invited to prove it.

1. Killer terrorists, Mehmet Yakışır alias Zeynel, were destabilized in an operation of Turkish Armed Forces in July 15, 2018. - Unsourced and non-neutral, so would be removed anyway.

As this is the only content added, I felt justified in reverting. BalamirAlpertunga, if you feel this rationale is unfair, please engage with me here rather than making further disruptive edits to the article. Thanks, Gazamp (talk) 15:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@BalamirAlpertunga: In response to your points above:

• Because the status of the PKK is a point of contention, the original wording of the article would be more suited to Wikipedia's neutral tone. If readers wish to read further about the PKK, they can see its own article where there is a whole section on the PKK's designation as a terrorist group.
• You are quite correct that the source does not need to be impartial; I have since read up on Wikipedia policy on the matter. Nonetheless, the fact that the source often uses online content from two papers which are generally considered unreliable by the Wikipedia community (see WP:RSP) - therefore, it would be a good idea to try and find a better source anyway.
• With all due respect, everything on Wikipedia needs references and neutrality, and even though 'martyr' may be a term used in Turkey, I don't think it is particularly neutral (it seems a very emotionally charged word in this context).
• Indeed, what she said does not necessarily need an impartial source but it does need an impartial tone. I can't see where in the article referenced she cursed [the] PKK though? You also removed a sourced quote from her from 2017, which by your argument above should be in the article too.

To make this thread easier to follow, it would be a good idea to have a look over Wikipedia's talk page guidance. Additionally, I would be grateful if you could revert your edits until we have finished the discussion here. Thank you, Gazamp (talk) 12:26, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@BalamirAlpertunga: I am trying to clean up the article a bit. If you disagree with my edits, please say why here rather than reverting my edits, so that we can work through it. Thanks Gazamp (talk) 18:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)