Talk:2011 Hotan attack

pakistan

There is a big difference from being based in pakistan, and being supported by the Pakistani government. The Pakistani government supports some groups launching terror attacks in other countries, like LET against India, while it is fighting against other groups, like the TTP. The way Pakistan is mentioned in the article gives the tone as if the Pakistani government supported the militant groups behind the attacks, even though refs like The Hindu only said the groups were based in Pakistan.DÜNGÁNÈ (talk) 01:56, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I would think that some explicit qualifier is needed to say that the groups were state-sponsored, since terrorism usually connotes non-state actors, but I acknowledge that there might be some special association for Pakistan that doesn't exist for other countries. If you have a better way of wording the sentences in question, please do it. But to me, "Pakistan-based groups" does not imply that they are supported by the Pakistani government any more than "Germany-based group" implies that the WUC is supported by the German government (well, the WUC probably is, but that's beside the point). Quigley (talk) 07:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I checked google and only Indian media is reporting Pakistani links. the original global times news from China only reported an analyst saying that since Hotan was close to the Pakistani border it might be vulnerable to overseas violence.DÜNGÁNÈ (talk) 01:58, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I'll consider the Sri Lanka guardian newspaper to be relatively neutral compared to Indian media like The Hindu, it mentions one paragraph on Pakistan, mentioning the ETIM presence in Pakistan and local support, without jumping to claims of Pakistani government support.DÜNGÁNÈ (talk) 02:05, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

this also looks like another local brawl like the Urumqi riots, where improvised weapons like knives were used. If this was really Pakistani backed, the attackers would have had AK-47's like the Mumbai attackers. I really doubt the Indian news claims of Pakistani involvement. Western media did not report pakistani links, and the attackers used such low grade weaponry like knives rather than AK-47 which Pakistani groups would have used.DÜNGÁNÈ (talk) 02:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Name of article

Should there have been a discussion before moving the article name from "incident" to "attack"? Even the Chinese media reference the event as riot (骚乱) and incident (事件). Benjwong (talk) 06:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so. English language media were pretty unanimous in their use of the word "attack". I don't know what kind of connotations 事件 has, but "incident" sounds like a euphemism for something unpleasant, and it's not really informative or precise. "Riot" is governmental language used in initial reports, but it doesn't really match up with events. The event is being reevaluated in light of the subsequent Kashgar attacks, and the favored phrase seems to be "terrorist attack". There are debates at 2011 Norway attacks and 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks as to whether such language should be used by Wikipedia. Quigley (talk) 15:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I am more comfortable with just "Hotan attacks" to be honest. I don't understand this obsession with having the 'year' in the title all the time, especially when there aren't any other serious "Hotan attacks" in history. Colipon+(Talk) 16:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Protests deletion

Ok for the time being I have reverted the edit about the protests being held weeks before this attack. How about counter this material with another source that said there never were any protests. Preferably a neutral source. Benjwong (talk) 04:37, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

There was already a source in the article for a long time that said there were never any protests: the Financial Times said "But dozens of Uighur and Han residents of the area around the police post denied there had been any demonstration preceding the attack." Other press repeated this testimony, but I didn't save it. The information is in the 2011 Hotan attack#Reaction section, because the WUC only started talking about a "protest" after the facts of the attack came out. And again, while independent media have been able to confirm certain facts about the attacks with locals, the only people who are claiming a "peaceful protest" took place is the WUC, an extremely unreliable source. Quigley (talk) 12:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Name of the bazaar

Where did the source of the bazaar name "Iktar" come from? I am pretty sure the name of the bazaar is either "Heytak" if transcribed directly from Uyghur (common on social media) or "Id Kah"[1] if treated as a Persian loanword. --Voidvector (talk) 08:52, 26 January 2020 (UTC)