| Revision as of 02:08, 3 November 2006 editBaroqqque (talk | contribs)227 edits →On the introduction← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 20:36, 24 November 2024 edit undoThebiguglyalien (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers19,711 edits →Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2024: partly doneTag: 2017 wikitext editor |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{WikiProject Muslim scholars}} |
|
|
|
{{Controversial}} |
|
{{WPBiography|living=yes|class=|importance=}} |
|
|
|
{{Article history |
|
|
| action1 = PR |
|
|
| action1date = 3 July 2008 |
|
|
| action1link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Fethullah Gülen/archive1 |
|
|
| action1result = not reviewed |
|
|
| action1oldid = 223186794 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| action2 = PR |
|
{{WPTR}} |
|
|
|
| action2date = 21 July 2008 |
|
{{controversial}} |
|
|
|
| action2link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Fethullah Gülen/archive3 |
|
{| class="infobox" width="120px" |
|
|
|
| action2result = not reviewed |
|
|- |
|
|
|
| action2oldid = 226963005 |
|
!align="center" colspan="3"|]<br/>] |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|- |
|
|
|] |
|
|
|] |
|
|
|] |
|
|
| |
|
|
|- |
|
|
|}<!--Template:Archivebox--> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| action3 = PR |
|
|
| action3date = 6 August 2008 |
|
|
| action3link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Fethullah Gülen/archive2 |
|
|
| action3result = reviewed |
|
|
| action3oldid = 229999505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| action4 = PR |
|
== The NPOV tag == |
|
|
|
| action4date = 24 August 2008 |
|
|
| action4link = Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Fethullah Gülen/archive4 |
|
|
| action4result = not reviewed |
|
|
| action4oldid = 233544810 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| currentstatus = <!-- only for GA or FA --> |
|
I put the NPOV tag back into the article. I outlined my reasons above repeatedly. Inserting this tag does not constitute an "edit war", or "disruption and vandalism" from my side, as ] appears to claim. Actually, I simply follow proper procedure (From ]): ''"Guidelines for cleanup - 1. If the discussion presents major issues that have not been fixed in the current article version, even if the discussion is old, leave the NPOV tag on so it can be cleaned up in the future. 2. If the issues are minor and there is no recent discussion, remove the tag. (If someone disagrees they can just put it back!)"''. This tells me two things: 1. You (Nandesuka) shouldn't remove the NPOV tag. 2. I "can just put it back". No edit war here. ] 23:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| itndate = |
|
:Since there doesn't seem to be an outstanding issue here that can't be corrected with some editing, I've removed the tag. We'd do much better to adress one point at a time until the article is fixed, rather than by simply having a tag there. Several points I've raised below, for example, are drawing serious silence as a result. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 07:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| dykdate = |
|
::None of these points have been addressed. That they ''could'' be "corrected with some editing" is a bit of a truism, and doesn't change the fact that they ''haven't'' been addressed yet. Your putting up apparently random bits of the article for discussion (see "Lead section" and "Biography" below) doen't change that either. These bits may still be unsourced, but they are not exactly disputed, so I don't see any urgency to address them in depth before the big picture is sound. Per ], I re-insert the POV tag, but I will not start to edit this article again until that football World Cup is over. ] 11:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| dykentry = |
|
:::Here's the skinny: Adding the tag w/o editing the article or taking part in talk is disruption, and if you do it again I'l block you. Was that clear enough? - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 12:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| topic = |
|
::::Aaron Brenneman, ] does not apply here? ] 12:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| small = |
|
:::::What in that name of corn on the cob in that little page applies here? If there is ongoing discussion and you don't participate in it, you don't get to just drop a tag and run. The point of the tag is... what again? Edit the article: Clearly articulate specific concers with suggestions, provide examples of proposed re-writes with new sources. Re-applying the tag makes no effort to solve any problems with the article. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 12:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
}} |
|
::::::I "don't participate in ongoing discussion"? Surely you're joking? Have you looked at the archieved talk pages? I have also edited this article a lot (and I don't mean the POV tag). Problem is, most of it was reverted by now-blocked editor ]. This was pretty stressful and I need a break. Now you want to block me for disruption? Who, exactly, am I disrupting? And the point of the POV tag, as you correctly say, is to indicate to editors that the article needs attention. (It still does - there are ''major'' omissions - or do you think it's NPOV as it is presently?) It doesnt mean that ''I'', personally, have to edit it ''right now''. ] 12:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=no|class=B|vital=yes|listas=Gulen, Fethullah|1= |
|
:::::::If you can somehow apply the tag ''without'' editing the page, go for it. But if you need a break, take it. Don't have one foot in the door to only put the tag on and to argue about it staying. It's up to the people who are editing the page do decide the fate of the tag, that's me as well as you. I opened some discussion, thundering silence. I make some big edits, louder silence. I remove the tag and ''then'' you re-apply the tag and come to the talk page? That's disruption. Work on the article, stop arguing about the tag. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 00:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography}} |
|
::::::::You forgot to mention that this period of "loder than thundering silence" between your "big edit" and your removal of the tag was a mere 5 minutes. This makes your argument appear a lot less convincing than you probably intended. Your attempt to "open some discussion" (I assume you refer to the section "sources/lead section/biography" below) is really just a pretense of a discussion - a challenge and empty posturing: None of the fragments you listed there is disputed in the least, neither by Gülen's followers or opponents, nor by neutral observers with either in-depth or just rudimentary familiarity with the topic. All you did was outing yourself as somebody who has never even heard of the subject before, but still tries to enforce his editing pattern. I said it before, but I'll repeat it again for your benefit: This article is totally distorted not for what it contains, but for what it lacks, and an hour or two of googling will help little to cure it. A several years thick stash of old issues of the Middle Easten Journal and similar publications would be more likely to do the trick here. You want to improve this article ''now''? Is this what I'm supposed to read into your removal of the NPOV tag? Great, go ahead! Or do you think the tag is unnecessary because the article is in good order already? Then you're just a fool. But I'm out of this one way or the other - I'm completely unwilling to work for free ''and'' on schedule ''and'' under the ill-tempered supervision of people who are both ignorant of the subject ''and'' maliciously arrogant in their interpretation of written policy or guidelines. ] 02:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Islam|Muslim-scholars=yes|Muslim-scholars-importance=|category=}} |
|
::::::::: Or, maybe he's honestly trying to help improve the article, and you're being unreasonably hypersensitive. I mean, it's just a thought. ] 02:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Turkey|importance=high}} |
|
::::::::: So, if I understand you correctly, you're simply saying that you won't work on improving the parts of the article that I discussed. That if work doesn't progress on ''your'' part then the tag must remain? The tag is not there to be talked about, it is supposed to make ediotrs talk about the ''article''. Make a concise suggestion about a specific part of the article, please. Enough about the tag. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 03:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Theology}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religion}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 125K |
|
|
|counter = 8 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 2 |
|
|
|algo = old(21d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:Fethullah Gülen/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Biased Content== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 October 2024 (2) == |
|
== Sources == |
|
|
I'm suggest we look at this article a section at a time, including only statements that can provide a ] as a reference. Then the only question is around acceptable sources. After each bullet point can we list possible citations. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 01:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
=== Lead section === |
|
|
* '']'' |
|
|
** ''"Fethullah Gülen is easily the most influential Turkish Islamic figure of his generation"'' |
|
|
** ''"groups in Turkey remain suspicious"'' |
|
|
** ''"Radical religious groups, on the other hand, object to his methods"'' |
|
|
=== Biography === |
|
|
* ''"Gülen's audience base began to expand"'' |
|
|
* ''"more versatile than that of most preachers"'' |
|
|
* ''"referred to as an exemplary Muslim"'' |
|
|
=== State and social issues === |
|
|
This section is totally without sources. I'd propose that it be moved to the talk page until it does. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 01:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:I've moved the section here until it has some references. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 07:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
<div style = "font-size:85%;"> |
|
|
::'''State and social issues''' |
|
|
::Islamic movements of the 20th century were usually strongly influenced by Arab or Iranian revolutionary tradition, where political or militarist organizations are integral components. While these movements have influence in Turkey as well, Gülen based his movement on faithful individuals with strong moral values. He rejects imposing Islamic rules and regulations on the people by a take-over of the state, unlike other movements. The sole aim of a person should be pleasing God. Gülen expects that Turkish Islamic tradition will be widely accepted and liked in the West.<br/><br/>Gülen's approach puts the emphasis on representing Islam in a good manner, rather than spreading the Islamic message to others, deviating from many Islamic scholars in that regard. Being a modern and perfect representative of true Islam at the universal level is considered to be the main aim in the movement. This approach will turn out to be the tool for conveying Islamic consciousness to new generations in schools and other institutions. Morals cannot and must not be taught but will be absorbed from the example of a virtuous teacher.<br/><br/>Gülen suggests to avoid confrontation with the state, and to respect the establishment. Globalization is a fact and should be encouraged: Open borders are beneficial for Islam, as Islam is complete and strong. There is nothing to fear and isolation will not work. The material and ideological dependence on the West must be overcome. The Muslim World in general, and Turkey and Turks in particular must claim their place and right in world politics and should become a dominant factor.<br/><br/>Engagement in politics is prohibited and considered evil. Worldly desires like wealth, office and money should be fought with a 'spiritual jihad'.<br/><br/>Obstacles should be avoided, not engaged, for societal peace. Conflicts should be examined and preferably avoided.Opponents of the movement should be approached nicely, disregarding their behavior.<br/><br/>High work ethics and efficiency is akin to prayer. Human and material sources of the movement should be used wisely and efficiently, this not only being an Islamic rule but also because donations of Turkish businessman being limited.<br/><br/>''Cemaat'' (loose circles of organizations, connected by personal contacts and common belief) are the most efficient form of organization, both for personal spiritual welfare and societal aims. |
|
|
</div> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit extended-protected|Fethullah Gülen|answered=yes}} |
|
:::"Turkey and Turks in particular must claim their place and right in world politics and should become a dominant factor.": I propose to add that Gülen's vision of Turkey's "place and right" encompasses the entire Ex-Ottoman empire + Europe + the Ex-USSR + parts of China and other counties "up to the Pacific". Source: ] 12:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Please Change photo of Mr Fethullah Gulen to something more decent |
|
::::I am totally unable to confirm what that citation says, but clearly that is my failing alone. I'd suggest that we treat the above paragraphs as a working template, and add the citations directly into it. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 12:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
It looks like someone explicitly chose a very non-flattering photo |
|
::::: the dissertation is available online and for free as a PDF at the link I provided, so this can't be the problem. It's on page 128. Even if you don't speak German, you may get the gist of it. It's right behind the passage where Gülen's theory, that the American Indians are actually Turks, is discussed. I'm off for today: Football! ] 13:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: Err... it's actually that I can't get the page to load, but that information will help as I'm going to examine the link at the library webcentre. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 00:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::brenneman, it appear that ] has the project. Bummer really he's been a great contributor on a wide variety of articles. See as well. ] 00:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Well, that does seem a shame. But isn't exactly what I was saying?<br/>]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 01:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Would you kindly un-sprotect this article? With ]'s apparent departure from the project I fear that this article is a lost cause and because of that without a {{]}} tag and low interest in editing on this article there's no need to sprotect it any longer. Thanks. I'm "unwatching" the article now. ] 14:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example these are good phoots: |
|
=== Removing sections === |
|
|
|
https://www.facebook.com/148178768683284/photos/pb.100079811117786.-2207520000/149478221886672/?type=3 |
|
The sections ] and ] are also without sources. I propose that they either be summarised down to two sentances each or be removed until sources are found to support them.<br/>]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 06:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
https://www.facebook.com/148178768683284/photos/pb.100079811117786.-2207520000/149478055220022/?type=3 ] (]) 17:07, 21 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
:I've removed those sections until sources are provided. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 09:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:{{not done}} Those images may be under copyright, which means it could be illegal for Misplaced Pages to use them. You'll need to provide an image with proof that it's either in the public domain or that whoever took the picture licensed it for anyone to use it. ] (]) 17:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Please insert this. It is certainly less like a mug-shot: and it comes with the permission we need (I think). ] (]) 01:34, 2 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::{{Not done}}: That's definitely not freely licensed either, sorry. ] (<i>] • ] • ]</i>) 01:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Lead section - deeply problematic final line, plus other flaws needing fixing - (a prompt for discussion & consensus) == |
|
== Lots of words == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) The final sentence is a bit of a shocker and is arguably a misleading & deceptive violation of ] (inappropriate content). It reads, from its framing & tone, like a vicious, politically partisan smear. It could not legitimately pass the tests of ] (Biographies of Living Persons) & there is no good reason why it should be tolerated now, despite the death of the subject. The sentence presents highly dubious claims & presents dodgy (& arguably corrupt) inter-governmental horse-trading as if they are undisputed facts based upon legitimate concerns. It clearly contradicts the previous paragraph which states that the more dispassionate & sober US authorities didn't swallow the hyper-partisan claims that desperately tried to smear Gulen as some sort of terrorist mastermind. This sentence should be substantially rewritten or deleted. |
|
It's much too long, this talk. I'm going to archive soon. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 01:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:Like now. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 12:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) The clause in the first paragraph describing him as a "fugitive" reads like a partisan non-sequitur that has been inappropriately shoehorned in; it also fails the WP:UNDUE test for non-partisan balance. Arguably this clause should be deleted. The issue of his exile is appropriately covered by the next sentence's mention of "self-exile" (which should probably be changed to "self-imposed exile"). |
|
== Earlier points == |
|
|
I've tried to sumarise . Please check my work. - ]<span class="plainlinks"> </span> 06:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
* Biography part wrong, part incomplete. |
|
|
** Date of birth |
|
|
** Missing |
|
|
*** The "business angle" |
|
|
*** The cooperation with US-intelligent design pushers |
|
|
*** Role in Turkish politics missing/wrong |
|
|
*The "philosophy and views" section omits |
|
|
** Beiliefs that sound "bizarre to laymen ears." |
|
|
** Ideosyncratic style of preaching on TV |
|
|
* His media empire needs naming names. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3) The dubious accusations against Gulen that are trotted out in the third paragraph are arguably questionable additions and lack fully appropriate qualification and context. |
|
He is just not the person that he looks he is. --] 19:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
==AZATE's contributions== |
|
|
First some history; I had contributed the bulk of the article back last year (the wording of the parts that I had contributed seem to have been twisted by Gulen's group), but then rgulerdem, almost certainly a follower of gulen, began modifying the article, and i had to spent my time almost exlusively to correct his modifications, a process that you can track from the discussion page, and at the end, was frustrated and left. Apparently he is now identified as a puppetmaster, both in the turkish and english wikis. Unfortunately, i do not think the article will be free of intervention; the following is a link to gulerdem's email to one of the mailing lists of gulens schools, in short, it complains of the treatment he received for this article, asks his friends to become membersof wikipedia, get a member of the group elected to being a moderator, and thereby modify the article as they see fit. Far-fetched plan, but is an indicator of what to expect. |
|
|
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Turk_Okullari/message/577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, this new section is being posted as an initial prompt for discussion & (hopefully) consensus, which is why an ] has not yet been posted (as suggested by the guidelines for this situation). So, what do editors think are appropriate changes? Cheers! ] (]) 05:58, 22 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
First suggestion: I read some of what Azate wrote, he knows the subject, its unfortunate he left the project, at the very least i suggest his previous deleted contributions are added back. Is there a way to bring him back? |
|
|
Second suggestion: I do not know wiki rules well,is there a category of protection, where only moderators can make a change? otherwise any attempt to improve the article will be moot in the long run. |
|
|
Third suggestion: If you read the discussions, you must at this point be aware that partly due to GUlen groups investment in education they have created their own literature, and for someone unfamiliar with the subject it is difficult to sort out objective articles from those written by members/affliates of the group. One solution I can suggest is to consult with Turkish wikipedia editors, who have survived through a similar attack, and have a better knowledge of the background and the actors. baroqqque |
|
|
==Some Changes== |
|
|
Im some changes in the article, who else is still working on it? The changes are reversions from changes by RGulerdem and his evil puppets and some more, listed in detail below: |
|
|
1) Reverted first paragraph:hi sonly official position was that of a preacher, and his training in islamic sciences was informal, from other sectarian, religious figures in his town, so do not really deserve mention in the first paragraph. About him being an islamic thinker, and the interfaith issues, those are controversial, so I put two views on him in the second sentence. |
|
|
2) The current biography follows more or less what I wrote, but with partial wording twists; i reverted back to the original biography, which also contains references. |
|
|
3) I tried to make his belief system sound coherent based on what was already in the article. It still is inadequate; this is partly because the movement has adopted mystical approaches of Nursi while assuming a conservative public stance. |
|
|
4) I added some turkish sources, as there is limited news coverage in English on Gulen, si that against the policy? |
|
|
baroqqque |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 November 2024 == |
|
== A concern == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit extended-protected|Fethullah Gülen|answered=yes}} |
|
Hi, I would like to thank to the people contributed to this page. I am planning to contribute to it too. I quickly realized that some of the contributors are acting bias. They are posting the claims answered before on this page. The answers can be found here. In fact some of them are side of the argument and still insist on their incorrect statements. |
|
|
|
Please add to "Further reading" the following sources: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jon Pahl (2019). , Blue Dome Press. ISBN: 9781682065259 |
|
Another tactic they used to use is declaring someone being puppet of someone else contributed to this page earlier. That is certainly unacceptable. I would like people refrain themselves from naming others who do not think as they do as puppets. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Department of State. ] (]) 02:29, 2 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
It is clear that the current contributors are not able to get a consensus. Therefore I ask someone moderate the discussion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I recognize that a Department of State report might appear out of place in a biography, but so much of the article deals with conflict between the Turkish government and the "Gulen movement," that a somewhat independent source on some aspects of that conflict might be useful. ] (]) 02:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
Thanks in advance. ] 18:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::{{partly done}} I've added the biography by Jon Pahl since that directly pertains to Gülen. I did not add the human rights report, because I'd rather not include things that are only tangentially relevant. ] (]) 20:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
=== Note === |
|
|
|
|
|
I askled user Azate to stop violating 3rr rule on . ] 18:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: ], (probably same as 128.101.154.52) is very likely ]'s newest sockpuppet incarnation. He is reverting the Artcle quickly and repeatedly to Rgulerdem's May/June 2006 version, thereby deleting content critical of Gülen and pimping up Gülen's image with flowery odes. He is also flat out lying in his edit comments. Watch out! ] 18:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: I am ready to discuss any point you can make here. How many people you made regret to edit on this page so far. Are all puppets? Is there anyone in this world who think differently than you but not a puppet? Are you a puppet of barouqqq? ] 21:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Changes == |
|
|
|
|
|
While the article protected, there have been some changes made to it. I am reverting it back to the version many worked on for long. It is surprising that Azate is also reverting the version to which he made many contributions. The history page is full of its evidence. What has changed? It is not possible that the facts about a person change from one day to other. ] 21:57, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: Please do not wholesale revert the article to a previous revision. A lot of work has been done by independent editors to ], and when you revert, that work is lost. Please identify the ''specific'' problems you have with the existing version before proceeding. Thanks. ] 22:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: The problem starts with the citations themselves. It is a "specific enough" problem I believe. The references are not in English. They are not reliable on the other hand. This is an English Encyclopedia and there is no room for references in different languages. The reader no way can justify the claims in those remarks. I will revert the form once more which can form a basis for health discussions. It is clear from the history that the editor Azate himself also contributed to most of the version I am reverting to. I do not know what has changed now? I sincerely ask you please look at the history carefully, and do not revert back to a version that discussed a lot and eventually corrected in most parts. This version I am reverting to is supported by many editors for months. Can't you just please check the history of discussion and article pages. Isn't it waste of time to get into the same discussions again and again? If you want me specifically find evidences of my claims above I can find links for each of them. A quick review of the history will make it clear to you as well. Please not that, one-two people here having opportunist tactics. They keep others away from the article and revert it back to a years old version. All those contributions in between are getting lost. Moreover the article gets biased! Thank you. ] 19:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: Nandesuka, please be careful in reverting the article. The people acting opportunistly here are pushing a version dates back to August 2005. Here are the links if you do not want to check it yourself: |
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to check how old this version is, please look at the following links: |
|
|
|
|
|
# Pay attention here to a name (the same editor barouqque reverted back to his/her version recently): http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Fethullah_G%C3%BClen&diff=prev&oldid=23140176 |
|
|
# http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Fethullah_G%C3%BClen&diff=next&oldid=27934275 |
|
|
If you want to see that Azate was one of the contributor of this version I reverted to, you can see the edits between |
|
|
# http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Fethullah_G%C3%BClen&diff=54128047&oldid=54126424 and |
|
|
# http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Fethullah_G%C3%BClen&diff=54150016&oldid=54149982 |
|
|
or others around the same time. If you want to see how barouqque behaved in this discussion, you can check the history of this page. I do not want to believe that you would like to revert to an antient and biased version. |
|
|
|
|
|
There is no reason to repeat the same discussions already made by some editors. It is not healthy that someone come and revert an article to a very old version. All contributions in between will be lost. Please note also that the references provided in their version are not English and not reliable. The comments supported by these citations are totally misleading. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for understanding. ] 23:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
= Revisions to the introduction = |
|
|
|
|
|
I removed the following sentences since they do not comply with ], such as criteria of ], ] and ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
* ''detractors accuse him of illegal activities aimed at undermining the secular republic and replacing it with an Islamic state.'' |
|
|
** A recent Turkish court ruling contradicts with the above mentioned sentence. For example Turkish Daily News states: "An Ankara court acquitted Turkish religious leader Fethullah Gulen of trying to overturn Turkey's secular regime, the Anatolia news agency reported on Friday." () |
|
|
** Everybody has a right to be suspicious about other’s intentions but any serious article cannot contain unverifiable suspicions. |
|
|
|
|
|
* ''His followers are sometimes referred to as Fethullahci (Supporters of Fethullah), while they choose to refer themselves as "Hizmet Insani" (Those devoted to service to others). His influence extends over much of Central Asia and Caucasus.'' |
|
|
** Academic publications on Fethullah Gulen and his movement uses the term ''Gulen Movement''. For example M. Hakan Yavuz and John L. Esposito, eds. (Syracuse University Press, 2003) |
|
|
--] 18:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
= Image and Introduction Explanation = |
|
|
I added a new image copied from http://www.sxc.hu/photo/455221 which does not have any copyright violation. This new image happens to be with the same name with a previously deleted image since it is the first and the last name of the person. I don't understand why ] deleted the quoted text just based on a suspicion? The text is completely new and meets the Misplaced Pages standards. There is a very detailed explanation about my changes above. It also includes two new references. |
|
|
|
|
|
Please edit responsibly. I'm going to revert my changes. I spent several hours to revise the article so that it complies with Misplaced Pages's guidelines. You can explain concerns here and I will try to answer as much as I can. Thanks. |
|
|
--] 19:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Image copyright=== |
|
|
Regarding the image; though you say that there is "no copyright violation," I'm not sure that the image's license is compatible with ]. Note this section of the license (available via a link below the image): |
|
|
: ''SELLING AND REDISTRIBUTION OF THE IMAGE (INDIVIDUALLY OR ALONG WITH OTHER IMAGES) IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN! DO NOT SHARE THE IMAGE WITH OTHERS!'' |
|
|
I think Misplaced Pages requires less restrictive licensing, except in "fair use" cases where no other image is available. I'm not an expert on this topic, but that's my take on it. <b>] ]</b> 20:38, 26 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==== Image copyright question === |
|
|
Dear , I agree with you on requiring a less restrictive licensing. I am confused about your comment though. According to the website (http://www.sxc.hu/photo/455221) that I downloaded the image from , on the ''Restrictions'' section it clearly states that "There are no usage restrictions for this photo." Doesn't it qualify for Misplaced Pages licencing requirements? |
|
|
--] 00:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
= Comment on the latest merge by Ohnoitsjamie and a new proposal = |
|
|
|
|
|
Ohnoitsjamie, I have some questions and proposals for your latest merge (13:16, 26 October 2006): |
|
|
|
|
|
* you maintained the following sentence: "''...while detractors accuse him of illegal activities aimed at undermining the secular republic and replacing it with an Islamic state.''" |
|
|
** This is a big criminal accusation (intention to destruct the Turkish state) without any proof, especially after a Turkish court ruling that acquitted him after years of investigation. Isn't this statement similar to accusing somebody for a murder without any proof? |
|
|
** I remember the big incidence where biography of John Seigenthaler, a retired journalist, was modified with a false statement claiming that ''he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations''. (See ) Misplaced Pages had to apologize and modify its policies, such as not allowing anynomous editing on the articles after John made it public. |
|
|
** In this respect, I'd like to propose a less strong following sentence instead: "''...whereas detractors accuse him of having a hidden political agenda for weakening ] dominance in state institutions. |
|
|
|
|
|
* You removed the sentence "''... certain ] criticize him for initiating ].''". |
|
|
** I agree that this statement needs a reference. Following article discusses the critics of ], Islamic terrorist group ]s to Gülen movement's interfaith dialogues. |
|
|
*** Ahmet T.Kuru, “,” Political Science Quarterly 120 (2): 253-274.) |
|
|
|
|
|
* As for this sentence: "''His followers are sometimes referred to as ] (Supporters of Fethullah) ''" |
|
|
** 'ci/cu/çı' type of suffixes in Turkish means somebody who sells something. E.g. "süt" means "milk" and "sütçü" means "somebody who sells milk". The term "Fethullahçı" (misspelled as Fethullahci in the article) is mainly used as means of belittling his supporters. Every group can use certain adjectives about politicians, their opponents but these type of adjectives does not fit into a formal article. |
|
|
|
|
|
* This sentence "''His influence extends over much of Central Asia and Caucasus.''" has been redundant by the statement in the following paragraph which is "''He has inspired several Turkish NGOs to open about 500 educational institutions in more than 90 countries including Eurasia, Africa and North America.''". In my opinion it sounds better to remove this. |
|
|
|
|
|
I won't make changes before I hear from you and reaching a consensus. |
|
|
|
|
|
--] 08:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
: Let me first say that my knowledge of Gülen is mostly limited to things I've read in this article, and I'm not an expert on Turkey. As such, I think I'm reasonably neutral of opinion regarding this subject, so I occasionally try to help opposing sides reach a consensus. |
|
|
: Regarding the "criminal accusation" part; there's a big difference between declaring something as a fact in the article and mentioning what a particular person or group thinks. (The same goes for "Fethullahçı"; if his detractors commonly refer to his followers with that word, it's fair to mention it, though it should also be mentioned that it's pejorative. On the other hand, any controversial statement (whether positive or negative) can be legitimately challenged as needing a source. In such cases, it's often safest to quote directly from a source to eliminate any ambiguity. <b>] ]</b> 20:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: It is always necessary to have a impartial mediator in any controversial discussion. It is great to have you on board for this matter Ohnoitsjamie. |
|
|
:: I like your suggestion. A reliable source needs to be referenced for any accusations. Quoting directly from the source is a good idea. How do you suggest modifying this? |
|
|
:: What do you think of the sentence: "''... certain ] criticize him for initiating ].''" His detractors are not all one group with the same idea, I believe this also needs to be noted in the introduction. |
|
|
|
|
|
Quote from above: '''ci/cu/çı' type of suffixes in Turkish means somebody who sells something. E.g. "süt" means "milk" and "sütçü" means "somebody who sells milk". The term "Fethullahçı" (misspelled as Fethullahci in the article) is mainly used as means of belittling his supporters.'' |
|
|
Well, not quite. 'ci/cu/çı' means lots of things, like the English suffixes 'er/ers', 'an/ans' or 'ist/ists' do. It's like saying "Republicans", where you can mean, and are then generally understood to have meant, the members and supporters of the U.S. American party in question plus their hundreds of affiliate or supportive organizations, even if the particular organizations have a name that doesn't contain the phrase "republican" at all (eg. the ]). It's just a shorthand, and there is no belittlement at all in the word itself. |
|
|
Their only objection to and problem with the term Fethullaci is: Many of the "Fethullahçı" organizations now try to camouflage their connections to each other and pretend to be independent, because too open association with F.Gülen would 'taint' them, too. As a matter of fact, as far as individuals in leading positions are concerned, all these many hundreds organizations form one big interwoven, overlapping network, with F.Gülen at the top. (many cadres are in leading positions of dozens of legally independent organizations). You'll frequently encounter single-purpose, throw-away organizations with a big name "United European-Asian World Peace Interfaith Conference" or some such, that are founded, quickly organize a conference at some rented facility, issue big press releases, award a couple of awards to sister-organizations, and vanish. These sister organizations then sport that award forever, and use is to impress hapless bureaucrats abroad, where they campaign for influence of some sort. That's "Fethullaci". Legally, F.Gülen is a pennyless pensioner without any influence. In practice, he leads the whole shebang. ] 12:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
= On the introduction = |
|
|
Modified ]'s changes. He opposed the use of the term ] and I replaced it with "volunteers". In the introduction it is good to mention important aspects. That's why I kept the information about the education institutions and interfaith dialogue. His current stay in US can also be included here with the same reason. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*RV: single purpose accounts, first by harput then bythe anonymous editor above, similar to rgulerdem; gulen is not known primariliy for interfaith as rest of text makes clear, at least not to a degree that deserves mention in introduction, does not mention departure concides with legal proceedings etc] 00:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:: First, the anonymous & harput are both me. I forgot to login before editing. Unfortunately Misplaced Pages does not warn when editing anonymously, I wish it did. I don't like leaving my account logged in but I will try to be more careful. I don't know rgulerdem at all. You can criticize my ideas, but disputing my text by just generalizing as being similar to someone else is not right. If you have followed my contributions you will see that I was very careful to not every sentence but every word. I think I have the right to expect the same from you as well. |
|
|
:: Secondly, how can you be the only authority to make the judgment whether he is known for interfaith? On the other hand, it is easy to point out even only in US many of NGOs influenced by him (yes, they are subject to 503-C in US with valid bylaws, accepted as non-profit organization by the federal and state governments) that are devoted to interfaith dialogue. is just one example to this. |
|
|
:: You are just reverting the text without giving a valid reason. I'd be very happy if unbiased moderators, such as Ohnoitsjamie, help us here in the merge. It is not fair to make the text one man's or one idea's show. It is normal to have controversies, and I'm sure civilized people can find comprises to reach consensus. |
|
|
--] 07:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Haven't heard back from Baroqqque or anyone else on the matter. I'm reverting my changes. Please explain in the talk page if you want to modify it. --] 21:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Read Azate for comment on NGO and Rumi forum. The comments you try to add are relevant, but belong to the main text, otherwise it is also possible to add sources about why his interfaith announcement and his purpoted health problem are controversial to the introduction, which would make it too long. Read the history to understand why introduction is kept minimal. Praises to editors for being unbiased, a positive tone followed by insistence on POV comments etc have all been tried before.] 01:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC) |
|
Please Change photo of Mr Fethullah Gulen to something more decent
It looks like someone explicitly chose a very non-flattering photo
1) The final sentence is a bit of a shocker and is arguably a misleading & deceptive violation of WP:UNDUE (inappropriate content). It reads, from its framing & tone, like a vicious, politically partisan smear. It could not legitimately pass the tests of WP:BLP (Biographies of Living Persons) & there is no good reason why it should be tolerated now, despite the death of the subject. The sentence presents highly dubious claims & presents dodgy (& arguably corrupt) inter-governmental horse-trading as if they are undisputed facts based upon legitimate concerns. It clearly contradicts the previous paragraph which states that the more dispassionate & sober US authorities didn't swallow the hyper-partisan claims that desperately tried to smear Gulen as some sort of terrorist mastermind. This sentence should be substantially rewritten or deleted.
2) The clause in the first paragraph describing him as a "fugitive" reads like a partisan non-sequitur that has been inappropriately shoehorned in; it also fails the WP:UNDUE test for non-partisan balance. Arguably this clause should be deleted. The issue of his exile is appropriately covered by the next sentence's mention of "self-exile" (which should probably be changed to "self-imposed exile").
3) The dubious accusations against Gulen that are trotted out in the third paragraph are arguably questionable additions and lack fully appropriate qualification and context.
So, this new section is being posted as an initial prompt for discussion & (hopefully) consensus, which is why an edit request template has not yet been posted (as suggested by the guidelines for this situation). So, what do editors think are appropriate changes? Cheers! Bluevista99 (talk) 05:58, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
.png)
Not done Those images may be under copyright, which means it could be illegal for Misplaced Pages to use them. You'll need to provide an image with proof that it's either in the public domain or that whoever took the picture licensed it for anyone to use it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Partly done I've added the biography by Jon Pahl since that directly pertains to Gülen. I did not add the human rights report, because I'd rather not include things that are only tangentially relevant. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
