Jump to content

Talk:Behzat Ç. Bir Ankara Polisiyesi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

@THEWISEOLDTURK

[edit]

Your use of language in that paragraph is biased and unsuitable for an encyclopedia:

The series have explicitly illustrated the corrupt policies of the governmental agencies and therefore widely criticized by the existing (as of July 2012) government of Turkey, being ruled by the A.K.P. (the Justice and Development Party). The government implicitly asked the producers of the series to stop production while exerting pressure on the TV channel to stop broadcasting; however widespread protests of spectators and fans of the series have caused the government to back down for the time being. Currently, the government is trying stop broadcasting indirectly by imposing huge monetary penalties through government-controlled RTÜK with feeble arguments such as "the series' containing material contradictory to traditional Turkish family values", etc.

I merely simplified what's being said in this paragraph here:

The series have illustrated corrupt governmental agencies and as a result, have been criticized by the current Justice and Development Party government.

The government implicitly asked the producers of the series to stop production while exerting pressure on the TV channel to stop broadcasting; however widespread protests of spectators and fans of the series have caused the government to back down for the time being.

Currently, the government is trying stop broadcasting indirectly by imposing huge monetary penalties through government-controlled RTÜK based on arguments such as the series' containing "material contradictory to traditional Turkish family values".

Actually, it looks like the text needs further attention. Lastly, there is no need for 15 sources if they are all saying the same thing. So, there. --Mttll (talk) 20:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Mttl

[edit]

I don't think my language is biased. However you may think so. If that's the case, it's no reason to delete whole edits and deprive users of Wikipedia from provided information. You can properly edit to refine other's work and, to do that, you do not necessarily have to delete whole contributions of them.

All of us are here to contribute not to criticize; if you see a mistake please edit accordingly e.g. if my language is biased, change it to a neutral tone. However, as courtesy rules of Wikipedia suggest, it's best to talk to the relevant person beforehand and let him/her know about the situation and suggest a proper change mutually if possible. Editing should not be seen as a tug-of-war; Wikipedians are here to voluntarily contribute (unless they have ulterior motives) therefore it's to everyone's interest that Wikipedia articles are as close to perfection as possible.

As for the resources; they don't say the same thing: Some are from January 2011, some from May-June-July 2011, some from May-June-July 2012 - these are particularly referenced so as to verify the fact that the Turkish government is determined in penalizing the producers of the series and persistently working for it. As for the contents of the references, they don't say the same thing either: Some tell about the penalties for reasons of alcohol use, some are about "bad language", some are about relationships out of wedlock, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by THEWISEOLDTURK (talk • contribs) 21:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of language is biased indeed, for instance: "feeble arguments". And I did try to refine it, only to be reverted by you.
And sources need not to be identical word by word. The important part is they are being used for the same purpose and thus 15 of them are redundant.--Mttll (talk) 22:42, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]


It is a relief that Wikipedia retains all edit histories. The past records show that you didn't refine my edit but deleted it alltogether and twice in a row.

As for the sources, I don't say anything anymore. My explanations are there for everyone interested to see.

Rgds, THEWISEOLDTURK (talk) 12:42, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it altogether the first time, because the paragraph seemed to be written in heavy bias and it would have been less of an effort to write it from scratch than to refine it. The second time, I moved it to another section in the article and simplified it as it can be seen here. --Mttll (talk) 13:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedited

[edit]

PaintedCarpet (talk) 19:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Behzat Ç. Bir Ankara Polisiyesi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Behzat_Ç._Bir_Ankara_Polisiyesi&oldid=1199771065"