Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/July 2009 Ürümqi riots


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was withdrawn by nominator. We worked out a quick solution at User talk:Otebig right as this was being posted, so no longer any need for deletion. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 03:17, 6 July 2009 (UTC)}}

July 2009 Ürümqi riots

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Word-for-word duplicate of the full text of East Turkestan independence movement. The creator believes the riots are not relevant to the East Turkestan independence movements, but they are (see my rationale at User talk:Rjanag). Note that the East Turkestan independence movement, a social phenomenon/idea, is not the same thing as the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, an organization; saying "the riots were not related to the ET Islamic Movement" is one thing, but "not related to the general independence movement" is another, and the editor here seems to have gotten the two confused. In any case, Wikipedia is not news, and there is no point having an independent article on this event until there is more information available (particularly, not until we can discuss its impact and aftermath, at the very least). I recognize that the AfD process takes so long that such information may become available before the AfD ends, and if that happens I'll withdraw it; if not, though, at least we've got the ball rolling. By the time the typical AfD period has passed then we will have a good idea if this event merits its own article or not. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 02:56, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - it's already not a word for word copy, I added additional information, and will continue to do so. It is a NPOV violation to have it on the ETIM (independence movement, not Islamic movement, I'm not getting them confused) article, because from all reports the riots are about unfair treatment between Uyghurs and Chinese in Guangdong (i.e., China proper, not Xinjiang). These riots are likely about equal rights, not independence (which others have been). Connecting it to the larger independence movement, which any activities related to are banned in China, gives the authorities a legal means to crack down. Without a single non-PRC source linking it to the independence movement (or repeating PRC claims), we are pushing PRC POV by keeping it on the ETIM article. Rjanag's rationale is well intentioned, but ill-informed and incorrect (which shows just how well the Chinese do in their work to make everyone immediately connect all riots in Xinjiang with ETIM). Otebig (talk) 03:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.