Talk:Gülen movement
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gülen movement article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Cheating at the Public Service Entry Examinations - In the source article no solid proof is mentioned. edit
"Algemeen ambtsbericht Turkije oktober 2019 - Ambtsbericht - Rijksoverheid.nl". www.rijksoverheid.nl (in Dutch) (Ministerie van Algemene Zaken). 31 October 2019.
The article above is as the source of the section "Cheating at the Public Service Entry Examinations, 2010" in the references written. However in the English version of the source article there is not any solid proof that can be considered as reliable source for the cheating allegations. The following statement is written in the article:
According to the confidential source, it is widely known that Gülenists had copied exam papers beforehand in order to help other Gülenists into key positions within the Turkish government. (P. 30)
Information from this confidential source can not be an evidence that supports the cheating allegations, since it has neither solid evidence nor any reference that can be counted as reliable source. Moreover the confidential source says that this information is a "widely known" fact but does not mention the scope of the popularity of this information. Widely known by who? By authorities? By people who watch television channels that are in political engagement with that government? Regarding these thoughts a revision and correction of this section strongly suggested.
The Lead-In part is too bloated edit
Someone needs to shrink those long ass texts and put them in the body of this page instead of shoving everything in the leading paragraphs
"MC EU TV" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect MC EU TV and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 5 § MC EU TV until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 03:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Article Clean-up edit
If the information is not verifiable or related to the topic, you must not include it under any circumstances. Thank you.
Komorijuno (talk) 15:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- I have made a few revision to Gülen, self-promoting, advertising, and marketing is does not belong on Wikipedia articles. Do not revise them. I would like to thank you in advance. Komorijuno (talk) 16:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Please do not delete ontopic stuff like their structure.Shadow4dark (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
- There is no need to mention FETO 121 times in an article. FETO is not even accurate, the Gulen movement prefers to be called Hizmet. Komorijuno (talk) 01:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- I agree you 213.74.87.11 (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
- There is no need to mention FETO 121 times in an article. FETO is not even accurate, the Gulen movement prefers to be called Hizmet. Komorijuno (talk) 01:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Please do not delete ontopic stuff like their structure.Shadow4dark (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)