Talk:East Turkestan independence movement

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the East Turkestan independence movement article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A news item involving East Turkestan independence movement was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 6 July 2009.

Wikipedia

China Mid‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Central Asia Low‑importance

	Asia portal East Turkestan independence movement is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang and Central Asian portions of Iran, Pakistan and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.Central AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Central AsiaCentral Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Limited recognition Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Wikipedia by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

Comment

Whoever corrected it last time did so in error. I don't really know what is best to write though. . . Both Xinjiang are controversial names, and neither one is more correct then the other. . .--Erkin2008 20:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs a move

E.T.I.M. stands for East Turkestan Islamic Movement. (according to Official United States State Department Doc) Therefore, a move is needed. TheAsianGURU (talk) 22:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Chinese Goverment Xinjiang has just confiscated all the Muslims' Passport, In case of Olympic Game which host in Beijing 2008. (Hui Chinese Involved as well) but this confiscation doesn't clearly shown on the laws or news. Just like the Confiscation of all the Arabic language related stuff with a hiden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mazokn (talk • contribs) 09:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks for the information. But what has it to do with this page is needed to be moved? TheAsianGURU (talk) 17:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference?

As you can see above, nobody seems be able to explain what the difference is between E.T.I.M. - East Turkestan Islamic Movement (A terrorist organization, recognized by many countries including the United States, China & the UN) and the ETIM - "East Turkestan independence movement", which is a..."Friendly Independence movement"?! Someone is using this name to cast a shadow and mask them from being a terrorist organization. That's why there is the "Expert & Rewrite Tag" in the article. TheAsianGURU (talk) 23:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

East Turkestan Islamic Movement is the name of an organization. The "East Turkestan independence movement" is an idea, just like the gay rights movement or most other movements. The distinction is pretty clear; I will modify the intro to make it clearer. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But the difference is the gays rights groups don't engage in terrorism, and don't want to take over the rights to govern, whereas the Uyghur movements do. 81.158.205.115 (talk) 02:49, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

:: For comparison: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8016455/Emmanuel-Macron-vows-win-battle-against-Muslims-creating-separate-communities-France.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.176.232 (talk) 15:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removing tags

I'm going to go ahead and remove most of the cleanup tags on the article, as they no longer have a reason to be there. The {{refimprove}} tag seems unnecessary, there are over 30 citations in the article and only three {{fact}} tags; I believe someone has added a lot since it was added. The {{neutrality}} tag was added without any corresponding talkpage section explaining why the editor believed t he article is non-neutral. As for {{cleanup}}, I see nothing that needs "general cleanup", and don't know what it's referring to—formatting and organization are all fine. Likewise, the {{weasel}} tag was rendered unnecessary at the same time the {{refimprove}} one was: all the claims are sourced to individual people or bodies. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:45, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2009 riots

Where is the stated that the July 2009 Ürümqi riots are connected to the independence movement? Why is it a subheading of this page then? Sashay, Shante! (talk) 03:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has already been taken up. The link to the July 2009 Ürümqi riots will be moved to the See also section (where the 2008 unrest link is) once the main page/ITN template is updated. Otebig (talk) 03:37, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While not officially connected to any organized "independence movement", I imagine the riots will probably have implications for the issue in general. Plus, while the actual cause for the demonstrations that led to the riots was the Shaoguan incident, I bet whatever was going through people's heads (on both sides) as the violence was going on often had something to do with the independence issue...riots have a way of forgetting what they actually started over and just getting swept up in the heat of the moment ;). Anyway, that all is just speculation now, of course, but it's just my reason for thinking there might be some eventual benefit in keeping the brief summary in this article. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:55, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More sources

I just found a wealth of useful academic sources here, at Meshrep.com (a Uyghur forum). They might be cherry-picked, but if they are used properly and put in perspective they could add a lot to the article. I've only looked at the first two so far, though.

Also found this recent article:

Szadziewski, Henryk. "The discovery of the Uyghurs". openDemocracy.net. Retrieved 11 July 2009.

Not 100% sure about the date; I first found it posted here, and it was either written on 9 July or at least posted then. In any case, it was clearly written after the riots. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:22, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

mergefrom

I placed a mergeto this article on East Turkistan Organization. Personally, I think that stub is sufficient to stand on its own. Some sources conflate the East Turkistan Organization, but I think this is either a transliteration error, or due to taking the assertions of Chinese security officials at face value. Chinese security officials have tried to conflate all Uyghur separtists with the most violent separtists. And I believe taking their allegations at face value is not consistent with WP:NPOV. I placed the mergeto and mergefrom because I don't want to be solely responsibile for this decision.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Soup

Oh dear contributors! Thanks for cooking a chinese soup! Do you sometimes read what comes out from what you write? No harmony in this article(!). Try to read from beginning to the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.104.30.234 (talk) 21:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt this article has problems. Please identify the issues you see clearly and specifically, to enable other editors to actually address them. If you can't do this, I may have to remove the tag you added (though I might add some of my own, particularly concerning the lack of citations...). The indiscriminate addition of tags without actionable suggestions for improvement is generally frowned upon. Thanks. Homunculus (duihua) 21:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indigeneity in Chinese claims

http://books.google.com/books?id=JqZyQCZmrRAC&pg=PA279#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rajmaan (talk) 00:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet and anti soviet versions of east turkestan separatism

There were two different separatist movements. One were the anti communist pan turkists like Muhammad Amin Bughra and Isa Yusuf Alptekin, who referred to their ethnic group as turkestani or turks, not as uyghurs, and the soviet backed communists who accepted the soviet imposed label of uyghur, which has won out as the term used to refer to the ethnic group today. They merged after the fall of the soviet union.

http://books.google.com/books?id=qz3vdkxBt4AC&pg=PA181&dq=Masud+sabri&hl=en&sa=X&ei=606sULS5F63U0gHm-YHoDQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Masud%20sabri&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=NKCU3BdeBbEC&pg=PA37#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rajmaan (talk) 04:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jadidism and education in Xinjiang during Yang Zengxin's rule

Yang Zengxin was pro conservative and anti reform. He supported mullahs and traditional Islam against reformers, modernists, and pan turkists, and Soviet influence in order to stop separatism in Xinjiang. He promoted traditional Islamic education against modern education.

http://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&pg=PA174#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA16#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA17#v=onepage&q&f=false yang's anti jadidism and anti communism

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA18#v=onepage&q&f=false yang's anti ottoman and anti bolshevism

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA66#v=onepage&q&f=false

Yang zengxin attacked soviet influence and pan turkist jadidism by encouraging conservative islamic teaching which banned history teaching and only allowed for reading, writing, and quran.

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA19#v=onepage&q&f=false

prince abd al karim

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA300#v=onepage&q&f=false

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajmaan (talk • contribs) 05:11, August 22, 2013

anti tunganism

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA307#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rajmaan (talk) 06:43, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet involvement

The soviet formation of uyghur nationalism and history

http://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&pg=PA208#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=NKCU3BdeBbEC&pg=PA38#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=NKCU3BdeBbEC&pg=PA39#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=NKCU3BdeBbEC&pg=PA40#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=NKCU3BdeBbEC&pg=PA41#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA188#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=dM9BAAAAYAAJ&q=inauthor:%22Rais+Abdulkhakovich+Tuzmukhamedov%22&dq=inauthor:%22Rais+Abdulkhakovich+Tuzmukhamedov%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=_VrFULiZE6uz0QHHvoH4Cg&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAQ

KGB aid to Uyghur separatists.

http://books.google.com/books?id=mXXnd81uoMoC&pg=PA240#v=onepage&q&f=false

KGB Agent Victor Louis (journalist) wrote a book about his support for Uyghur, Mongol and Tibetan separatists, he encouraged the Soviet Union to try to wage war against China to allegedly "free" those nationalities from China's rule

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZavAkGUNdSkC&pg=PA175#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=cEdQ1IuJFH4C&pg=PA172#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rajmaan (talk) 01:38, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

anti kemalism and pro young turks

many ottoman turks involved in helping east turkestan separatists were young turks and anti kemalist

ESENBEL, SELÇUK. "Japan's Global Claim to Asia and the World of Islam: Transnational Nationalism and World Power, 1900–1945". The American Historical Review. Retrieved 28 June 2010.
Andrew D. W. Forbes (1986). Warlords and Muslims in Chinese Central Asia: a political history of Republican Sinkiang 1911-1949. Cambridge, England: CUP Archive. p. 247. ISBN 0-521-25514-7. Retrieved 28 June 2010.

THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF EASTERN TURKESTAN AND THE FORMATION OF MODERN UYGHUR IDENTITY IN XINJIANG THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF EASTERN TURKESTAN AND THE FORMATION OF MODERN UYGHUR IDENTITY IN XINJIANG

Japanese plot to Enthrone Ottoman prince during the Kumul Rebellion

http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/ahr/109.4/esenbel.html http://www.triposo.com/section/Prince_Komatsu_Akihito http://www.academia.edu/Papers/in/Ottoman_Prince_Abdulkerim_and_Japan http://www.turkey.jp/english/turkey-japanrelations.htm

http://www.scribd.com/doc/protected/89074623/53

es.scribd.com/doc/89074623/53/Ottoman-Relations-with-Japan

http://books.google.com/books?id=rKlBpo1wUpwC&pg=PA202&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=ottoman%20prince%20japan&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=sz3jOgF1AGUC&pg=PA225&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=ottoman%20prince%20japan&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=T2NtAAAAMAAJ&q=ottoman+prince+japan&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAg

http://books.google.com/books?id=3CrHCVJVEuUC&pg=PA79&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=ottoman%20prince%20japan&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=vDzjkrTDKjYC&pg=PA407&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CE8Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=ottoman%20prince%20japan&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZRpXAAAAYAAJ&q=ottoman+prince+japan&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CFMQ6AEwBg

http://books.google.com/books?id=ltmXn9rUGD8C&pg=PA108&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CFcQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=ottoman%20prince%20japan&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=-6OH48kBdREC&pg=PA379&dq=ottoman+prince+japan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=M1X7T66qOOzp0QHnxIj9Bg&ved=0CGEQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=ottoman%20prince%20japan&f=false

Rajmaan (talk) 05:05, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Xenophobia by East Turkestan separatists

Anti hindu attacks by turkic people

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA76#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA78#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA84#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=M2vu7Odjz6kC&pg=PA96#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=M2vu7Odjz6kC&pg=PA98#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=M2vu7Odjz6kC&pg=PA176#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=M2vu7Odjz6kC&pg=PA90#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=M2vu7Odjz6kC&pg=PA268#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA84#v=onepage&q&f=false

Attack on swedish missionaries by Abdullah Bughra

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA87#v=onepage&q&f=false

black mountain and white mountain factions

the black mountain were pro chinese turkic muslims, the white mountain were anti chinese turkic muslims. They were ruled by khojas in the tarim basin.

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAs9AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA33&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwADgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=1bArr1-E5mQC&pg=PA324&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1FnFULeQO8a00AGG8YDoDw&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=xXLg4cTZcDkC&pg=PA369&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1FnFULeQO8a00AGG8YDoDw&ved=0CEcQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=xYhOAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA109&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1FnFULeQO8a00AGG8YDoDw&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=AzG5llo3YCMC&pg=PA184&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1FnFULeQO8a00AGG8YDoDw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=sEbAyJ7aj38C&pg=PA78&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CDIQ6AEwATgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=cF4lMj8skvoC&pg=PA237&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=bEzNwgtiVQ0C&pg=PA55&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=iWAGUYLgAU8C&pg=PA6&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=iyrrFNIdcbcC&pg=PA192&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=BwuSpFiOFfYC&pg=PA112&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=KTmO416hNQ8C&pg=PA21&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=q1rFULyvHuy20AGb0YCoCQ&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=mzxSNM3_vCEC&pg=PA214&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwATgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=MT2D_0_eBPQC&pg=PA139&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=XULERYYEJo0C&pg=PA71&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAzgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=WdEUAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA232&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBDgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=-AznJs58wtkC&pg=PA232&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBTgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&pg=PA88&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBjgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=riPEes0xs-YC&pg=PA192&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBzgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=4EqRBIz9GtgC&pg=PA67&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CEcQ6AEwCDgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=IAc7CVKSJpcC&pg=PA82&dq=Black+mountain+white+mountain+chinese&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TVzFUI6wF6H20gH-toHgCg&ved=0CEoQ6AEwCTgU#v=onepage&q=Black%20mountain%20white%20mountain%20chinese&f=false

http://books.google.com/books?id=4EqRBIz9GtgC&pg=PA78#v=onepage&q&f=false

21:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajmaan (talk • contribs) 05:11, August 22, 2013

Yaqub Beg as a conqueror

Yaqub Beg was a kokandi conqueror, but modern uyghur nationalism has drawn up a myth around the 1860s revolt in Xinjiang, presenting it as an "independence movement"

http://books.google.com/books?id=8FVsWq31MtMC&pg=PA117#v=onepage&q&f=false

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajmaan (talk • contribs) 05:11, August 22, 2013

Merger Proposal

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested merge. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the merge request was: no merge.GreyShark (dibra) 08:52, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the article Xinjiang conflict be merged into this article. Judging by the lede of that article the topic of Xinjiang conflict is the same as this one. The important difference being that the East Turkestan Independence Movement article adds some context to help the reader understand what the conflict is actually about. Xinjiang conflict does not cover anything outside the established scope on this article. It is likely that the article was created by mistake, the editors being unaware of the existence of this article. Despite the names being quite different the two articles actually cover the same topic. Read the article and you'll see it doesn't really cover anything this article doesn't already. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 12:18, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The East Turkestan independence movement is just one organisation among several that are involved in violence within Xinjiang. There is even some doubt as to whither the East Turkestan independence movement even exists or is simply a catch all title applied by thrid parties to describe disparate groups of people with similar motives but no real connection. See NYT page 2

The unrest in Xinjiang is not simply a matter of independence. It is far more complicated than that. The current Xinjiang conflict article fails to adequately describe the complexity of the situation. It paints the conflict in one sided terms. Merging it into this article would create even more bias as there would be nowhere to describe the full picture of what is happening there. e.g. thehindu.com, one of the sourece on the current article, says:

"Ms. Hou, however, said there had been no protest earlier this week.
She rejected reports that the attack was an ethnic conflict. “Both Han and Uighur people were hurt,” she said. An Uighur security guard and an Uighur police officer were among those killed by the attackers.
“This was not a clash between ethnic groups, and has done enormous damage to the local community.”
Many Uighur groups have, in the past, accused the government of portraying local protests and ethnic unrest as being driven by separatist groups in order to justify security clampdowns."

-- Rincewind42 (talk) 11:29, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, this article is explicitly not about one organization, but about the movement as a whole and some of the historical context in which the movement exists. Your point that unrest in the area is about more than separatism is well-taken. From what you say, the correct course of action would be to expand the Xinjiang conflict article to more clearly define its scope as being beyond that of this article. is that correct? - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 12:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I may have seen your capitalisation East Turkestan Independence Movement as a proper noun and confused it with the East Turkestan Islamic Movement which has the same acronym ETIM, however my point is still valid. Yes, the correct action is to expand the Xinjiang conflict article. Rincewind42 (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. "Xinjiang conflict" is about the low-level insurgency in Xinjiang (actually if this happened in Russia or India we would call them terrorist incidents, but whatever), where scholars observe a great deal of ethnic, religious, and political faultlines among the motley terrorists, separatists, and extremists fighting the government. The idea that all violence can be attributed to ethnic nationalists is united front propaganda from Rebiya Kadeer's cronies (as an extention of her project to project a facade of a Uigur diasporic unity which doesn't actually exist).

Although there are various interesting minor topics within the Xinjiang conflict, such as the self-defense militias against Uigur supremacist and Islamist terror from Han, Hui, and Kazaks, there is one major counterweight to the supposedly secular ethnic nationalist movement. That is the Islamic International Front (IIF), whose Xinjiangnese subsidiary has been harassing Chinese authorities along the border (and have taken responsibility for many of the widely-reported attacks of the last 20 years), and aim not for independence, but an Islamic caliphate union with Afghanistan and Central Asia.

In other words, both ETiM (small I, ethnic nationalists, not the organization) and ETIM (pan-Islamists) are merely actors within the Xinjiang conflict. Plus, I think "independence" gives the wrong idea about the indigeniety of the struggle. Before 1991, the Russian Empire and Soviet Union played a large role by radicalizing and arming Turkic troublemakers in Kazakstan and sending them across the border. This role has been taken over by Taliban and Al Qaeda affiliates in Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan etc. (and the US govt's Radio Free Asia), so it remains a largely extranationally-driven anti-China struggle, but without a single goal as far as a political solution is concerned. Shrigley (talk) 01:23, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are right to comment that the Xinjiang Conflict article is oddly named. You may wish to comment at Talk:Xinjiang conflict#Title of article Rincewind42 (talk) 15:41, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose-one group of at least five.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested merge. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Soviet Union support for East Turkestan Independence vs China

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

06:04, 30 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajmaan (talk • contribs) 14:04, January 30, 2014

Most badly written article on Wikipedia

I am currently researching armed struggle organisations so I was interested in learning about the situation in China. What I was looking for was something along the lines of "this is the name of the group/political party/movement, this is what they want, the leader/leadership is/are, they are reported to have committed such and such actions." Instead what I got was endless waffle, irrelevant historical detail, and endless, endless, endless repetition. (Not to mention instances of bad grammar in some places--English is NOT an opinion!--and political bias in others.)

I got bored, fed up, almost fell asleep and eventually was forced to give up completely after reading at most 20% of the article because my head was swimming. I would read half a dozen or more paragraphs, look at the title of the article in the address bar to make sure I wasn't reading something else by mistake, go back to the article and wonder a) what the hell what I was reading had to do with the purported subject matter of the article and b) why what I had just read in one paragraph was repeated over and over again in at least the subsequent six or seven paragraphs virtually word for word. Mind-numbing doesn't even begin to describe what I felt about it. To call the narrative meandering and disjointed would be too kind because quite simply it's disfunctional and therefore confusionary.

I have no hesitation in stating that this article could be edited down by 80% and still contain exactly the same amount of information (unless it is the intention of the authors to browbeat the reader into submission, or brainwash him/her, by the simple expedient of endless reiteration.) At least half of the remainder could be deleted as being completely irrelevant to the subject at hand. The East Turkestan independence movement is a specific topic with its own specific origins, causes, evolution. That's what the title's about and that's what I want to be informed about NOT about the history of the region going back to the Mongols and the Quing dynasty and this lot did this and that lot did that and yadda yadda yadda and a truckload of non-sequitors that have zero to do with the Turkic peoples of Xinjiang and any independence struggle they may or may not have undertaken.

My advice: Stick to the subject and GET TO THE POINT! As it stands this article is at least four articles on different topics masquerading as one. It should be headed "abandon hope all ye who enter here" because attempting to read it in its current form is simply a huge waste of time and people deserve to be warned in advance!--LondonItalian (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Is it a joke? Repeated maps of "Han dynasty in 1 AD."? Hadith quotes with numerous refs, translated twice into Turkish for better effect? Insane. Zezen (talk) 11:45, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just put tags on the article/certain sections, condensed some sections, and removed some redundant info. RuneMan3 (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've collapsed some of the references, just a first pass to clean up some stuff, without even touching the actual presentation of the content. (Numerous twitter links to suspended accounts, repeated full book citations for each page in a twenty-page range, etc.) This definitely needs some serious work. grendel|khan 22:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good god this page is horribleSassmouth (talk) 00:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 100%. This article may need to be rewritten to match Wikipedia's standards. I'll tag it as such. Kamalthebest (talk) 04:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More sources from Islamist groups

The article includes perspectives of the Uyghur Islamist groups themselves but not from foreign Islamists who support the movement. There are much more sources available like from Hizb ut Tahrir and others.

^[1]

http://www.doamuslims.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/TheIncompleteHistory-AndalusAfter1492.pdf

Chapter 6: Connecting The Past To The Present:How Does Andalus Apply To Us Today?

https://historyofandalus.wordpress.com/chapter-6-connecting-the-past-to-the-presenthow-does-andalus-apply-to-us-today/

http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/TheIncompleteHistory-AndalusAfter1492.pdf

http://islamstory.com/en/taxonomy/term/5000

http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?253754-You-must-read-this-book-An-Incomplete-History-Muslims-in-Andalus

https://justpaste. it/hsrc

https://books.google.com/books?id=E5RpCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA210&lpg=PA210&dq=Ibn+Abi+Hashim+Al+Muhajir&source=bl&ots=M35mdDZzPR&sig=88omC6kSUH8qhZAEMeXM_VizQtQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiq-Py53YHPAhWGmR4KHU5VDWk4ChDoAQgwMAY#v=onepage&q=Ibn%20Abi%20Hashim%20Al%20Muhajir&f=false

https://www.scribd.com/document/11096445/Muslims-in-Central-Asia-and-The-Coming-Battle-of-Islam

http://www.khilafah.com/only-the-second-qutaibah-will-end-chinas-oppression-against-uyghurs/

http://www.khilafah.com/chinas-crusade-against-the-muslims-of-xinjiang/

http://www.khilafah.com/only-the-khilafah-can-protect-the-uyghurs/

http://www.khilafah.com/uyghur-muslim-women-continue-to-face-oppression-from-all-directions/

http://www.khilafah.com/china-bans-xinjiang-officials-from-observing-ramadan-fast/

http://www.khilafah.com/china-extends-its-brutal-repression-against-uyghur-muslim-women-who-wear-the-islamic-dress/

http://www.khilafah.com/without-the-khilafah-chinas-brutal-regime-is-free-to-abort-the-babies-of-the-noble-uyghur-women/

http://www.khilafah.com/persecuted-uighur-muslims-have-no-safe-sanctuary-except-under-the-shade-of-khilafah/

http://www.khilafah.com/the-capitalist-nationalism-of-turkey-humiliated-uighur-refugees-for-18-days/

http://www.khilafah.com/pakistan-headlines-16-aug-2016/

http://www.khilafah.com/raheel-nawaz-regime-is-endorsing-chinas-role-in-afghanistan-at-americas-behest/

http://www.khilafah.com/is-chinas-starting-a-central-asian-nato/

http://www.khilafah.com/social-engineering-through-marriage-chinas-latest-policy-to-assimilate-uighur-muslims-away-from-islam/

http://www.khilafah.com/xinjiang-violence-on-muslims-the-attack-on-islam-is-in-the-east-and-west/

http://www.khilafah.com/chinese-campaign-against-muslims-in-xinjiang-continues/

http://www.khilafah.com/chinas-conducts-aggressive-campaign-against-muslim-womens-islamic-dress-due-to-its-fear-of-an-islamic-awakening-in-east-turkestan/

http://www.khilafah.com/east-turkestan-has-no-qmuatasimq/

http://www.khilafah.com/views-on-the-news-16-aug-2014/

http://www.khilafah.com/china-may-send-troops-to-join-the-global-conflict-against-islamic-political-revival/

http://www.khilafah.com/totalitarian-chinese-regime-continues-its-war-on-islam-by-shooting-demonstrators-protesting-against-detention-of-women-and-girls-for-wearing-islamic-dress/

http://www.khilafah.com/views-on-the-news-04-july-2014/

http://www.khilafah.com/views-on-the-news-17-july-2009/

http://www.khilafah.com/repercussions-of-destroying-the-khilafah/

http://www.khilafah.com/photos-hizb-ut-tahrir-pakistan-protests-against-chinas-oppression-of-east-turkestan/

http://www.khilafah.com/a-dialogue-between-the-chinese-embassy-and-the-delegation-of-hizb-ut-tahrir-indonesia-chinese-embassy-runs-out-of-arguments/

http://www.khilafah.com/views-on-the-news-13-july-2015/

http://www.khilafah.com/views-on-the-news-6-july-2015/

http://www.khilafah.com/raheel-sharifs-kashmir-policy/

http://www.khilafah.com/images/stories/nussrah-mag/Nussrah_Mag_Issue_30_EN.pdf

http://www.khilafah.com/views-on-the-news-04-jan-2015/

http://www.khilafah.com/images//images/PDF/US_Grand_Designs_on_PK-Report.pdf

http://www.khilafah.com/the-dna-of-politics/

07:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

References

^ The Incomplete History-Andalus After 1492. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |url2= ignored (help)

Massive POV issues and just general issues too

Hello, everyone. As I'm writing this, this article has already been tagged as "too long" and "bad summary," but I feel as though the issues with this article go way beyond that. This article has massive issues with WP:NPOV and providing two sides of the movement.

First, there are entire sections in the article that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, but only exist to portray Uyghur people in a bad light. This edit here is great example of this. Why would do you need to include a section on "Uyghur sayings about women"? Other than to portray them as inherently sexist? Looking through the linked sources shows blatant WP:OR by the user. The user literally searched "mazlum oppressed woman" and copy+pasted the first books/articles that contained that information.

There other are issues, for example, in the history section which featured this line until a couple of days ago: "The claims of these 'Uyghur nationalist historians', which the majority of Uyghurs believe in, are not backed up by actual evidence. The belief that they were native to the Tarim Basin is held by all Uyghurs." This is such a blatant example of POV-pushing to make Uyghur people sound misguided.

I've noticed a lot of similar POV-pushing on other articles of this topic, so I understand that this is a controversial issue where there are a lot of opinionated additions, and I am not knowledgeable enough about the topic to fix them myself or even determine if they are true. That is why I am inquiring that someone with more knowledge about the topic look into it to improve this article. There was already another discussion higher up on this talk page discussing how awful this article was written if you'd like more information on how to repair this. Thank you. Kamalthebest (talk) 05:14, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely. I'm a relatively new editor, and really lack knowledge on the subject, so I don't want to just delete large sections of the article, but I think that needs to be done. The blatant POV-pushing borders on racism with it's endless attempts to smear the movement and the Uyghur people in general. I don't even know where to start, there are so many problems with this article. Hexen hour (talk) 18:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems to reflect the trolling / tampering with honest work by unscrupulous state actors, which has seemed so pervasive in any articles about the politics, culture, history (or anything else) of China, Russia, and various other authoritarian nations or international pariah states. This reflects a massive failing of Wikipedia -- in theory and in practice -- that fundamentally undermines its validity, reliability, and credibility. Wikipedia is nearly defenseless against corrupt, state-sponsored Wiki-trashing -- and has shown little or no ability, or willingness, to do anything about it. All that's necessary for evil to win, is for good men to do nothing. It's time for Wikipedia to develop a more discriminating, and realistic, fact-focused way of controlling the editing of articles about these unscrupulous nations, and their governments, and the issues they wish to distort or suppress.

~ Penlite (talk) 11:06, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image dump

In the Pre-modern times subsection of Historical background (the very first section), do we really need 17 maps that pretty much show the same thing? It may have been done to show that there is a consensus of some kind (didn't really check what about, probably historical homeland), but showing only one map should serve this purpose well enough. If it's not disputed - as the current gallery implies - then there shouldn't be any problem with using just one image to illustrate it. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 08:27, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs an expert

I have gone and removed a chunk load of stuff which simply does not seem relevant to the independence movement, broadly speaking. But we need someone who knows what they are talking about to do the rest. I can't help but laugh at some sections in this article. What a disastrous creation. ^My^name ^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 07:29, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at it, the French Wikipedia article is a good start. It is substantially smaller, but considering this might be a 'throw it in the trash and start again' job, it's something to look up to. ^My^name ^isnot^dave (talk/contribs) 11:30, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on East Turkestan independence movement. 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) 07:40, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on East Turkestan independence movement. 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) 08:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 30 external links on East Turkestan independence movement. 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) 03:33, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Xinjiang reeducation camps

can someone add the Xinjiang reeducation camps as an argument in the "Arguments for East Turkestan independence" section ? at it's current state the arguments against section is much bigger, the sources could be taken straight from here : Xinjiang reeducation camps#References — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.178.57.21 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done We need a reliable source for it. The size of each of these sections is irrelevant, and they are about the same size anyway. --MarioGom (talk) 18:07, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, I reckon the reeducation camps and the general sinicization/anti-terrorism campaign in the region is an important addition to the rationale for independence. It's not like these camps are undocumented, the wiki linked is full of references. I think it's important when contributing to controversial wikis to understand the essence of reliable source. We're not gonna exactly find published admissions of why they're there and what they're for from China, but you have sources from many reputable sources, some being Foreign Ministries from multiple countries. I agree that the size of each section is irrelevant, but ignoring the camps wouldn't give a fair description of the situation. Will add soon if no further discussion occurs. Otojac115 (talk) 08:52, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTFORUM

@otojac, would you think that due to the the reeducation and anti-terrorism campaigns in America against its Black citizens, they should be a rationale for an independent Black nation, such as an Afrostan, to form from the USA? Also White Australians have been reeducating and mistreating the Aborigines of Australia, so according to your thinking, the Aborigines of Australia should form their own independent country. Or better still, the White Australians should pack up and return to Europe, and returning Australia to the Aborigines. 2A00:23C5:C102:9E00:750A:2EFF:ABF3:2E50 (talk) 03:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fake claim

How can the present Uighurs claim a homeland in Xinjiang when their biological ancestors were not the aboriginal population and migrated to the area? The present Uighurs speak a Turkic language, which is a language of a Mongoloid people. Even the Turks of present day Turkey speak a Turkic language, and not the language of their biological ancestors, the Hittites, who spoke an Indo-European language. The reason was these people were conquered and enslaved by the Mongoloid people, and adopted the language of their masters. This is rather like African-Americans, who now only speak English, the language of their ex-masters, and not any African language. The African-Americans cannot claim to be Anglo-Saxons or Europeans for the reason they only speak the English language, which is a European language, and not an African language. When the Jews of Europe claimed a homeland, it was in the land of their biological ancestors, that is in the Middle-East, and not in the land of their residence such as Germany or Poland. Likewise, if the Uighurs desire to claim a country of their own, they should look to areas that are further to the West of Xinjiang, for example in the Caucasis or in parts of modern Turkey, where their ancestors came from. Indeed a country such as Turkey should volunteer to cede land to their Uighurs brothers so that they can return to their homeland. For the Uighurs to claim Xinjiang as east turkestan is as ridiculous as for African-Americans to claim parts of the USA to be independent Afrostan. 109.150.151.205 (talk) 02:36, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not a propaganda piece supporting Uyghur independence. Rather, it is an article explaining what Uyghur independence is, the history surrounding the movement, the reasoning behind the movement, and modern-day perceptions of the movement. I can't say whether the desire for Uyghur independence is justified or not, but I can still report on the facts as I see them. Some people desire Uyghur independence, and it is a significant issue in China and in Xinjiang, China today. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 14:59, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then the article should explain the reasoning behind the movement is based on a fake claim. The present day Uyghurs are not genetically related to the ancient people also called Uyghurs. The original ancient Uyghurs were a Mongoloid people. The present people were given the name Uyghur by the Russians. Turkic is a term coined by linguists that refers to a language family, and is not an ethnic group. The Turkic language was originally a language of the Mongoloid people. This language had then subsequently been adopted by the people of the Near East, including by people of modern day Turkey, rather like African people in America adopting English as their language. The ancestors of the present day Uyghurs were from the Near East. If the Uyghurs wish to establish an independent state, then by all means do so, but they should establish their independent state in the Near East and not in China. This would exactly match the Jews' re-establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle-East, which is the land of their ancestors. The Jews did not and could not establish a homeland in Europe such as in Germany or Poland, where they lived, as these countries were not the countries of their true origin, and these countries would not allow them to do so. In the same way the Uyghurs cannot establish an independent state in China, as it is not where their ancestors were from; but if they wish to do so, they should return to the Near East and establish their independent state there. 81.158.205.115 (talk) 02:10, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not against the Uighurs claiming independence. It is just that they are claiming independence over the wrong piece of land. If they want independence, they should return to the homeland of their biological ancestry, that is to the west of today's Xinjiang, and also in present day Turkey, and claim their independence there. When the Jews of Europe claimed their homeland, they went back to the land of their biological ancestors, that is to the Middle East, and not in Germany or Poland, where they have resided for thousands of years. Likewise the Uighurs should do the same if they want to be successful. 109.150.151.205 (talk) 03:31, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Jewish reclamation of Israel has caused an ongoing international conflict, the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which is still active today. Matters such as these are not that simple. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 06:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But it is still the land of their biological ancestor, and they have successfully claimed it regardless of what their fellow Middle-eastern "cousins'" views are. In the same fashion, the Uighurs should claim their rightful land from their Turkish cousins and not from the Chinese. It might of course lead to a Turk fighting a Turk, but that will be their choice. Just imagine if the people of Chinese descent in Malaysia or any other country start to make a claim for an independent Chinastan in those countries, it would cause an uproar against those Chinese peoples; no doubt they will be told that if they wanted a Chinastan, then go to China. So if the Uighurs want a Turkestan, then go to Turkey and ask the Turks for it. Just imagine African-Americans claiming an independent Afrostan in the USA, let's just say, the US government will not allow it. 109.150.151.205 (talk) 03:14, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

”Just imagine if the people of Chinese descent in Malaysia or any other country start to make a claim for an independent Chinastan in those countries” that "independent Chinastan” is called Singapore and it became independent in 1965. Did you genuinely think that was a good argument? Horse Eye Jack (talk) 05:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong, Singapore was kicked out of Malaya. The city state consists of Chinese, Malays and Tamils. It is not Chinastan. You are confusing Malaya with Malaysia.109.150.151.205 (talk) 16:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For a guy who theoretically is opposed to fake claims you make an awfully large number of them. Its not my job to teach you history, try perusing Singapore in Malaysia, Independence of Singapore Agreement 1965, Race in Singapore, and Demographics of Singapore. Democratic self-determination is a human right recognized by the UN, you cant just pick and choose which groups get self determination and which don't. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And where does it say Singapore is Chinastan? it might be in your history, which is made up. And don't be so sexist, I am not a guy. If the Uighurs want a Turkestan, then by all means return to the place where their biological ancestors came from, that is in an area around the country now known as Turkey. 109.150.151.205 (talk) 02:02, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you genuinely think the Turkic peoples come from Turkey? Thats just ignorant... See Turkic peoples and Turkic migration, the lead for the second of which reads "Turkic migration refers to the expansion of the Turkic tribes and Turkic languages into Central Asia, Eastern Europe and West Asia, mainly between the 6th and 11th centuries. The region of origin of the Turkic peoples is suggested to be somewhere in Siberia (North Asia), Mongolia or northwestern Manchuria." Horse Eye Jack (talk) 03:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't think the Turkic people come from Turkey. The Turkic people were and are East Asians, and Mongoloids. Modern Turks and Uyghurs are Anatolian peoples, who adopted the Turkic language. This is the same as African-Americans adopting the English language as their native language. Just because modern Turks (of the country now called Turkey) speak a Turkic language now does not in itself make them a "Turkic" people; they are still an Anatolian people. In the same way, just because African-Americans now speak English as their native language does not make them Anglo-Saxons. 109.155.164.36 (talk) 03:31, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is Uyghur and Turkestani the same thing?

As Uyghur refers to a people, and Turkestan refers to a hypothetical geographic place, is Uyghur and Turkestani the same thing? The ancestors of the present day Uyghurs were from the geographic place known in English as the Near East. Surely then, if the Uyghurs want to have an independent state, they should set it up in the Near East of their ancestors. This would be similar to the establishment of Liberia in Africa for African-Americans who wanted to return to Africa. Uyghurs who moved to Turkey feel very much at home there, so it is right that a Uyghurstan be established in the Near East so that all Uyghur people can move there to live in their home country. 81.158.205.115 (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you honestly believe that Chinese people (excluding Uyghurs) feel at home in the Tarim Basin and the Taklamakan Desert? The geography of these regions is very different from the geography of the rest of what is currently the People's Republic of China. I don't think Chinese people (Hua or Han people) have ever had a history of inhabiting this region, though I could be wrong. I don't necessarily believe that Uyghurs should have their own independent country, but I think it's safe to say that they are indigenous (or, at least, "native for a long time") inhabitants of this particular region, since no one else in their right mind would want to live there. I believe that the best solution is for Uyghurs to have autonomy within China. At the moment, they're supposed to have autonomy according to China's own laws, but the Chinese government has been eroding their autonomy in recent times. For example, the Uyghur language has been banned in schools and the practice of Islam has been declared a "disease". Now Uyghurs are being locked up by the hundreds of thousands in concentration camps for supposedly having ties to the independence movement (though, in many cases, such allegations have been unsubstantiated). So, I don't think that Xinjiang is really an "Uyghur Autonomous Region" anymore, if it ever was, to begin with. And, I believe that this erosion of the Uyghur people's autonomy within China will only lead to more pro-independence sentiment within the region. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 07:34, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Chinese people in Xinjiang feel at home in the Tarim Basin. I am unaware that any people feel at home in the desert part of the Taklamakan Desert. After all Taklamakan means "you enter and not come back". People can survive only in the oasis. Yes, you are wrong, Chinese people, that is Mongoloid Chinese people have lived in the Xinjiang region for over 2,000 years. The rest of your mangled accusations are untrue. 109.155.164.36 (talk) 03:38, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What's your typical "Chinese people" here? Are Chinese people those living in China or actually those of Han ethnicity? It's a bold and extremely thuggish statement. The problem of this "Chinese people" is, despite its claim as a people from China, in reality the only people who represent "Chinese" are of Han ethnicity. Those who learn history realize Han Chinese cannot distinguish the difference. ZaDoraemonzu (talk) 06:04, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I am concerned anyone who is a citizen of China is a Chinese person and that include the current uighur people born and living in China. However, there are some stirrers out there who say the uighurs in China are not Chinese. There are many people in western countries who stir up hatred by claiming uighurs in China are not Chinese, Tibetans in China are not Chinese and so on. I do not say that. The logical conclusion is if any uighurs who say they are not Chinese do not belong to China. Indeed even people of Han descent outside of China and without Chinese citizenship are not regarded as "Chinese" by the present Chinese government. In the same way, Uighurs and Tibetans who have taken up citizenships of other countries are no longer Chinese; they can of course describe themselves as uighurs or tibetans. In much the same way, White Anglo-Saxon citizens of The USA or Australia or South-Africa can no longer call themselves British. These people are now Americans, Australians and Africans. Just imagine a Chinese politician going into Wales and tell the people there that they are not English. The Welsh in Wales already know they are not English, but they are still British, whether they want to be or not. In the same fashion, the Welsh speakers of Patagonia in Argentina are no longer British, but Argentinian. They can of course still call themselves Welsh, but not British. I am very clear what Chinese or British or American or Australian or African or English or Welsh or Scottish or uighur or tibetan mean, what about you @ZaDor, do you know what they mean? If uighurs want a place to form a country called turkistan, then they should go back to the land of their ancestors in Anatolia and form it there. In the same way there are many Jews (ancestry in the Middle-East) and Romany (Gypsy peoples originally from India) in Europe, but they will never be allowed to form a Hebrewstan or Gypsystan in Europe. Nor will African-Americans be allowed to form an Afrostan in America. 2A00:23C5:C102:9E00:4453:CED6:348A:D44A (talk) 14:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Turkiye-uyghur.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality of article

Why was this flagged as not neutral? Blindlynx (talk) 11:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. Unless some exposition of the issues is presented, we should get rid of the tag. Acalycine (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not neutral as it read almost like an advert for a an independence movement. It assume that there is a place called East Turkestan. It is like someone claiming that within American, there is a country called Afrostan. A factual and real history of the people now called the Uyghurs is not given. Nor is it correctly stated where the genetic and cultural ancestors of these people were actually from. In fact, the present Uyghurs simply took over the identity of the original Mongoloid Uyghurs. The real original Uyghurs, and present pretender Uyghurs are not related genetically or culturally. The claim by the people of this movement will be like African- Americans claiming that they are Anglo-Saxons because English is their language. The current Chinese government, and Chinese people in general have graciously allowed these people to stay in and call Xinjiang their home province. If the Chinese people treated the present Uyghurs like Europeans treated the Jews, these Uyghurs would have been asked to return to their homeland in Anatolia and the Near-East. 2A00:23C5:C102:9E00:750A:2EFF:ABF3:2E50 (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. "East Turkestan" should be used when referring to the movement, their proposed name and their independence proposal, while "Xinjiang" should be used to refer to the actual region in its current form. MarioGom (talk) 10:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I originally wrote the intro as The East Turkestan independence movement is a movement seeking independence for the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China, to be named "East Turkestan". [i.e. the independence activists want the new country to be named East Turkestan]. Someone changed the article this year to refer to Xinjiang as "East Turkestan" everywhere outside of that sentence. 'Twasn't me. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 14:54, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If I may necropost, that wasn't why the POV tag was added. It was because of smearing by wumaos; see previous sections. Firestar464 (talk) 05:37, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ETIM stands for ... ?

So it seems that East Turkestan Islamic Movement and East Turkestan Independence Movement are different things? But both ETIM. That distinction needs to be made clearer. Cossaxx (talk) 07:24, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Flag of Xinjiang Uyghur.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:24, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Flag of the Baloch People.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:08, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tarim Basin Mummies are from local tribes as identified by DNA studies

The Tarim Basin Mummies have now been identified by DNA analyses to be from local tribes and are not related to the present people mistakenly called uighurs. The present day uighurs were mistakenly labelled as uighurs by russians, and the title has stuck, but they are in no way related to the original people called Uighurs. This is comparable to europeans calling Native Americans as indians, when of course Native Americans are in no way related to Indians from the Indian sub-continent. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04052-7 2A00:23C5:C13C:9F01:A0D8:F967:2BD7:D401 (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] The Incomplete History-Andalus After 1492. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |url2= ignored (help)

[1]