| Revision as of 21:30, 1 March 2017 editA.S. Brown (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers88,499 edits →Mention of forced abortions: m← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:57, 16 February 2018 edit undoINDICATOR2018 (talk | contribs)260 edits →Undue explained: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| I do not ] this article however this article should be neutral provide both points of view both uyghur and chinese and when you edit please do an edit summary so we know the rationale for the editing is thanks] (]) 03:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC) | I do not ] this article however this article should be neutral provide both points of view both uyghur and chinese and when you edit please do an edit summary so we know the rationale for the editing is thanks] (]) 03:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC) | ||
| == Undue explained == | |||
| Given that this article has 4 paragraphs to demonstrate those Xinjiang indepedence advocates's POV, but only 1 paragraph to show Chinese government's POV. Arguably, this article qualifies ] . Consequently, I added this template hoping someone can fix this. --] (]) 11:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 11:57, 16 February 2018
 | China Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
99.23.90.235 -- Page ban request
This guy has been going around pushing POV and poorly sourced edits on numerous pages relating to Uighurs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/99.23.90.235
Would kindly request administrative action, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.42.29 (talk) 09:32, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Mention of forced abortions
I've been I've been following this article and everytime I look at it is completely different this is not helpful for the encyclopedia Sassmouth (talk) 07:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
There were forced abortions that may have caused the unrest they were mentioned in this source this information should be mentioned in this articlechina's spacial disintegration page 44 this source is reliable. Sassmouth (talk) 02:01, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
The information about the forced abortions was removed in 2014 This information is from a reliable source i entend to work on this page when i have some time Any comments? Sassmouth (talk) 02:08, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
]Though an official account of civilian casualties is absent, exiles and participants in the event claimed that over 5000 civilians had died with thousands more wounded. the reference for this sentence is broken need to find replacement reference — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sassmouth (talk • contribs) 02:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- The source is reliable, and it is a very well established fact that since the one-child policy was introduced in 1978 that the Chinese state has a policy of forced abortions with women who want to have more than one child, so the account here of the riot being sparked by Uighur women being subjected to forced abortions seems very credible. I would put it back in, and if you have more trouble with this issue, ask whoever is deleting to explain why. To offer you some help, this article Circling the wagons about the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps mentions the corps was involved in putting down the riot, which according to this article led to the deaths of about 50 Uighurs.--A.S. Brown (talk) 21:29, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Doing partial Rewrite of article
I am attempting to do a partial rewrite on this article unfortunately it is very hard to determine what exactly happened because all the sources that exist regarding the Baren township riot Vary Wildly!!! in their accounting of the incident. Both Chinese and Uyghur viewpoints should be given equal weight please feel free to collaborate Cheers! Will do more work on article soon Sassmouth (talk) 05:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Need help with article new editor here thanksSassmouth (talk) 04:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Reverted edits by UserDe
I do not WP:own this article however this article should be neutral provide both points of view both uyghur and chinese and when you edit please do an edit summary so we know the rationale for the editing is thanksSassmouth (talk) 03:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Undue explained
Given that this article has 4 paragraphs to demonstrate those Xinjiang indepedence advocates's POV, but only 1 paragraph to show Chinese government's POV. Arguably, this article qualifies WP:UNDUE . Consequently, I added this template hoping someone can fix this. --INDICATOR2018 (talk) 11:57, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Categories: