Talk:East Turkistan Government in Exile/Archive 1

Anwar Yusuf Turani is no longer affiliated with the East Turkistan Government in ExileCite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</ref>, it would be incorrect to re-direct this page to Anwar Yusuf Turani's wikipedia page. It would be like redirecting the White House page to Donald J Trump's page. Someone should remove the re-direct and publish the East Turkistan Government in Exile page separately.

UyghurExpert (talk) 23:43, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 16 June 2020

This edit request to East Turkistan Government in Exile has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The "East Turkistan Government in Exile" should have its own page separate from its first Prime Minister Anwar Yusuf Turani. The ETGE is an active organization and has been especially active since 2018. I recommend Wikipedia removing this re-direct and allowing people to edit the article to create a specific page for the ETGE. EastTurkistanExpert (talk) 19:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EastTurkistanExpert, see the AfD on the matter here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/East Turkistan Government in Exile. You'd need to show notability for your request, per the notability guidelines at WP:GNG or WP:ORG. Could you provide reliable sources to show either (please read through those links first)? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) PR has answered this and this does seem a bit controversial since there was an AfD so removing this from the edit request queue. If I may, I would suggest to User:EastTurkistanExpert that they create a draft which meets the criteria to be kept? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RandomCanadian I was unable to remove the re-direct for this, therefore, I created a new wikipedia page for the East Turkistan Government-in-Exile, feel free to help edit. EastTurkistanExpert (talk / contribs) 03:36, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ProcrastinatingReader: I don't have a strong opinion on this since the article appears to be based on quite a few good sources (and if the version preserved in the history here is the same as that which was deleted as a result of the AfD, then they're significantly different), but if you feel strongly enough about it I guess you could draftify it. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

EastTurkistanExpert, the appropriate thing to do here is to go to WP:RFPP and request that this redirect be unprotected - it's been nine years since it was protected, so an admin may be willing to lower protection to allow a new version of the page. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unfactual information

@Mikehawk10: Regarding describing the ETGE as "East Turkistan's elected parliamentary government". This is just factually incorrect because the body is not even elected by the people of Xinjiang and the sources do not even call it that, furthermore the ETGE has received zero diplomatic recognition unlike say the Tibetan Government in Exile. Its also evidently biased as it assumes that this is the legitimnate government of "East Turkestan", itself a biased term.PailSimon (talk) 08:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@EastTurkistanExpert: @PailSimon:

Regarding the ETGE, it is a legally registered diaspora body hence it is an exile government. The diaspora community participate in parliamentary elections and elect their members of parliament who in turn elect the President and Prime Minister. The Tibetan Government in Exile has not gotten any official recognition either. East Turkistan is not a biased term as if you look at historical facts and data prior the PRC's conqest of East Turkistan in 1949, an independent East Turkistan Republic existed. Furthemore the term "Xinjiang" is biased as it literally translates as the "New Territory." Uyghurs and other Turkic peoples have lived in East Turkistan for millenia, whereas the Chinese are new. It seems you are probably a 50 cent soldier based out of China. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CentralAsiaEnthuist (talk • contribs) 10:23, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@CentralAsiaEnthuist: Who is it recognized by exactly? Because it is recognized by no government or NGO as an actual government. As the article East Turkestan makes clear it is a politically charged term used by Xinjiang ethno-nationalists. The ETGE is just some fringe body that nobody recognises or takes seriously.PailSimon (talk) 10:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PailSimon: it's recognized by much of the global Uyghur diaspora and their various NGOs as an actual exile government. The article on East Turkestan has a lot of misinformation and is very biased. The term "East Turkistan" was first mentioned in texts in the 5th Century, and mentioned in Yusuf Has Hajip's 11th century political treatise "Kutadgu Bilig" and widely mentioned Dughlat Muhammad Haidar's history book on Central Asia "Tarikh-i-Rashid." Furthermore, prior to the Manchu Qing conquest of East Turkistan and renaming of it to "Xinjiang(New Territory)" in 1884, historical maps be it Ottoman, Mughal, Russian, British, German, and even American referred to it as East Turkistan, Dogu Turkistan, Ost Turkistan, Eastern Turkestan, Eastern Turkistan, Sharqi Turkistan, and Meshreqi Turkistan. The ETGE is clearly not a "fringe group" if the Chinese Foreign Ministry and China had to lash out against it. In fact more recently, in December the Chinese Communist Party in "Xinjiang" held a press conference to specifically criticize the ETGE. The ETGE has been making headlines and has been the lobbying force behind the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act in the US, the Genocide Resolution in Canada, the ICC case against China, the removal of the so-called "ETIM" (ETIM was fabricated by China on November 11, 2001 to portray the East Turkistan independence struggle as "terrorism") from the US terror list, and the recent designation of China's atrocities as a genocide by the U.S. Clearly its not a fringe group if everything its pushing for is slowly becoming a reality. User:CentralAsiaEnthuist (talk) 5:23, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

It's not recognized by anybody important or of note. Nobody actually considers it to be an actual government bar the Uyghur ethno-nationalist lobby. You can go into the historical origins of the term 'East Turkestan' if you want but as its own Wikipedia article lays out it is a political charged and therefore biased term to use and has no official recognition, its just a colloquialism.PailSimon (talk) 10:30, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It would be a violation of WP:NPOV to write in the POV of the subject of the article itself (e.g. that The East Turkistan Government-in-Exile [...] is a parliamentary government) if it is not a description from published reliable secondary sources.
It is different to say that The East Turkistan Government-in-Exile [...] claims to be a parliamentary government than to say that it is one. — MarkH₂₁^talk 00:20, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and I would also add that the term 'East Turkestan' is not used by reliable sources.PailSimon (talk) 11:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times [reports] that “ To many Uighurs, Xinjiang is known as East Turkestan”. As such, there are RS that acknowledge that this is something of an indigenous name.

Mikehawk10 (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The term “East Turkestan” also appears to have international recognition, at least by Turkish officials.

France 24 describes it as the “the name used by Uighurs to designate Xinjiang”. Mikehawk10 (talk) 17:02, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Its a colloquialism and nothing more.PailSimon (talk) 17:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

“Nothing more” doesn’t seem to be the case. If it were nothing more than a colloquialism, how would the officials from Government of Turkey use it, as well as the Uyghurs who speak a different language altogether? There’s also a whole page dedicated to East Turkestan on Wikipedia. It seems like this term can be used (and has been used) both in press and the academy, and a few (albeit short-lived) republics persisted under that name. Even China allows has allowed the name to be used for the region in its official, state-run media. Mikehawk10 (talk) 19:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Erdogan dictatorship using the term is hardly a ringing endorsement and it appears to be the only government to use it. The sources you presented say "Uighurs refer to the region as East Turkestan" or something to that effect but the actual sources dont themselves use the term instead opting for Xinjiang. PailSimon (talk) 19:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PailSimon: My point was that is was not a mere colloquialism. While we may feel a certain way about the Erdogan government, I don't think that opposition to its dictatorial tendencies erases the fact that there are non-Uyghur sources that use the term. Additionally, East Turkestan also has a history of being a political entity in the 20th century that is distinct from the Xinjiang province. The East Turkestan Government in Exile has a map on its website that does not appear to identify the East Turkestan that they claim as their homeland with the current borders of Xinjiang. This may be worth considering in how we choose our phrasing going forward. Mikehawk10 (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New ref

[1][2] PailSimon: I think these sources could be helpful to add some information. I pinged you since you appeared to be involved in this subject, Good luck - Kevo327 (talk) 21:51, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recognition

Regarding this edit. No present governments actually recognize the ETGE and its not really taken seriously like the Tibetan Government in Exile is.

Just to give some examples the USA has said it "does not recognize any East Turkestan government-in-exile, nor do we provide support for any such entity". PailSimon (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@My very best wishes: This is where you're supposed to gain a consensus for your changes as opposed to edit warring and nearly breaking the 3RR.PailSimon (talk) 22:31, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look, it is actually you who constantly reverts edits by others on this page. My concern is very simple: you restored content which was not sourced or very poorly sourced. For example, this is not good at all. But maybe you are right. If so, please find RS and use them to improve content. My very best wishes (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not I "constantly revert" is irrelevant to the fact that you've reverted three times in the last 24 hours without a consensus, textbook edit warring really. Do you have any evidence at all that the ETGE is recognized by any countries at all? I have provided sources but you have provided none.PailSimon (talk) 22:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I did not revert 3 times. Please check WP:RS. All statements, and especially contentious ones (such as one you restored) must be reliably sourced. My very best wishes (talk) 22:46, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to start abiding by WP:BRD. There are of course other sources detailing for example Canada's lack of recognition.PailSimon (talk) 22:55, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]