Talk:Turkish court sentences journalist to prison for "insulting Erdoğan"

Notes

Here are some tips that can help in reviewing this article:

• First and second para is sourced to The Guardian, but the date of the sentencing is mentioned on Ouest-France;
• the beginning of third para is sourced to The Guardian, the part about the letter is sourced dto The Brussels Times;
• fourth para is sourced to The Guardian and SCF;
• fifth para is sourced to Reporters Without Borders. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 00:28, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Dsuke1998AEOS can you remove theguardian source? It's paywalled and not allowed for publishing. Gryllida (talk) 13:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

... 2) Please also add that if convicted, how many years in prison he could need to have.

3) I'm concerned the sources vary on the charges. They all pretty much agree on 'membership in illegal / terroristic/ military organisation' but some (ie rsf) also mention 'terrorist propaganda'. politico's version is that 'insulting president' is 3y and 'pkk membership' 9 years. This seems contradictory and may affect answer to the above. If you can word it clearly please do, otherwise you may include both versions and attribute them.

These edits may be made within up to 24 hours after publishing.

Hi @George Ho @Wikiwide @BigKrow @Lofi Gurl @Back ache @Md Mobashir Hossain @Almondo2025, @Dsuke1998AEOS, @Ternera, @Monsieur2137 @Asked42 (if you want yourself removed or someone else added to this list, please inquire here) A revision has been requested. Here is a list of what to do. (If/when you intend to start working on it, please leave a message or mark the article with {{editing}}) See below: (See 3 points above) Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 13:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

@Gryllida I have not idea about this article. But thanks for mentioning me. Md Mobashir Hossain (talk) 13:24, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Can you please delete 'The Guardian' source @Md Mobashir Hossain (this is simplest edit of the above to make) Thanks Gryllida (talk) 13:32, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

@Gryllida Done Md Mobashir Hossain (talk) 13:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

@Gryllida: and @Md Mobashir Hossain: That removal is going to be problematic, because the details in the second para are solely sourced to The Guardian article. This article would need to be significantly re-structured, but the end result would be that it focuses on the events prior to 30 April. That problem can perhaps be remedied by posting the entire content of the Guardian article here; would this be acceptable? Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 13:58, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

The content in 'The Guardian' is not freely licensed, we cannot copy paste it on-wiki. Can you find another source for this information? Gryllida (talk) 14:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I've found this ECPMF article, which verifies the second para, and this RSF article for the info about his court appearance. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 15:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Great thanks. I approved the edit. Gryllida (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I didnt understand the point about "events before April 30". Journalist being imprisoned is covered in multiple sources already. What part is only in theguardian? Please clarify. Gryllida (talk) 14:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

2) Done

I'm still looking at the other issues. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 13:33, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

@Dsuke1998AEOS Hi @George Ho @Wikiwide @BigKrow @Lofi Gurl @Back ache @Md Mobashir Hossain @Almondo2025, @Dsuke1998AEOS, @Ternera, @Monsieur2137 @Asked42 (if you want yourself removed or someone else added to this list, please inquire here) A revision has been requested. Here is a list of what to do. (If/when you intend to start working on it, please leave a message or mark the article with {{editing}}) See below:

• perhaps add an image of the journalist? Already available in his Wikipedia page.

Thanks Gryllida (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Done and removed the current image . Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 20:58, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Review of revision 4854183 [Passed]

Revision 4854183 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 13:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I couldn't fully verify. Please check comments above. Please address these urgently within less than 24 hours from now. Thank you. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4854183 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 13:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I couldn't fully verify. Please check comments above. Please address these urgently within less than 24 hours from now. Thank you. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

NPOV issues

I note the following neutrality and balance issues with this article:

• Some evaluative statements are presented in wikivoice without attribution. For example:
  • "Both charges are often levelled against journalists who criticise the Turkish government."
  • "Press freedom in the country has experienced a sharp deterioration in recent years..."

These should be attributed to a specific source (e.g., watchdog report, NGO) rather than stated in the project’s voice.

• The article includes perspectives from Joakim Medin, the Swedish foreign minister, and international NGOs, but no direct comment or rationale from Turkish officials. This creates an imbalance, as the government’s position is only implied by the charges themselves. At minimum, the article should note the absence of a Turkish government response.
• While NGO criticisms such as Reporters Without Borders calling the verdict "undemocratic" are appropriately attributed, presenting only condemnations without a countervailing perspective may tilt the piece toward advocacy.

Per WN:NPOV, evaluative content must be attributed, and balance requires inclusion (or explicit noting of the absence) of official responses from all sides.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 19:10, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Michael.C.Wright:, I'm the author of this article. Are you suggesting that I choose the most serious NPOV violations to be remedied through a post-publication correction, or that I draft an alternative version of this article that could then be used as a replacement? Or are you suggesting that it should be retracted? Redireditor ^(talk)_{aka Dsuke1998AEOS} 21:59, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I could have been clearer with that note. We can’t change the article now due to WN:Archive. A correction could be issued if warranted, but I don’t think this rises to that level. My note was mainly to inform future writing and reviewing. NPOV can be tricky, and we all need to stay mindful of neutrality and balance before publication.

I’ll work on making my archival notes clearer about intent. And thank you for keeping tabs on your articles after publication...it’s tremendously helpful!Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 13:02, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. Yeah, for some relatively long articles, I sometimes create a separate "Note(s)" section at the talk pages to instruct reviewers about the part of the sources that support the statements. Redireditor ^(talk)_{aka Dsuke1998AEOS} 13:45, 27 September 2025 (UTC)