Talk:Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk receives Nobel Prize

Thinking to unpublish?

Rather than unpublishing, please add a comment here as to what to fix, or better yet, just drop a brief note to towsonu2003 at gmail dot com. If you can't help but unpublish it, you need to please add a reason here in the discussion page so we can fix it :)

PS. The quotes from his speech are fair use. Towsonu2003 06:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to say, looks good. Bawolff ☺☻ 06:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :) Towsonu2003 06:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thinking to vandalize?

Orhan Pamuk is now a very controversial figure in Turkey, to such a degree that him receiving the Nobel prize is being treated as a proof that he is a traitor. If you are considering to vandalize this news item, please consider this:

We have often witnessed peoples, societies and nations outside the Western world – and I can identify with them easily – succumbing to fears that sometimes lead them to commit stupidities, all because of their fears of humiliation and their sensitivities.

Please discuss rather than falling victim to your own fears and insecurities. Towsonu2003 06:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you should worry to much, unless it actually happens. (Sometimes overdoing the warnings gives people ideas imo) Bawolff ☺☻ 06:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, being aware of what most Turkish people think about the writer, I doubt :( It's all up to how much "daylight" this link sees :( Towsonu2003 06:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

oh well, hope for the best. (: Bawolff ☺☻ 07:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of reference to the disputed Armenian genocide

I see one user deleted selectively the reference to the disputed Armenian genocide. That information is not just background, but crucial to understand the negative sentiments too many people feel against Pamuk. Please leave that reference in place -thanks Towsonu2003 09:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Is there an absence of free speech in Turkey?

There may be, but is it the job of wikinews to reach this conclusion? I suggest using more objective terms.

seems better articulated now Towsonu2003 17:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Duplicate?

Didn't we run this article a while back? I can't find it now, but I'm sure it was written. Maybe got deleted somehow? Nyarlathotep 17:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure there was an article that said "Pamuk actually received the award" instead of "It was announced that Pamuk won the award"? Towsonu2003 17:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the article about the announcement was abandoned and got deleted.--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Just to point it out, the point of this news item isn't the announcement. it's him actually taking the prize and giving a speech :) Towsonu2003 22:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Well actually this article is about both since the first one was abandonded. If the first one was run, this one would be expected to have a more narrow focus on the speach. Nyarlathotep 13:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see your point. Do you still wanna delete this article because another abandoned and deleted article about the announcement existed once upon a time, before this one was ever written and published? I cannot give more focus to the speech other than quoting it, because than it would look like POV (because I would be analyzing his speech, which usually is regarded as POV stuff) Towsonu2003 20:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't complaining about the article, its just fine. I was objecting to your assertion that this article was about his acceptance speach when there was no need for such a narrow focus. You only need to avoid stepping on old stories toes if they are actually published. fyi, We usually have a "sliding scale" for "currentness" depending upon subject, based upon level of coverage, importance, and POV pushing issues. For example, you can't run old Israel-Palistinian confict stories or old local news stories, but your quite free to talk about less known world trouble spots long afterwards. A previously ignored nobel prize is news at almost any time of the (half?) year, imho. But you only get to talk about the Ignoble prizes when they come out.  ;) Nyarlathotep 17:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

POV title?

Maybe this oughta change to "Nobel Prize awarded to Orhan Pamuk"?--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 19:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. And a writer who isn't controversial can't be a good one anyway. --+Deprifry+ 19:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

You just killed my nice, attention-attracting title -oh well... It wasn't POV though, the writer is truly a controversial figure in Turkey... Towsonu2003 22:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Category and links

{{edit protected}} Please add this article to Category:Nobel Prize and localise the link of the same name as well as the link for Literature. Green Giant (talk) 10:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Done --Pi zero (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2015 (UTC)