This article was nominated for deletion on 30 August 2018. The result of the discussion was redirect.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Geographyinitiative, that service seems to be the only difference between when this was deleted and now. It was enough that rather than taking it back to AfD I marked it as reviewed. However, that commission is not, to my knowledge, something which conveys notability under any notability guideline - the applicable ones here being WP:ANYBIO and WP:NPOL. Hence the tag. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Barkeep49: I added some more sources- am I reaching the threshold? Also, I am having trouble finding his official, legal Chinese character name from when he was a Chinese citizen, so I ask for patience on that front. There does seem to be literature about Mr. Turkel in Mandarin Chinese media sources. Names I have found so far: 努尔﹒图凯勒 / 特克爾 / 图凯尔 Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Geographyinitiative, here's the problem from 2018. Turkel is quoted in the media a fair amount and is even published in the media a fair amount. However, he's not actually profiled/written about by reliable independent secondary sources. Like the best profile I found last time was from his own law firm which is obviously not RS. Do you have any reliable independent secondary sources discussing him as a topic rather than merely quoting him about something else? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:03, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Geographyinitiative, so you're running into some of the same issues as before. I only have access to a snippet of AFR but that's the most promising of the bunch. The second source is a speaker's bio, the third one is again a self provided bio for Congress, and the last is an interview (which is not considered independent). Turkel is good at promotion and appearing places but that alone does not convey notability. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:02, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Barkeep49: (See comment immediately after this one) "A secondary source provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. They rely on primary sources for their material, making analytic or evaluative claims about them."..."Whether a source is primary or secondary depends on context. A book by a military historian about the Second World War might be a secondary sourceabout the war, but where it includes details of the author's own war experiences, it would be a primary sourceabout those experiences." provides an author's own thinking: "After a thorough review of the record, including Applicant’s testimony, all exhibits, all relevant policies, and the applicable adjudicative guideline, I make the following findings of fact" based on primary sources: "The Government called no witnesses and introduced two exhibits (Ex. 1 and Ex. 2), which were entered in the record without objection."..."Applicant timely submitted six additional documents, which I marked as Ex. F through Ex. K and entered in the record without objection. DOHA received the hearing transcript (Tr.) on January 17, 2012."..."I take administrative notice of the following facts, which appear in official U.S. government documents, and which were summarized in documents provided to Applicant and to me:"..."Another medical professional with whom Applicant worked"..."Applicant’s program manager praised Applicant"..."In May 2011, Applicant’s managers made the following recommendations" Your position seems to be that this is a primary account of the life of Turkel instead of a synthesized source about the life of Turkel. I contend that this document includes a secondary and interpretative component synthesized by Judge Anthony concerning the various facts about Mr. Turkel. I see the decision itself as primary (like "those experiences" mentioned in the above sentence), whereas the synthesis of testimony and exhibits (both from the government and Turkel) into a biographical outline of Turkel is secondary (like the component of the military historian's book about the war is secondary). For instance, Judge Anthony says that the information about Turkel's college studies and folk dancing (page 3) is based on a synthesis of Exhibit 1 (provided by the government) and the hearing transcript. A primary source on the subject would be a photo of his college degrees, not a synthesized report by a judge a decade or two after the events occurred. In conclusion, in the document provided, we indeed are not one step removed from the event of the decision that was reached. The document is primary to that decision. However, we are a step removed from the content synthesized based on the various exhibits and testimony presented.Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)(modified) (clicked publish accidentally)[reply]
@Geographyinitiative:&@Barkeep49:, Hello, I have some sources which related to Mr. Turkel, here are three of them (Turkel-1), (Turkel-2),(Turkel-3) which talk about Turkel's life, especially the second part of the first article by Uyghur Academy, hope can help. But these article are in Uyghur language, we can use google translater to verify the information, glad to hear from you, thanks.--KH561 (talk) 19:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Barkeep49: Hey! Am I getting any closer to Wikipedia notability here? I feel like I'm slowly circling in on it, but I'm not sure. Are there other cases like this that are on the edge that I can learn from? I'm still looking for that 'slam dunk' second indpendent analysis of him. Please keep in mind that we know relatively little about Xinjiang/East Turkistan on Wikipedia, and this person is getting all kinds of coverage and a government commissionership. Geographyinitiative (talk) 01:49, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Geographyinitiative, if you feel that you've addressed the tag feel free to remove it. I will not object though I admit to just being too plum tired to really dive too deep into this issue at the moment. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:58, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Barkeep49 I've made a lot of mistakes here, but also some progress. I don't want to go too fast, but I do think that I am in notability terriotry, or if not, I'm inching closer to a better and better case for notability. I'm going to remove the header for now, but I recognize that this may be considered premature and may need to be restored. Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:06, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. This is just an accusation, and the current status of the investigation can't be considered Undue weight because this content can't be considered minority views as it came directly from the investigation conducted by the law firm Isler Dare. Please read the article first. WikiValidator01 (talk) 18:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Law firms obviously will defend the accused, although the accusation may be wrong or right it still is not a neutral source and you added your own analysis into the article. Wiiformii (talk) 21:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Wiiformii. The edit here pulls a quote from the RFA article about another article which is quoting lawyers. You can't just drop the quotes and attribution like that, especially when the RFA article itself then immediately mentions the discrepancy between the group's initial denials of Turkel's harassment and its statement on Friday. We don't have a independent reliable source saying that there is simply no basis to support allegations. This is directly from the lawyers involved. — MarkH21talk01:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please edit and use exact wording from the reference without adding your opinion instead of reverting/undoing. Please try to edit with a neutral pov WP:NPOV .You are deleting a lot of other content. WikiValidator01 (talk) 18:46, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WikiValidator01: You've continued to revert your preferred version over 3 other editors, added vague language like Turkel reportedly resigned from his position as chair in May 2024 when the resignation is clearly reported in this RFA news article and the UHRP itself, and removed mentions of the reason given by those same sources. You're also editing with the word "we" (as in this edit summary). Are you representing multiple people or an organization? — MarkH21talk02:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MarkH21 Thank you for your comments. Initially, I did some revert/undo because you and other editors were taking that action, no matter how I edited it. But I don't want to create an edit war, so I have asked for help from other more experienced wiki editors, and the current edit is the result of that. No, I don't represent any org. I represent only myself. I read those sources for reference and didn't see any direct accusation. The original edit used misleading words like "multiple," which doesn't exist in the source and was structured in a very confusing way. WikiValidator01 (talk) 18:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked for help from other more experienced wiki editors, and the current edit is the result of that. What? The edits have been entirely done by you, against three other editors who disagree with you.The RFA article literally says amid sexual harassment claims and accused of harassing women at the 2019 and 2022 editions of Oslo Freedom Forum, and separately of making a “sexual advance” following a work meeting in 2021. That's multiple. — MarkH21talk18:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
