Talk:Hrant Dink/Archive 2

GA Nom
After doing a few minor cleanup tasks, I'm passing this. Sorry that I don't have anything really constructive to say-- my reccomendation is to take it to WP:FAC. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 23:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, archive the talk page. It's getting kinda long. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 23:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Archived the talk page. Thanks! --Free smyrnan 05:10, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

FAC next?
I am rather a newbie, so any suggestions from more experienced editors? What next, WP:PR or WP:FAC? The only problem I have with FAC is the quality of the prose (needs copyedit, but I have read the article so many times I have developed a blindness to it). Should we go for it? --Free smyrnan 05:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Still needs work, remove merge or expand the one sentence paragraphs - the references [4][2][5] should be [2][4][5] as goes the same for all grouped references - add references for the citation needed tags. M3tal H3ad 10:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * At this stage it will need some further work, otherwise FAC won't be smooth. Personally I think that FACs should be simple "stamp of approval" processes after all the work has been done - otherwise the FACs can become really complicated. + from what I could observe over time I know that there is a very tough group of reviewers (some perfectionists :)) at FACs, so better be safe than sorry. Therefore we might go with the peer review. I will also try to do some cleanup and proofreading this week. Btw good job with the GA! Baristarim 10:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * M3tal H3ad and Baris, thx for excellent feedback on what to do next. I have added these to the to-dos and will try to do them over the next few days. In the meantime, the article is submitted for WP:WPBIO Peer Review, we are waiting. --Free smyrnan 06:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Peer Review done
A very informative peer review done by Yannismarou. Thanks to Yanni! I have linked the peer review to the to-do list and I call for all editors to step in and start addressing these items. --Free smyrnan 13:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Another point in the intro
Well, I thougt that the last sentence in the intro was approaching the reactions afterward his death in a very one-sided way. So initially I thought of removing it, since it was mentioned later in the article, but I was afraid to be misunderstood. So I added a few sentences about his funeral. If it was for me I'd cut it from the sentece beginning "While Samast...". Not that I am just "another bloody nationalist Turk" trying to cover up for the guys treating him as a hero, but because I don't think how his killer is treated in custody is an intro-worth part in Hrant Dink article.Ombudsee 23:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Lead paragraph, opinions?
I have problems with this sentence and I would like to open it up for discussion and consensus:

"He was best known for his open and critical approach, in public statements and writings, to the issues of Armenian identity and the official Turkish version of the 1915-17 massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire which he referred to as genocide."


 * 1) Sentence is awkward prose.
 * 2) Much more important than above, I don't think this truly reflects what Dink's work emphasized. I used to read his articles before his death and I would not have summarized his work in this fashion. IMO, he was primarily concerned with demos vs. ethnos and with reconciliation between Turkish and Armenian societies. The events of 1915 he did not shirk from discussing, but all of his writings point out that he'd rather concentrate on "getting relations out of a 1915 meters deep well".

Therefore I propose this sentence instead:

"He was best known for his opinions on methods towards a Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and on human and minority rights in Turkey with a special emphasis on the rights of the Armenian minority in Turkey."

That he stated that the events of 1915 were a genocide can be (and is, I believe) mentioned further down in the article, but this is not what he wrote and spoke about for 11 years. --Free smyrnan 21:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Well maybe we can blend your suggestion with the sentence used in AG article. The one there sounds better; "Dink was often critical of both Turkey's denial of the Armenian genocide, and of the Armenian diaspora's campaign for its international recognition" Ombudsee 23:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Let's try this:

""Dink was best known for his opinions on methods towards a Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and on human and minority rights in Turkey with a special emphasis on the rights of the Armenian minority in Turkey and was often critical of both Turkey's denial of the Armenian genocide, and of the Armenian diaspora's campaign for its international recognition.""

If no other suggestions come forward, I will update the lead paragraph as above. --Free smyrnan 08:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Rm Agos webpage being blacked out from the condemnations
I removed the following sentence from condemnations. Two reasons: One, a website being blacked out does not seem like a very weighty condemnation. 2, the website has changed and I am unable to find a cached version of it anywhere, so the link is bad. Feel free to revert me if you wish, but please provide some reasoning, esp since we will have a problem providing a reference.


 * The website of Agos is replaced with a black page with his photo, and its editorial staff stated: "there are no words to express our pain".

--Free smyrnan 21:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Drive for fixing refs
Dear all, I would like to ask for help in: 1. Making sure that each named reference is defined just once. I think I saw a couple of instances where this is not correct. 2. Using Citation templates for each and every one of the references. Esp. the accessdate field is important! This help will truly be appreciated!! --Free smyrnan 08:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * There is also another issue I would like to raise regarding references and sources. I think that there are far too many Turkish-language references, some of them placed in sections that may not, possibly, be useful to the indented English-speaking readership. For example the 'police scandal' section in the lead of the article is given such a source, even though there are plenty reliable, detailed, accurate, neutral and current English ones, both from western and Turkish media outlets. I realise that some information given in the article comes from these sources but I think it would be preferable and useful if we could cut-down a bit (or a lot) to the non-English ones; especially in sections where there is an abundance of English-language sources (wherever these may come from) that can cover reliably, neutrally and accurately any given issue. -.- AccidentalTourist 22:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. I haven't yet finished working through formatting the refs (up to 89th now...), and have not started editing the main body, but that is one of the problems with the current refs. The article evolved rapidly, with the first news breaking out in Turkish sources. All the Turkish sources are newspaper articles. The equivalent English sources need to be found - not so much press releases or blogs. --Free smyrnan 05:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * All refs formatted and cleaned up. --Free smyrnan 14:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Feedback/opinions needed on Bibliography
When editing this article and fleshing out certain sections, I noticed that it was very cumbersome to actually *use* the references section as it is such a long list, and ordered only by referencing order in the main article. Also drawing inspiration from some articles such as Pericles, I am proposing creating a bibliography section, which contains the same references, but in an order that would make sense to those readers wishing to peruse these references.

Since this is a long task of formatting, before wasting a major amount of time, I want to ask whether people think this is a good idea or not. I have done a partial implementation at: User:Free_smyrnan/Hrant_Dink Please voice your opinions, I would hate to format all 115 references this way and then undo it... --Free smyrnan 12:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It will definitely be better. I was going to work on provinces but I might help. I have seen your Hrant Dink page, I guess you haven't started to shorten the references, yet. denizTC 13:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I just took 6-7 refs and formatted them into the bibliography to illustrate the plan. It won't actually shorten the references, but it should make it more navigable. And of course, any help is appreciated. I am just waiting a bit to make sure it won't be thrown out, as it is quite a bit of work. --Free smyrnan 13:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It is surely a good idea as the references are getting really long and could confuse readers. I saw the Pericles article and it looks professional and well. Your preview looks good as well. Don't worry it won't be thrown out. I'll try and help too as soon as i'm cleared of an Arbitration case. On a side note, check this out, they've arrested a right-wing politician in Trabzon for Dink's murder...maybe it should be used? - Fedayee 15:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll make a note of it and use it when updating the aftermath of the assassination, if you don't update it until then. There are a couple of other arrests that I don't think are reflected in the article currently. Good luck w/ case. --Free smyrnan 05:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is a good idea. I was actually surprised that this article didn't have a list of references. The Pericles article is a great example. Although you are on the right track with your preview, I don't like how you named the sections in there. First, Bibliography section needs to be renamed to References because to me the word Bibliography means the works of the subject (in this case the books Hrant Dink wrote). Then the References section needs to be renamed Citations. Keep up the good work! --Crzycheetah 17:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It was also a thought of mine when I first read the article. But I did not propose it, because I thought that this is an article with mainly online sources, most of which are used once. In the cases that the great majority of citations are online sources, I have seen in FAC that the reviewers do not insist on the creation of a "References" section. And this has its rationale. You use one the templates in Citations and it is over! Now, of course, this does not exclude the possibility for the creation of a seperate "References" section, where the sources will be in alphabetical order and with full data, while in "Citations" or "Notes" or "Footnotes" section they will be in a shorter format. This is definitely more easy to use for somebody searching the sources and trying to locate one of them. Therefore, what I can say is that both solutions are absolutely acceptable. Maybe the one you think about is a bit more helpful for the reader. So, if you have the courage to go through all these sources and do it, I do not think that your job will be wasted. Ah! And in this case, I think El Greco is a better example than Pericles: more online sources, use of Template:cite web and Template:cite news, clear distinction of online sources and external links.--Yannismarou 16:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all the feedback and for the offers of help. I am getting started, and would love to see others pitch in. --Free smyrnan 16:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Did the first 30-40. --Free smyrnan 20:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmmm ... Just a comment: Maybe you are making too many categories in "References". Whan I did more than two in El Greco I was criticized. You can find the criticism in the article's peer-review. I thus decided to have just two categories: printed and online sources. I don't know if such a categorization works also here, but my suggestion is to try not to make many categories; more than two may face criticism.--Yannismarou 18:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You may be right. The main difficulty is weeding out all the citation definitions from the text. Once they are in References format, it will be easy to merge categories if it turns out ugly. --Free smyrnan 20:24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

All done. What do you think? I have removed the language sub-sections and re-arranged a bit, but I still have 4 sections - and I consider these 4 sections to be necessary as the nature of these sources are vastly different. At least this has freed up the main body of text and made it more amenable to editing and I think it makes it more useful for someone who wishes to check out some of these sources. --Free smyrnan 12:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Well done, Free smyrnan. Thanks a lot. Do you think we should put the numbered references above the sorted ones? denizTC 16:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You are right, also checked it in Guide_to_layout. Changed. Thanks for pointing it out. --Free smyrnan 18:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Anybody find Dink's college graduation year?
Has anybody found Dink's college graduation year? I have not been able to find his graduation year from the Zoology department, Istanbul University. --Free smyrnan 11:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Is this right about Hrant Dink?
A QUOTE: Ara Manoogian over at Martuni or Bust now shares his opinion on Dink’s assassination.

Though I never had a chance to meet Hrant, my parents knew him as he was an admirer of my grandfather Shahan Natalie.Comment by Onnik — January 20, 2007 @ 12:04 am http://oneworld.blogsome.com/2007/01/19/hrant-dink-shot-dead/

For those do not know! Shahan Natalie (1884-1983) was the principal organizer of the terorist Operation Nemesis on behalf of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation wherein the Turkish masterminds of the so-called Armenian Genocide were assassinated, and a member of the A.R.F.'s Bureau. He later became a writer on Armenian national philosophy, and notable for his essay, The Turks and Us. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jedet72 (talk • contribs) 13:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Don't know. If you can come across something published from a reliable source, it would be appropriate to put it in the article. I haven't come across anything in his articles or biographical articles about him. --Free smyrnan 13:40, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Life up to Agos done - please check/edit
I have substantially re-written the Early Life section, from Hrant Dink's birth until the start of his career at Agos. I would really appreciate editors looking it over. I have tried to get all the facts in. The language is somewhat rough still. Wikification etc, is quite weak. --Free smyrnan 22:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Webcitation notice - all sources archived
I have submitted all the sources used in the article to WebCite. As the automatic crawling did not seem to work, I ended up doing it manually in the end. All but 5 sources are currently permanently cached by WebCite, for this version of the article. If any of the sources become non-available in the future, they can be retrieved from WebCite. Free smyrnan 06:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lv354.jpg
Image:Lv354.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Non-working ref ANCA
I have been able to reach the following url for the ANCA press release. I have tried over a period of days but the web site does not seem to be working. Can someone please find a working ref for this? Otherwise, I intend to take it out, as there is no dearth of press releases condemning the murder, this is just one of many and provides no other addition to the article.
 * The link works fine, ANCA's site is most likely blocked in Turkey if thats from where you're trying to access it. VartanM (talk) 20:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

New Info on murder conspirators
Perhaps one of the editors of this page can incorporate this new bit of info that I saw in the news: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080128/wl_time/turkeybustsallegedmurdernetwork

Essentially, 13 people (including a former general and high-profile lawyer) arrested on charges of "provoking armed rebellion against the government. Suspected of involvement in last year's string of nationalist-motivated murders, which cost the lives of prominent ethnic Armenian journalist Hrant Dink and three Christian missionaries. Also plot to kill Nobel-prize winner Orhan Pamuk.

I'd have added it myself, but I'd rather have one of the editors of this page make the proper edits. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fshafique (talk • contribs) 23:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

GA sweeps
This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Lead doesn’t cover subject’s background, and as such doesn’t give a satisfactory summary of article
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * There were some parts marked off as needing citations, I added a few more. This should be doable with the wealth of available sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The “Trial” section needs to be expanded a bit. Otherwise, at 133k the article is far too long. The “Reactions” section is excessive, and makes the article appear as a memorial. It needs to either be reduced significantly, or forked off into a subpage.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Lampman (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The article has been on hold for over a week, and no changes have been made. It will now be de-listed as a GA. If changes are made to bring the article into compliance with GA criteria, please do not hesitate to contact me on my talk page for a reassessment. Lampman (talk) 18:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Lampman (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The article has been on hold for over a week, and no changes have been made. It will now be de-listed as a GA. If changes are made to bring the article into compliance with GA criteria, please do not hesitate to contact me on my talk page for a reassessment. Lampman (talk) 18:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Quotation possibly worth using
I haven't been involved in this article, and I'm sure it has been controversial, so I'm sticking to making a suggestion on the talk page rather than introduce a potentially controversial edit. Quotation possibly worth using, perhaps even in lede: "It is largely thanks to his efforts that the 90pyear taboo om public discussion of the darkest chapter in Turkey's history — the 1915 Armenian genocide — is now well and truly broken." Maureen Freely, "Chronicle of a Death", Index on Censorship, Volume 40, Number 1, 2011. p. 157. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 17:40, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

let's be fair
I took away the "According to turkish media" part. It might cause a question mark concerning Dink's reaction to the french law limiting freedom of speech: "Did he really say it, or is it a lie from turkish media?". Dink's reaction was very typical one reflecting his principles (fighting for the freedom of speech in any country). It has been published months before his assasination, and he repeatedly confirmed this speech in the media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.75.102 (talk) 21:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)