A news item involving 2022 Istanbul bombing was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 November 2022. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
I have removed the mention that Soylu is known for this rhetoric as the articles belonged to before the attack even happened, therefore didn't include a mention of the bombing. Anyway the info was added back, adapted a bit and I won't edit war over its inclusion. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 10:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Cramer, Philissa (2022-11-13). "Blast rocks Istanbul, killing at least 6 and canceling memorial for Jews killed in 2003 attacks". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
Also, it's worth knowing that a deadlier attack occurred in Beyoğlu district in 1986. Dunutubble ( talk) ( Contributions) 14:15, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
As we know, the title is 2022 Istanbul bombing. I'm confused, of why the title is like this if the editors already had the article " March 2016 Istanbul bombing." (In See Also) which is similar to this one. Shouldn't be the title "November 2022 Istanbul bombing"?
Also, there is another article of a bombing in Istanbul, which is January 2016 Istanbul bombing.
Thank you. Gabriel Ziegler ( talk) 00:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
In the fact section, should "perpetrator" be renamed to "possible perpetrators" as it lists several groups and is unconclusive? FikaMedHasse ( talk) 06:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm noticing that there is a significant amount of speculative stuff being written in the articles that frankly is very biased and not really supported by any facts, like for example in the background information, there is the mentioning of the election and other things, but I'm wondering what that has to do with the attack, it seems like people are pushing suggestive thinking trying to push a narrative that somehow Turkey did this to itself, without any basis. And then there is a the perpetrators column, where people are taking statements from the PKK saying that Turkey carried out a false flag. I'm just wondering if this sort of speculation would be the same if there was a terrorist attack in western states, and if someone would write in that al qaeda or whatever group is alleging that the US or whatever country carried out the attack on itself for its own foreign policy objectives or whatever reason. Like for example I cannot imagine that the 9/11 article would be ever written in any way that would acknowledge conspiratorial stuff, b/c that would be seen as irresponsible, and yet for some reason this seems reasonable to some people here. Midgetman433 ( talk) 14:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Or The New York Sun : https://www.nysun.com/article/turkey-tries-to-finger-yanks-kurds-for-terror-bombing-at-istanbul "At the height of its war against the Turkish government, the PKK typically claimed responsibility for attacks. Yet, for several years the group, which the Department of State has listed as a terrorist organization since 1997, has tried to shed its past militancy in favor of political activity. Turkey, nevertheless, often bombs PKK bases in Iraq, as well as the American-backed Syrian Kurds. After nearly six years in which there were no serious attacks against civilians in Turkey, the Sunday terror bombing could mark the return of harsh security measures in the country. Some fear that such measures would even become tougher with the approach of next June’s presidential and parliamentary elections. There are “hints at a premeditated campaign of terror orchestrated by Ankara, with the US and Kurds pre-designated as the perpetrators,” a Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Turkey watcher, Sinan Ciddi, tweeted. He later told the Sun that while “there is no hard evidence that the Turkish government is behind the bombing, they’re certainly trying to capitalize on it.”"
AgisdeSparte ( talk) 11:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
This edit removed two banners for WikiProjects that have an interest in this article. This removal was not previously discussed, nor were the reasons for removal explained in the edit summary. Within 6 hours, these banners were reinstated and partly reassessed. However, I found I needed to still clean up what was original removed. WikiProjects banners are often added to article talk pages because an editor believes the article is within the scope of a particular WikiProject and is "of interest" to that project. However, WikiProject members should decide if a projects's banners is relevant for a particular article, and the WikiProject guidelines indicate a consensus is needed if a banner is to be removed by non-participants. Unexplained removal of WikiProject banners deprives the relevant WikiProjects from fulfilling their purpose to improve the quality of articles. Users who feel an WikiProject banner is not appropriate for an article should ask first about the reason for a banner, and not remove without warning or explanation. - Cameron Dewe ( talk) 08:08, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
According to Hurriyet Daily News article of November 16, 2022 titled Perpetrator of Istanbul bombing ‘always dressed in black’: Witnesses, "The suspect reportedly stated in her interrogation that she was trained as a “special intelligence officer” by the PKK/ YPG that she joined." In addition, "We assess that the order for the deadly terror attack came from Ayn al-Arab in northern Syria, where the PKK/YPG has its Syrian headquarters,” Interior Minister Soylu said earlier." All this needs to be added here. 46.31.118.93 ( talk) 05:08, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The names of the people who were randomly killed by a stranger have been repeatedly added. They're not included in the large majority of articles about fatal bombings. It's not encyclopedic, the names mean nothing to the vast majority of readers & including them violates the privacy of the victims' families. We shouldn't name them on the basis of remembering them or it being respectful. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 15:16, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The removed paragraph from the background section need to have a reference that explicitly mentions the information. Otherwise its SYNTH. [1] Semsûrî ( talk) 23:39, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
You dimwits, ASALA has been inactive since 1990s. One Ukrainian and Kyrgyzstani tabloid report on it, and you include it? Shame on you! Remove this trash right now! PKK is responsible! OÇ KYRGYZ ( talk) 18:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
It is acceptable for potential Turkish invasion plans of Northern Syria to be included in the article, however the lede is not the place for them. Especially since the Kurdish forces did not claim responsibility for the bombing. Wikipedia is not a tabloid cover.
Denials from YPG, SDF and AANES should be put under the same banner, YPG is comparable to US Army, SDF to US Armed Forces and AANES to the United States Federal Government. It is pointless to state that each of them specially denied involvement instead of saying United States (aka SDF, or AANES) denied involvement. Ecrusized ( talk) 14:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
A news item involving 2022 Istanbul bombing was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 14 November 2022. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
I have removed the mention that Soylu is known for this rhetoric as the articles belonged to before the attack even happened, therefore didn't include a mention of the bombing. Anyway the info was added back, adapted a bit and I won't edit war over its inclusion. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 10:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Cramer, Philissa (2022-11-13). "Blast rocks Istanbul, killing at least 6 and canceling memorial for Jews killed in 2003 attacks". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Retrieved 2022-11-14.
Also, it's worth knowing that a deadlier attack occurred in Beyoğlu district in 1986. Dunutubble ( talk) ( Contributions) 14:15, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
As we know, the title is 2022 Istanbul bombing. I'm confused, of why the title is like this if the editors already had the article " March 2016 Istanbul bombing." (In See Also) which is similar to this one. Shouldn't be the title "November 2022 Istanbul bombing"?
Also, there is another article of a bombing in Istanbul, which is January 2016 Istanbul bombing.
Thank you. Gabriel Ziegler ( talk) 00:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
In the fact section, should "perpetrator" be renamed to "possible perpetrators" as it lists several groups and is unconclusive? FikaMedHasse ( talk) 06:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm noticing that there is a significant amount of speculative stuff being written in the articles that frankly is very biased and not really supported by any facts, like for example in the background information, there is the mentioning of the election and other things, but I'm wondering what that has to do with the attack, it seems like people are pushing suggestive thinking trying to push a narrative that somehow Turkey did this to itself, without any basis. And then there is a the perpetrators column, where people are taking statements from the PKK saying that Turkey carried out a false flag. I'm just wondering if this sort of speculation would be the same if there was a terrorist attack in western states, and if someone would write in that al qaeda or whatever group is alleging that the US or whatever country carried out the attack on itself for its own foreign policy objectives or whatever reason. Like for example I cannot imagine that the 9/11 article would be ever written in any way that would acknowledge conspiratorial stuff, b/c that would be seen as irresponsible, and yet for some reason this seems reasonable to some people here. Midgetman433 ( talk) 14:28, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Or The New York Sun : https://www.nysun.com/article/turkey-tries-to-finger-yanks-kurds-for-terror-bombing-at-istanbul "At the height of its war against the Turkish government, the PKK typically claimed responsibility for attacks. Yet, for several years the group, which the Department of State has listed as a terrorist organization since 1997, has tried to shed its past militancy in favor of political activity. Turkey, nevertheless, often bombs PKK bases in Iraq, as well as the American-backed Syrian Kurds. After nearly six years in which there were no serious attacks against civilians in Turkey, the Sunday terror bombing could mark the return of harsh security measures in the country. Some fear that such measures would even become tougher with the approach of next June’s presidential and parliamentary elections. There are “hints at a premeditated campaign of terror orchestrated by Ankara, with the US and Kurds pre-designated as the perpetrators,” a Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Turkey watcher, Sinan Ciddi, tweeted. He later told the Sun that while “there is no hard evidence that the Turkish government is behind the bombing, they’re certainly trying to capitalize on it.”"
AgisdeSparte ( talk) 11:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
This edit removed two banners for WikiProjects that have an interest in this article. This removal was not previously discussed, nor were the reasons for removal explained in the edit summary. Within 6 hours, these banners were reinstated and partly reassessed. However, I found I needed to still clean up what was original removed. WikiProjects banners are often added to article talk pages because an editor believes the article is within the scope of a particular WikiProject and is "of interest" to that project. However, WikiProject members should decide if a projects's banners is relevant for a particular article, and the WikiProject guidelines indicate a consensus is needed if a banner is to be removed by non-participants. Unexplained removal of WikiProject banners deprives the relevant WikiProjects from fulfilling their purpose to improve the quality of articles. Users who feel an WikiProject banner is not appropriate for an article should ask first about the reason for a banner, and not remove without warning or explanation. - Cameron Dewe ( talk) 08:08, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
According to Hurriyet Daily News article of November 16, 2022 titled Perpetrator of Istanbul bombing ‘always dressed in black’: Witnesses, "The suspect reportedly stated in her interrogation that she was trained as a “special intelligence officer” by the PKK/ YPG that she joined." In addition, "We assess that the order for the deadly terror attack came from Ayn al-Arab in northern Syria, where the PKK/YPG has its Syrian headquarters,” Interior Minister Soylu said earlier." All this needs to be added here. 46.31.118.93 ( talk) 05:08, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The names of the people who were randomly killed by a stranger have been repeatedly added. They're not included in the large majority of articles about fatal bombings. It's not encyclopedic, the names mean nothing to the vast majority of readers & including them violates the privacy of the victims' families. We shouldn't name them on the basis of remembering them or it being respectful. Jim Michael 2 ( talk) 15:16, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The removed paragraph from the background section need to have a reference that explicitly mentions the information. Otherwise its SYNTH. [1] Semsûrî ( talk) 23:39, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
You dimwits, ASALA has been inactive since 1990s. One Ukrainian and Kyrgyzstani tabloid report on it, and you include it? Shame on you! Remove this trash right now! PKK is responsible! OÇ KYRGYZ ( talk) 18:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
It is acceptable for potential Turkish invasion plans of Northern Syria to be included in the article, however the lede is not the place for them. Especially since the Kurdish forces did not claim responsibility for the bombing. Wikipedia is not a tabloid cover.
Denials from YPG, SDF and AANES should be put under the same banner, YPG is comparable to US Army, SDF to US Armed Forces and AANES to the United States Federal Government. It is pointless to state that each of them specially denied involvement instead of saying United States (aka SDF, or AANES) denied involvement. Ecrusized ( talk) 14:10, 3 December 2022 (UTC)