Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of persecuted Turkish writers (2nd nomination)


 * 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 work it out on the talk page. I don't see a clear consensus for removing the material, although there might be grounds to do so. There are definite concerns regarding the name of the article, but you don't need AfD's say-so for that. Mackensen (talk) 00:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

List of persecuted Turkish writers
There was some problem with this AfD. I am merely substing the templates properly. Have copied the original nominator's reason below. Aksi_great (talk - review me) 09:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Original reason by User:BigHaz - Renomination of a previously nominated page. All contributors to the previous AfD were invited to participate in a discussion on the article's Talk page about where the information was best placed. Consensus was to move those charged under Article 301 to that page (they already were) and those charged for insulting Ataturk to that section of that page (the one who was explicitly charged in that manner was redlinked, which implies a lack of notability - the section of the article in question also doesn't seem like the greatest place to put the names of those charged for insulting the man). Thus, we're left with an article which I'm not quite sure what to do with. I stress again that the overwhelming majority of useful information is in fact duplicated elsewhere on Wikipedia, which seems like as good a reason as any to delete this. That said, arguments were made during the AfD and the discussion about a possible rename, so that may be a worthwhile thing to bring up here. I'm in favour of a delete based on the rationale that the information is either duplicated or (in the case of the redlinked people still listed) just not there, but I'm only one man. BigHaz 08:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. The title is inherently NPOV. There is no clear criterion for inclusion. Not all people mentioned are normally considered to be writers. The article lists people who are dead and alive indiscriminately, and makes no distinction between old cases and new cases, or between the cases in which the accused were convicted and acquitted or only charged. Those listed are often much less notable than those not listed. As such the article is not informative and serves no purpose. I do not agree with what BigHaz wrote above that being redlinked implies a lack of notability. Several if not most of these people should have an article. Actually there is a page Ragip Zarakolu; its page title differs from the (proper) spelling in the redlink in this article. --Lambiam Talk 16:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I based the idea that "redlinked implies a lack of notability" on a comment which I'd misread either on the talk page or the previous AfD. My apologies. BigHaz 22:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge the sourced parts to Human rights in Turkey or similar article. -- E ivindt@c 20:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Most of the sourced parts have already been moved, with the exception of Zarakolu (described above). What remains is a collection of names who have achieved a level of fame by being charged under laws which tend not to be specifically named. BigHaz 03:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * According to this reliable source Zarakolu faces prosecution (also) for charges under Article 301, and so can be listed there. --Lambiam Talk 04:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Done, although it's a rough-cut job so it's all all as beautifully cited as the rest of the article is. The name, details and link are there, though. BigHaz 06:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Move to a better name. - FrancisTyers · 05:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you have any suggestions? List of Turkish writers and other people who face or have faced accusations under one or more contested articles? --Lambiam Talk 09:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess at a pinch we could tree it out from Article 301 as "List of people who have been charged under Article 301", and use it as a place to list the "notable prosecutions" or whatever that article calls them. There's then the question of whether any individual who's not listed there (i.e. the redlinks we still have on this article) is notable enough to be listed for that - presumably there'd be a lot of stubs to be created running "X is/was a Turkish journalist/poet/author/other who was prosecuted under Article 301". BigHaz 10:17, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Although possible, I'm not sure it is an ideal solution. If you take the information away from our article Article 301, I'm afraid it will become rather lame; the Article derives its notoriety notability from these prosecutions and attempts at prosecution. But it is better than leaving the article under discussion be. --Lambiam Talk 16:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * So move the redlinked characters to Article 301 as well? BigHaz 22:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Move per Francis. This is a notable topic, and not all of these people were prosecuted under Article 301. &mdash; Khoikhoi 19:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * So do you have a suggestion for another name? In the previous discussion you appeared to be supportive of List of notable people charged under article 301, but that does not jibe with your present recommendation. --Lambiam Talk 23:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, how about List of prosecuted Turkish writers? &mdash; Khoikhoi 03:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Assuming that they're all being prosecuted and haven't had the charges dropped before they got that far (yes, I know it's in the references, but I've got a splitting headache and wouldn't be any use looking at them), then that makes sense to me. BigHaz 03:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Should they then actually be writers? Do publishers count as writers? Any limitations on the nature of the alleged crime? Current prosecutions only, or should cases from 1926, say, also be included? Perhaps also from the time of Ottoman Empire? --Lambiam Talk 06:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Valid point. I'd forgotten we had some ring-ins (the Mazlum Der head being probably the most ringing). Perhaps get rid of all bar living authors (as against publishers) who were actually charged under things like Article 301 or other serious parts of the criminal code. BigHaz 07:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure I understand the meaning of "ring-ins" in the preceding sentence. --Lambiam Talk 08:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it must be more of an Australianism than I realise. It means "something which is in a place where it doesn't normally qualify to be", so in this case the people who aren't necessarily "writers" in the normal sense of the word are ring-ins. From memory it's a horseracing term. BigHaz 10:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * If it is only current cases, then a question is: How do we keep it current. For example, the article states: "Ibrahim Aksoy, ..., imprisoned ... since October 1995". This sounds like the man has been subject to the notorious brutalities of Turkish prison wardens with atrocious accents for almost eleven years now. But the reference given is from 1996. I further have some problem in making the criterion "other serious parts of the criminal code" concrete. (It would actually seem worse to me if writers are prosecuted by dint of frivolous parts of the criminal code.) How can we deal with this in an NPOV way? --Lambiam Talk 21:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point again (and I'll admit to not having checked those references, I'm not in great health at the moment so I give up on research a bit more easily). Perhaps the idea of rolling this into a subpage from Article 301 as "notable prosecutions" (and zapping anyone who we can't verifiably say was prosecuted under that article) is the best. BigHaz 23:19, 18 August 2006 (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.