Jump to content

Talk:Xinjiang conflict/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Soviet Union propaganda

China and the Soviet Union waged a propaganda war over East Turkestan Independence, with the Soviets trying to incite separatism among the Uyghurs, and China retaliated with jamming and broadcasting of its own. Soviet Muslims (Uzbeks and others) would taunt Russians in the bazaars about the threat of China liberating Soviet central asia from the Russians, and China broadcasted news of Soviet atrocities against Afghan Muslims during the Soviet invasion.

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/aureview/1980/may-jun/meehan.html

http://www.oxuscom.com/sovinxj.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/06/world/on-soviet-china-border-the-thaw-is-just-a-trickle.html

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1946&dat=19810922&id=3oAxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9KQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5348,448513

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1928&dat=19690102&id=ylsgAAAAIBAJ&sjid=UGQFAAAAIBAJ&pg=4665,144363

http://f3.tiera.ru/1/genesis/580-584/581000/08896bda69d79b32dcf80f11fc793dbf

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/may2010/gb20100528_168520.htm

http://engnews.gazeta.kz/art.asp?aid=308213

http://www.irgamag.com/component/k2/item/6735

Rajmaan (talk) 16:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Use of journalist's twitter accounts

You are using primary sources and unreliable sources to construct a narrative. Primary sources should be only used for most basic and non-controversial statements of fact.

Are simple statements made by journalists like Joanna Paraszczuk on images not basic and non-controversial? What is controversial about a journalist saying that TIP is training kids, next to an image released by TIP of them training children?Rajmaan (talk) 04:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

First, the talk page is not the place to post "alternative" versions of the article. That section above should be removed.
Second, your link above is to an essay, not policy, and this essay is not even about reliable sources but about external link.
Third, again, you are using primary sources - essentially a single comment. If you got a secondary reliable source that says that TIP is training kids then we can talk. Volunteer Marek  04:36, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Again, its sourced by Long War Journal. Which has been used as a source on multiple articles- 2015 Park Palace guesthouse attack, Abdullah Said al Libi, Amirli, Yathrib, Iraq, 055 Brigade, First Battle of Tikrit, Raskamboni Movement, Adnan Gulshair el Shukrijumah, Afghan National Army, List of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant members, Ahmed Abdi Godane, Afghan National Civil Order Police, 201st Corps (Afghanistan), Nasir al-Wuhayshi, Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, Qari Hussain, 1st Division (Iraq), Operation Augurs of Prosperity, Sadr City, Iraqi Special Operations Forces, Mullah Mohammad Hasan , Iraqi Navy, Saudi detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Tehrik-e-Jafaria, Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle, Mukhtar Army, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Camp Speicher. If you feel so strongly that Long War Journal is unreliable I suggest you delete it from every article on this list.
Long War Journal has also been cited by Academics in books published by Columbia University Press, Georgetown University Press, University of Pennsylvania Press, Naval Institute Press United States Naval Institute, in addition to New York Times (two of which were on the newspaper's front page),[1][2][3] Reuters,[4] Associated Press,[5] United Press International,[6][7][8] Sunday Times,[9] The Hindu,[10] Cable News Network,[11] the Times of India,[12] The Australian,[13] CTC Sentinel,[14] Time,[15] The Nation,[16] Washington Times [1],[17] and The Atlantic.[18] Marc Thiessen in the the Washington Post.[19] and by Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Thomas E. Ricks in The Gamble.[20]
Some news organizations have an entire category devoted to articles where they cited Long War Journal on articles about terrorist groups such as Christian Science Monitor and The Daily StarRajmaan (talk) 04:52, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
By the way, the Arabic news sources about Az-Zanbaqi village also say TIP is training children.Rajmaan (talk) 14:05, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion: Move Syrian Civil War related content to Foreign rebel fighters in the Syrian Civil War > China

I think content relating to the Syrian Civil War and foreign Uyghur fighters in Syria should be moved to this section, and a link should be provided on this article to the moved content.

GeneralAdmiralAladeen (talk) 02:00, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

SITE

RS source used by multiple news agencies. This will be used to supplement and back up Long War Journal sources, since both often report on the same thing.

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-division-in-syria-releases-photos-of-fighters-camp-for-children.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-division-in-syria-releases-video-on-its-participation-in-jisr-al-shughour.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-division-in-syria-claims-liberating-four-areas-in-idlib.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-division-in-syria-releases-video-photo-album-featuring-young-boys-in-training-camp.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-releases-12th-issue-of-qislamic-turkistanq-magazine.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-division-in-syria-releases-video-promoting-cause-inciting-for-jihad.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-s-syria-division-releases-video-on-joint-operation-with-nusra-front-to-capture-abu-duhur-air-base.html

https://news.siteintelgroup.com/Jihadist-News/tip-division-in-syria-claims-role-in-capturing-abu-duhur-air-base-provides-photos.html


http://news.siteintelgroup.com/blog/index.php/about-us/21-jihad/36-tip

Rajmaan (talk) 02:28, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

>> China media says clash in Xinjiang kills 16 (Lihaas (talk) 10:18, 16 December 2013 (UTC)).

As reported by the BBC News, "China says "foreign terrorists" are behind the violence in the region. Hundreds of people have died in attacks over the past three years." but they also report "China strictly controls media access to Xinjiang so reports are difficult to verify."[21]LeadSongDog come howl! 17:53, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Reddit, twitter, personal blogs are NOT reliable sources

I don't know how else to put it. It's sort of self explanatory. These sources do not satisfy the criteria for WP:RS. Please stop reinserting them along with primary sources. Volunteer Marek  03:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Verifiability policy clearly states: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities".
This NOT an article about reddit. This is NOT an article about twitter. This is not an article about some blog. Please stop reinserting this crap back in. Volunteer Marek  03:14, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Also please stop removing the relevant tags that I've added to the article. Volunteer Marek  03:17, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Cut it out. We both know this policy refers to material released by a person or organization on social media. Either you didn't read clearly or are deliberately playing dumb, this policy does NOT refer to twitter talking about twitter- it refers to a famous individual or organization running a social media account such as a twitter account and releasing info about themselves, such as Justin Bieber making a tweet commenting about an issue or Human Rights watch running a twitter account and tweeting information on human rights violations. WP:SOCIALMEDIA This policy also applies to pages on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook.. Turkistan Islamic Party released videos of their activities on social media like twitter, liveleak, and archive.org and they call their media arm Islam Awazi. Long War Journal is a terror analysis website run which is used as a reliable source by media organizations and is RS. FYI I did not use a single reddit thread as a source.
If you actually read the paragraph, you would notice that most the material is sourced from longwarjournal and that the reddit threads are tagged on after a longwar journal source- The Uyghur Turkistan Islamic Party and the Taliban allied Uzbek Imam Bukhari Jamaat and Al-Qaeda allied Uzbek Katibat al Tawhid wal Jihad, along with Jund al Aqsa cooperated together in the Al Ghab plain to conquer multiple crucial villages, with the TIP engaging itn suicide bombings in Jisr al Shughur and iits participation in overrunning Abu Dhuhur with Jund al Aqsa and Al Nusrah. Longwarjournal[22] Reddit [23] The reddits can be removed without any content being affected. I just kept the reddit threads as a reminder of where I got the link for the longwarjournal article from.
You also deleted this paragraph which is entirely sourced by actual news articles. Don't know where you got the idea that this is "Twitter" from. The village of Az-Zanbaqi (الزنبقي) in Jisr al-Shughur's countryside has become a base for a massive amount of Uyghur Turkistan Islamic Party militants and their families in Syria, estimated at around 3,500, military camps in the area are training hundreds of children from these families; Hezbollah media, Iranian media and Syrian government media accused Turkish intelligence of being involved in transporting these Uyghurs via Turkey to Syria, with the aim of using them first in Syria to help Jabhat Al-Nusra and gain combat experience fighting against the Syrian Army before sending them back to Xinjiang to fight against China if they manage to survive.[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]Rajmaan (talk) 03:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
STSC Benlisquare can someone explain to Marek what this policy means?
Same thing for some of the tweets. I found a link to an Islam Awazi video or picture on a tweet and posted a reference to both the tweet and video (hosted on youtube and archive.org). The tweet can be deleted without any issue in that case.
I often double source with both a secondary source and a primary source or the website of wherever I got the link to the secondary from, its a habit of mine and the extra stuff tagged on can be deleted without any content being affected.
As for the other material sourced entirely from tweets by journalists and counter terrorist analysis organizations and liveleak, I clearly explained how they are RS in the first paragraph.Rajmaan (talk) 03:40, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Verifiability policy clearly states: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities". If you think otherwise then you're not understanding the policy as written. Volunteer Marek  03:34, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
FFS, the words "about themselves" is BOLDED in the policy text. Volunteer Marek  03:36, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:External_links/Perennial_websites#Twitter. Wrong again. Read what the policy says and stop telling me to read something you didn't. As a reliable source: Nota bene Sometimes. A specific tweet may be useful as a self-published, primary source. Twitter incorporates a Verified Account mechanism to identify accounts of celebrities and other notable people; this should be considered in judging the reliability of Twitter messages.
Don't know where you got the idea, that videos and pictures showing TIP members released by TIP's media arm has nothing to do with TIP.Rajmaan (talk) 03:40, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
By the way primary sources are allowed on Wikipedia as long as they are not interpreted. What is the grounds for deleting them?Rajmaan (talk) 03:46, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
You are using primary sources and unreliable sources to construct a narrative. Primary sources should be only used for most basic and non-controversial statements of fact.
And how are liveleak and that warjournal blog reliable?  Volunteer Marek  03:48, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
The liveleak links are not interpretations of any kind. They simply show videos which were released by TIP, showing TIP fighters which is stamped with their media logo. Just as a video created by Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International and put on youtube is a reliable source about HRW or AI, these TIP videos are the same as that. Longwarjournal is a site maintained by former military personnel and academics, and has been used by multiple prominent news organizations as a source. Blogs run by professionals fall under Wikipedia:Verifiability#Newspaper_and_magazine_blogs. And also the tweets by the journalist Joanna Paraszczuk, who is a reputable journalist who works for RFERL and other news organizations. Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi is an academic at Oxford University and a reknown counter terrorist analyst and his tweets are RS too.Rajmaan (talk) 03:54, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
The liveleak links are not interpretations of any kind. - so again, self-published primary sources which you are using to conduct primary research (same goes for youtube videos).
I'm skeptical about LongWarJournal so the best course of action is to ask at WP:RSN about it. Volunteer Marek  03:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Most of the liveleak leaks are double sourced to longwarjournal articles and news articles like the Daily Mail. Most can be deleted and the only issue lies with longwarjournal. The stand alone liveleak material is not of really any importance, just a few videos showing TIP members i Afghanistan and I am not concerned about them.Rajmaan (talk) 04:16, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
@Rajmaan: inquired at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_197#Longwarjournal. While there was no formal decision at the time, I would have interpreted that discussion as supportive of LWJ's reliability. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Xinjiang conflict. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 14:32, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Xinjiang conflict. 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 or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 05:32, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Xinjiang conflict. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 15:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Xinjiang conflict. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 05:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Xinjiang conflict. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Tweets here for reference and links to sources. Are twitter accounts of interns working at organizations regarded as RS considered on the same level of reliability as journalists twitter accounts? Journalist accounts are allowed and so is LWJ's website itself but I'm not sure about interns of LWJ? There is detailed analysis in the tweets that don't appear in the articles.

https://twitter.com/Weissenberg7/status/773640643381985280

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-kyrgyzstan-blast-china-idUSKCN11C1DK

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/770574309739864065

https://twitter.com/gulzana_imaeva/status/773748885726593024

There is also the issue of their stance against Fethullah Gulen. I feel this should be included in the TIP article itself but I'm not sure here.

http://www.doguturkistanbulteni.com/2016/09/02/rabia-kadirden-amerikaya-yalakalik-marsi-amerika-2006/

http://www.doguturkistanbulteni.com/2016/09/03/silahli-teror-orgutu-dunya-uygur-kurultayi-turkistan-islam-dernegi-yoneticilerini-isid-iftirasi-ile-hedef-gosteriyor/

http://www.doguturkistanbulteni.com/2016/09/07/fetocu-silahli-teror-orgutu-hatay-gorantas-karakolunda-uygur-turklerine-zulmediyor/

http://jihadology.net/2016/09/07/new-video-message-from-%e1%b8%a5izb-al-islami-al-turkistani-in-bilad-al-sham-a-call-from-the-front-lines-of-jihad-22/ https://videopress.com/embed/qpwZ3YqZ?hd=0&autoPlay=0&permalink=0&loop=0

Is Terror Monitor's twitter considered RS? Yes or no?

https://twitter.com/Terror_Monitor/status/773648417964826624

Editor at Long War Journal and Fellow at Foundation for Defense of Democracies. RS?

https://twitter.com/thomasjoscelyn/status/771821957989797889

https://twitter.com/Weissenberg7/status/774720957348999169

The verified Associated Press journalist Gerry Shih reposted Weiss's work on TIP. I think this should be taken as an endorsement that this particular work of his is a reliable source.

https://twitter.com/gerryshih/status/775280178759098368

https://justpaste. it/spka

https://twitter.com/Weissenberg7/status/775337802628202497

Rajmaan (talk) 06:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Action against self-published jihadist sources

A lot of content on this page reads like a newsletter or update log rather than an encyclopedia, and is sourced mainly by jihadist magazines in the form of PDFs or reproductions on other websites, violating WP:SPS (self-published sources) and WP:PRIMARY (use of unreliable primary sources). Jihadists are by no means "experts" on themselves, and the content they produce are nothing but propaganda to lure fighters; by no means reputable or reliable. By doing weekly/monthly updates on the jihadist content they produce, this page is becoming a content dump for jihadist propaganda rather than an informative page about the conflict in Xinjiang.

Having jihadist published content in this article is the equivalent of updating Donald Trump's page every time he makes a controversial tweet or tweets a policy announcement on Twitter, then sourcing it with a link to his tweet. To avoid an unwanted edit war, I am leaving this discussion here; if you do not agree with this please reply to this thread.

– GeneralAdmiralAladeen (Têkilî min) 18:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Agreed, the article is atrocious. The Turkistan Islamic Party page was in a similar state until another editor went through and cleaned it up. Gazkthul (talk) 03:07, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

How do we shrink this article and removing unnecessary info

This article is really really long Does it need to be shorter?? Opions?? Sassmouth (talk) 06:26, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I intend to remove alot of references and statements such as The Turkistan Islamic Party released a new video titled "Importance of Martyrdom Operations in Our Current Time" (أهمية العمليات الإستشهادية في زمننا الحاضر) (زامانىمىزدىكى پىدائىيلىق ئەمەلىيىتىنىڭ ئەھمىيىتى) by Abdullah al-Muhaysini.[700][701][702][703][704][705]

I don't think jihadi videos are reliable sources neither are twitter accounts they just arent. The reader needs to see facts backed by reliable sources, From all major viewpoints. this article needs to be shrinked disagree with me bring it to the talk page... thanks Sassmouth (talk) 07:03, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

I am considering deleting most if not all of sections Western media and Human Rights watchdogs and Pan-Turkish Uyghur media before i do so i want the opinion of other editors this article is unreadable in its current state way to much citation clutter and walls of text What do you think!!! Sassmouth (talk) 22:13, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Just deleted a statement about Protests against Kazakhstan government unnecessary for this article which is about Xinjiang china Perhaps the editor who put all this stuff on here should consider starting an article called Pan-Turkish Uyghur media across asia Sassmouth (talk) 22:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

@GeneralAdmiralAladeen: hello personally i think that most if not all of the stuff in pan turkish uygher media should be deleted or moved to its own article what do you think??. Sassmouth (talk) 04:09, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@Sassmouth: I personally find most of the article to be irrelevant or biased, most of it seems like copy and paste from news articles. The content that cites Twitter are especially not "Wikipedia" level content, and doesn't really meet standards of importance, but I know that even if it is removed by someone, there will be an edit war from others to keep it there. So even thought I agree it should be moved, I doubt it will not cause an edit war as it did before. - GeneralAdmiralAladeen (Têkilî min) 05:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

@GeneralAdmiralAladeen: Quite frankly this article is too much for me to clean up on my own i don't know enough about this conflict to decide what to delete and what to keep (its a very long and complex conflict) and there is way too much info on this page! I wish some one that was relatively neutral and more knowledgeable than me about this subject and the wikipedia in general would come and help if you do know someone send them my way as far as edit warring i really do not feel like doing that but ill try it if forced to Otherwise this article is pretty much garbageSassmouth (talk) 03:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

my suggestion is not really on how to delete unnecessary information, since I am not sure, whether someone else will just put it in again and also because I think that it is really a hard work with such a huge article. I suggest, that the first step could be dividing the article, e.g. history of Xinjiang Conflict (take a lot of stuff out of the "Timeline") and put other stuff in articles like ETIM articles (if they exist). Then it is easier to handle everything. Sebbe xy (talk) 07:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
just saw, that there are already dozens of articles on specific topics, so probably most of the information can be handled by pointing to those articles, e.g. 2014 Kunming attack or others. Sebbe xy (talk) 08:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

The importance of this article to wiki project China should be upgraded to mid or high

The importance of this article to wiki project China should be upgraded to mid or high this is an ongoing Insurgency and This Very notable73.81.150.5 (talk) 07:56, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

The reason it is not rated high is because part of this article is a garbage dump for insignificant tweets and announcements by Uyghur and foreign terrorists. Attempts to remove it result in an edit war, and as a result nobody has bothered reviewing this article. - GeneralAdmiralAladeen (Têkilî min) 00:13, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
But aren't the importance rating and the quality rating two things? I believe the importance rating should about the *topic*, not the current article. How the article being long somehow impedes importance rating evades me. If anything, currently having a long article should be an indicator that this stuff is important. Ahyangyi (talk) 17:10, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Xinjiang conflict. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:58, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ Scott Shane (August 12, 2011). "C.I.A. Is Disputed On Civilian Toll In Drone Strikes". The New York Times. p. 1. Archived from the original on February 5, 2014. {{cite news}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; November 5, 2012 suggested (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper= (help)
  2. ^ Eric P. Schmitt (April 13, 2011). "New C.I.A. Drone Attack Draws Rebuke From". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 5, 2014. Retrieved April 30, 2012. {{cite news}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; November 5, 2012 suggested (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper= (help)
  3. ^ Bumiller, Elisabeth, and Thom Shanker, "War Evolves With Drones, Some Tiny As Bugs", New York Times, 20 June 2011, p. 1.
  4. ^ Taylor, Rob, "Senior Qaeda leader in Afghanistan killed - NATO", Reuters, 26 April 2011; retrieved 30 April 2012.
  5. ^ Straziuso, Jason, "American extremist in Somalia releases 2 new rap songs on Internet", Associated Press via Seattle Times, 12 April 2011; retrieved 30 April 2012.
  6. ^ United Press International, "Bin laden aide leaves Iran.", 29 September 2010 (wire service report).
  7. ^ United Press International, "'Pretty sure' bin Laden son killed", 23 July 2009 (wire service report).
  8. ^ United Press International, "Iraq security development slowed in 2008", 16 January 2009, (wire service report).
  9. ^ Lamb, Christina, "School bombing exposes Obama's secret war inside Pakistan", Sunday Times, 7 February 2010 (correction published on 15 February 2010 noting attribution to the Long War Journal was accidentally omitted), p. 27.
  10. ^ Joshua, Anita, "Senior Taliban leader killed in drone attack: report", The Hindu, 21 December 2010
  11. ^ Cable News Network, A top insurgent in Afghanistan killed, coalition confirms", 26 April 2011; retrieved 30 April 2012
  12. ^ Times of India, "What happens to global jihad after Osama bin Laden's death?", 4 May 2011; retrieved 30 April 2012.
  13. ^ Neighbor, Sally, "Libya ripe for jihad's rallying cries", The Australian, 26 April 2011; retrieved 30 April 2012.
  14. ^ CTC Sentinel, July 2009.
  15. ^ Thompson, Mark, "Battleland: Mullen Talks Tougher in Pakistan", Time, 21 April 2011; retrieved 30 April 2012.
  16. ^ Cite error: The named reference The 'Hero' of the War on Terror was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  17. ^ Lake, Eli, "Terrorist hit puts Pakistani reporter under fire", Washington Times, 25 May 2010; retrieved 30 April 2012.
  18. ^ John Hudson (September 30, 2010). "What We Know About the Planned Terror Plot in Europe". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on February 5, 2014. Retrieved April 30, 2012. {{cite news}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; November 5, 2012 suggested (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  19. ^ Thiessen, Mark (March 15, 2011). "Adam Serwer's ignorance of a terrorist group". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 30, 2012. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |newspaper= (help)
  20. ^ Ricks, Thomas E., The Gamble (book) (New York: Penguin Press, 2009), p. 266.
  21. ^ "Chinese forces kill 28 people 'responsible for Xinjiang mine attack'". BBC News. 20 November 2015. Retrieved 20 November 2015.
  22. ^ Weiss, Caleb (September 10th, 2015). "Turkistan Islamic Party releases photos from captured Syrian regime airbase". Long War Journal. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  23. ^ https://www.reddit.com/r/syriancivilwar/comments/3kgv5e/turkistan_islamic_party_releases_photos_from/
  24. ^ http://ar.abna24.com/service/important/archive/2015/09/03/709062/story.html
  25. ^ http://syriaalhadath.com/archives/89517
  26. ^ https://www.almayadeen.net/news/syria-,H4E81K07UKhyaUIAI4_qQ/%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%A8%D9%82%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A3%D9%82%D8%B1%D8%A8-%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%85%D9%86%D9%87%D8%A7-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%B4%D9%82
  27. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPlUCyz9-u8
  28. ^ http://www.alakhbar.co/posts/60490
  29. ^ http://www.syrianewsapp.com/1/Article/2114/97747291#.VfHSlJdGQrc
  30. ^ http://www.mepanorama.net/540445/%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B2%D9%86%D8%A8%D9%82%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A3%D9%82%D8%B1%D8%A8-%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%85%D9%86/
  31. ^ http://www.harbipress.com/news.php?News=6289
  32. ^ http://www.awsatnews.net/?p=145269
  33. ^ http://xeber24.org/nuce/83521.html
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Xinjiang_conflict/Archive_1&oldid=1259548281"