Talk:Ablajan Awut Ayup

Copyedit in past tense
Because Ayup is among the many Uyghurs who have "disappeared" into concentration camps and are unlikely to return to freedom, I am changing the lede to past tense. He was an entertainer, but he is not likely to return to that occupation.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 20:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Pre-edit war
Whoops, my linking has been terrible lately. This policy is what I meant to link to. Donkey Hot-day (talk) 07:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * So your argument is that broken english, "Some reports have suspected that Ablajan had been sent to one of the internment camps in Xinjiang" is better than possibly contentious yet perfectly sound english? Reports cant suspect... Its physically impossible. Would you object to “While he hasn’t been seen or heard from since 2018 Ablajan is reportedly among a number of cultural elites detained in the Xinjiang re-education camps.” Nothing contentious there and it matches the article and sources. I’d also remove that last sentence "There is a growing concern at the increasing number of people being sent to these camps; a Reuters report estimates that 2 million Uyghurs and Muslim minorities were forced into “political camps for indoctrination” in the Western Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.[7]” as its too general and edit the Disappearance section which is also currently in broken english. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Your accusation of broken English sounds quite pedantic, I must say, as there have been many other articles using similar or worse language. It gets the point across, which is most important anyway. But I would not object to your suggestion, if you can provide the sources for the 'number of cultural elites'. Sources are really the only thing that matters on Wikipedia. Donkey Hot-day (talk) 14:02, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Those sources are already in the article... I dont think anyone disputes that China has locked up a large number of Uyghur intellectual and cultural elite the only contentious/disputed information is the quantity (hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands) which this wording avoids. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 22:04, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Re-asserting your argument without providing any links to back it up doesn't make it more convincing, I'm afraid. I checked a couple of sources that would be considered acceptable, which is mostly RFA and I did not find anything referencing a 'number of cultural elites'. And RFA is not exactly a preferred source either, as one of the first things that pop up when typing it is 'propaganda', with some sources suggesting it to have an 'anti-Communist' bias with the US govt funding. Maybe come back if you've found some links. Donkey Hot-day (talk) 11:30, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I’m not exactly sure what you’re arguing anymore, I didn't just re-assert my argument I addressed your specific point about providing a specific number for the quantity of cultural elites/intellectuals detained, perhaps I was confused because you chose to quote 'number of cultural elites’ rather than ‘a number of cultural elites'. From the Artforum piece "Lu is the first cultural figure from the majority Han Chinese population to go missing. “Most of the more famous [Uyghur] cultural figures have all been arrested...” from the PEN piece "PEN is concerned by an apparent renewed crackdown on promotion of Uyghur language, culture and dissenting voices...“ Heres some links (this is almost universally reported, if I had the time there could literally be hundreds of links), , , , , , , and . Let me know which link you would prefer to we can put it in ASAP. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 13:21, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The Artforum source is not really the most reliable, and the PEN article does not really mention the camps. But very well then, you can put in the edit with the nytimes, bbc, latimes, and/or dw sources since those seemed to match wording well enough. Donkey Hot-day (talk) 14:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Horse Eye Jack, your understanding of "sources" is dangerous and could potentially lead to real wars like lies justified the US interfering Iraq. The news sites you quote often cite each other. The primary source is based solely on the works of the Christian fanatic and anti-Semite Adrian Zenz. All the so-called "evidence" is staged and presented with a clear agenda. The vocational centers are to fight extremist thoughts and this is not Chinese propaganda or an understatement. The US actually worked together with China to fight terrorism in that area, but media also likes to twist stories. The premise of your point is already wrong. --2001:16B8:31DC:F800:6D1F:7634:C1D3:7EED (talk) 00:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:12, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Ablajan Awut Ayup.png

Michael Jackson?
Michael Jackson is listed as a related link on this article. I didn't see any connection between Ayup and Jackson in the rest of the article. Posting here in case I am somehow mistaken, since I'm not familiar with Uyghur culture or music. Mr Responsible (talk) 01:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)