Talk:Rebiya Kadeer

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

Untitled[edit]

I don't speak Uyghur or Chinese, so if anyone can help with other forms of her name, it would be appreciated. Also, could use a picture, but I'm not sure if any of these pictures would qualify as being public domain. --MC MasterChef 23:32, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Improve this article with this extensive youtube interview.[edit]

I just found this 30 minute interview with Kadeer. I know a little Mandarin and was able to get the GIST of things, and I definitely can tell that a lot of Kadeer's personal views and philosophies are explained in detail. However, I don't speak it well enough to authoritatively add information to Wikipedia from this interview, so I'm throwing this link into the discussion section with the hopes that someone who speaks better Mandarin (or Uyghur, for that matter) than I can make some accurate translations and thus enhance this article. --Entropy Rising 08:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improve this article with different sources.[edit]

The part of this article describing her life is definitely sided. It is Rebiya Kadeer and her group's saying. While Beijing (or/and Urumchi) government has another. Which one is true? Remained to be investigated. But different points of view should be presented in order to keep Wikipedia's objective stance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.175.114.82 (talk) 02:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a farce/[edit]

This article is so hopelessly biased against China. She's a terrorist sympathizer. What a farce. While we are in Iraq, killing terrorists at will, we lecture China on how it handles the terrorist East Turkestan Islamic Movement? --69.209.76.0 (talk) 06:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She is a humanist and a great human right activist.Her praiseworthy acts of being sympathetic to ethnic xinjiang people's human right should not be equalized with terrorist sympathizer.Hossain Akhtar Chowdhury (talk) 06:35, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha What kind of "humanist" uses fake photos to proof her point???? Plz~ TheAsianGURU (talk) 22:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'fake photo' - a common Chinese claim. I guess you think this is fake too? - [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesrlforsyth (talk • contribs) 23:33, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think that's fake. If you are looking for the article of Capital punishment, go there and take a look, China is right up there with many free world countries. That is your best come back?! With an undated, non caption Chinese execution photo?! Really?! BTW, next time, make sure you sign what you write, getting caught by sinebot while trying to make a point isn't exactly awesome. TheAsianGURU (talk) 01:14, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Source: http://www.dgshi.cn/ and AFP) China says at least 140 dead in rioting by Uighurs. Han Chinese businesspeople told AFP there were around 3,000 Uighur protesters, a figure repeated by exiled Uighur groups. "The Uighurs attacked motorists with rocks," said one Han woman who saw the riot unfold from the 11th floor of a local hospital. "They just attacked the Han people." The Xinjiang regional government blamed Rebiya Kadeer, the Uighurs' leader who is living in exile in the United States, for orchestrating the unrest. "An initial investigation showed the violence was masterminded by the separatist World Uighur Congress led by Rebiya Kadeer," the government said in a statement, according to Xinhua. But Kadeer and other Uighur exiles laid the blame on Chinese authorities. Alim Seytoff, general secretary of the Uighur American Association, told AFP in Washington the Uighurs were protesting over an ethnically charged brawl late last month at a factory in southern China that left two Uighurs dead. "These young Uighurs peacefully took to the streets but more than 1,000 armed Chinese police came out," Seytoff told AFP of Sunday's violence. "What we were told is that they began to shoot indiscriminately." Riot police and other security forces armed with machine guns and carrying shields were seen in Urumqi on Monday, preventing further protests, according to an AFP reporter here.

(Source: FT.com)“If it follows the Tibet pattern, at this stage the Chinese media will only release figures of those allegedly killed by protesters,” said Robert Barnett, a lecturer on Tibet at Columbia University in New York. “We’re seeing again the same news management method, which is to try and pre-empt foreign press reports by rapidly releasing news that is damaging to government critics, especially any images of violence by protesters and any evidence of foreign links.

Spins: --->3000 Uiguhrs killed approximatelly 140 Han Chinese (or up to 200) and 828 injured (all Hans...since this is the officially reported numbers) for what happened last month at a factory in southern China.... that left two Uighurs dead. Pretty strong retaliation. --->Uighur protesters took to the streets to demand independence of the region. The Chinese government suppressed the riots, with the death toll at 140 dead and 828 injured, the worst bloodbath in China since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.175.37.120 (talk) 18:01, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppression or Deception[edit]

(Source http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/5769839/Eyewtiness-tensions-high-on-the-streets-of-Urumqi.html) (last 3 paragraphs)(No copyright notification.... By Peter Foster in Urumqi)

It began almost two weeks ago with reports that a Han Chinese mob had beaten a group of Uighur toy factory workers in the southern province of Guangdong and, crucially, had been allowed to get away with it. In the Sai Ma Chang (Racetrack) District this was taken as another example of institutionalised Han favouritism against the Uighurs and soon the internet rumour mill was turning fact into fiction, feeding latent anger which is never far from the surface in Xinjiang. Didn't you hear? There were 4,000 Han people who chopped the heads off 600 Uighurs and then threw their body parts in the dustbin,-- said Gu Li, a 19-year-old student. --I heard there were videos on the internet. It's true.-- It is not, but the damage has already been done and now it seems that it will take long time for the wounds of Sunday's communal violence to heal. On Monday night, Chinese police entered the Sai Ma Chang shanty and rounded up 100 suspects, bursting through doors and pulling men and boys from their beds, according to the Uighur women who took to the streets to protest yesterday. They emerged from the dirty backstreets, wailing and beating their breasts, many clutching grubby-faced children dressed in the cheap clothes and holding up the identity cards of their arrested husbands, fathers and brothers.

Please note -the cheap clothes- phrase in this important news, that could be true. It is used to describe Oppressed Uighurs...but please remember who's page are you reading: Kadeer was born into poverty but enjoyed a successful career as an entrepreneur, starting first with a laundry service and then expanding her activities to eventually own a trading company and department store in Xinjiang. She was also an active philanthropist within the community, most notably through her foundation of the 1,000 Families Mothers Project, a charity intended to help Uyghur women start their own local businesses.[1] Kadeer's successes as a businesswoman earned her the local nickname "the millionairess" and also a position at the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. She became a member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, but was barred from re-election in 1998 for failing to condemn her husband's statements in the United States.[1] Can anyone with a right mind Imagine a Woman becoming "the millionairess" a political figure a success story in any far east Muslim istan (mean country)who was born into poverty. NO. Maybe this story talks about her Ego only.....We may just observed a Sarah Palin of China in action?

New source[edit]

Specifically about Kadeer:

  • Montgomery, David (9 July 2009). "The Mother of the Uighur Movement". Washington Post. Retrieved 9 July 2009.

The title looks unnecessarily sensationalist, but from my brief skim the content seems like it may be useful. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 12:10, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any feedback from Kadeer about the fake new picture she used in "Photo Controversy" part?[edit]

It is kinda stupid trying to fool the rest by a fake image in nowadays.--207.168.191.2 (talk) 17:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the age of Internet, she was either ignorant or simply just doesn't care. TheAsianGURU (talk) 17:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it was from her speechwriter.Fuzbaby (talk) 20:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reuters, The Daily Telegraph, Voice of America all made the same mistake before her. It's a media non-event, certainly as far as she is concerned. I would ask the IP editor to please don't keep warring to restore it. Ohconfucius (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They said sorry already. TheAsianGURU (talk) 23:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"how did she do in china" section[edit]

It is pure propaganda, presented as pro-China arguments rather than an unbiased account of what life was like for her in China. It must be improved or otherwise deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.201.221.119 (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this section is ridiculous; it reads like a trivia section and I believe should be tagged. 96.238.103.103 (talk) 00:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)dioxinfreak, not signed in[reply]

  • Have I missed something? What does this refer to? I can find no such section even looking at the 10 July versions. Ohconfucius (talk) 05:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Photo controversy should stay in this article[edit]

It is about Rebiya lied or not, not this riot. it is nice if you want to keep her "image" by minimize it to some lines hide behind some links. But if she said such things, truth or lie, we should have it listed, everyone deserve the right to know. Like what " Lewinsky scandal" is listed in Clinton's article, not some "Lewinsky scandal" main article --68.5.186.148 (talk) 04:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disagree. This photo controversy relates to the riots, and is entirely irrelevant to the biography. In any event, this controversy is a just part of a media gaffe and is already mentioned in the riots article. Ohconfucius (talk) 04:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disagree. A section this long would be out of proportion. You will have noticed that the [2] Lewinsky-thing in the Clinton article is only three lines in an article that spans over several screens in length. The subsection is about his impeachment which made the event noteworthy. Seb az86556 (talk) 04:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The photo controversy is a minor, minor thing that has been wildly blown out of proportion by POV-pushing editors (as far as I can tell, Wikipedia editors and bloggers are making a much bigger deal out of it than real media is). The photo was used by many other media outlets before Kadeer used it; she was still wrong in using it, but the point is it's not a Kadeer-specific gaffe, it's a gaffe that tons of people made. Anyway, trying to use a trivial non-issue like this to overshadow the biography of a person who has actually received significant media coverage and done notable things for real is not really appropriate. So far, all the editors who have made a big deal about including this have openly admitted that they want to "show the world how much of a liar Kadeer is" or some such, and Wikipedia is not your platform for trying to change people's opinions or 'prove' things to people. I am always skeptical of an editor who has an agenda. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 05:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Information about her wealth may be fradulent[edit]

As for today, Aug 5, 09, the article claims...

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Kadeer engaged in cross-border trade, accumulating assets which at their peak were worth more than 200 million yuan. She became one of the top five richest people in China, and her success earned her the nickname "the millionairess"

This information is not supported by the links to BBC News. In addition, to have 200 million RMB by the 1990's is extremely unlikely unless a) she have very good friends at Beijing or b) she has done something illegal.

It was not legally possible to own a business in China until after 1978. Even after that, all multi million businesses were still owned by the state. Also, Xinjiang is a notoriously poor province. The fact that she amassed such a great wealth is rather unlikely.

In either case, the claim is not supported by the link to BBC News and I removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.115.165 (talk) 02:34, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nobel Peace Prize nomination[edit]

  • ...and in 2006 she was nominated by Swedish parliamentarian Annelie Enochson as one of the candidates (among 191 people who were nominated) for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Being nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize is an honor, but it is not official or even prestigious. Any national legislator or about a third of the university professors in the world can make a nomination, and there have been as many as 140 some years. Nominators are requested to keep their nominations secret, so it's only those wishing publicity who make announcements, and more often it is impossible to verify. I see no reason to keep it. No offense to the subject, this is a general Nobel Peace Prize "nominees" issue. -Will Beback · † · 08:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An article at http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-01/08/content_777852.htm documents the Chinese government's condemnation of Kadeer's Nobel Peace Prize nomination (alongside seemingly unrelated reports of the destruction of a terrorist camp.) The article includes a lot of editorializing in the form of unattributed quotes from "netizens", so I am not certain as to its usability as a primary source, nor am I certain the link will always be valid. I'm new to Wikipedia editing to I'll let someone more experienced make the call on whether or not this is worthy of inclusion, should the Peace Prize information remain in this entry. Apoxy 18:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I no longer edit articles, but here is the citation you are looking for:
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/09/eng20070109_339386.html
Sam Spade 10:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a rare exception, a case where the nomination itself became noteworthy. (The Stanley Williams exception). On account of that controversy this material is worth keeping. -Will Beback · † · 07:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Every Chinese Human Rights person will get at least one Nobel Peace Prize nomination, haha, just feel very funny. There are zillions of nominations, but only successful is Dalai Lama, a Tibet guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.117.219 (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying that the Nobel Peace Prize is not notable; it is. The flaw in this (as far as WP is concerned) is that the nominations are a very open process. In 2009, 205 names were submitted for the Prize. The nominations, unlike the award itself, are not at all discriminatory, and easily abused. This is often done for political ends by a politician or political entity which finds a sympathiser to submit a nomination for X or Y; what is more, the names of nominators are kept secret for 50 years, meaning that there is no deterrent to the loss of credibility as a result of making that nomination. That is why I do not believe it does not warrant inclusion. Furthermore, use of phrases like "heaped praise on her" is just a blatant violation of WP:NPOV as I have ever seen. Ohconfucius (talk) 06:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disagree with you - she was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by members of the U.S. Congress and "lavishly praised" (the article's words not mine - and it is not "heaped praise on her" as you have) by both the President and the Speaker, showing support from both major parties in the U.S. I think this is notable - it is certainly a far cry from being nominated by some lawyer. Moreover, the Chinese govt. saw fit to denounce this support which, in itself, must give some support to the nomination being of significance. I will, therefore, reverse the changes once again and place the words "lavishly praised" in quotes to make clear these are not mine. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 07:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, your insertion failed to make it clear where it said who lavishly praised her. In addition, the nomination is clearly politically motivated, so I would maintain my objection to its inclusion. Ohconfucius (talk) 07:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This looks like an edit war which I don't want to get into. However, regarding your first point - I said she was "lavishly praised" by former US president George W. Bush and Democratic congressional leader Nancy Pelosi with a link given to an article as a reference anyone can look up and check. Is this not clear enough?
Secondly, many, if not most, Nobel Prize nominations are at least to some extent politically motivated - so when do we reach the point that a nomination is too politically motivated to be mentioned in the Wikipedia? Also, here we have both major parties in the U.S. backing her in the Congress. And the Chinese condemnation of the nomination is clearly politically nominated. So, as I see it, we have an example of the U.S. and China disagreeing strongly about her nomination, and this in itself, I would have thought, was notable and worthy of inclusion in a biographical article about the woman. I don't understand why you are objecting so strongly. Yours, John Hill (talk) 07:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've now raised the matter at Talk:Nobel Peace Prize#Mentions of nominations in WP in general Ohconfucius (talk) 05:17, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is clearly biased against chinese government, is there any real evidence that kadeer's children letter is fake, beside just personal opinion? and how is kadeer's children interview with cctv also fake or forced, if you wanna quote personal opinion shouldn't be from both sides? not just from one side? or you shouldn't quote any of them at all and also rabiyah kadeer was caught lying on interview in front of chinese police officer before her release, why nit included in this article to give a full view of her personality, you can watch how she charmed chinese guard on youtube —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.17.101 (talk) 02:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dates of Marriage(s)[edit]

The article states she was first married in 1965, this would make her 18 at the time. However other sources, including Encyclopedia Britannica claim she was 15 when she first married. The article goes on to claim she was married in 1981, which would have made her 34 at the time. However, Encyclopedia Britannica claims she remarried in July 1978, when she would have been 31. Enquire (talk) 08:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that some of the confusion on dates is that, traditionally, Chinese babies are considered to be "1" year old at birth (probably in recognition of the 9 months in the womb). Also, in some parts of China, they consider that everyone is a year older at the same time, i.e. at the start of a new Chinese Year. This makes sense in a Chinese cultural context in that they consider their age to be the age they reach within a given Chinese astrological year (year of the ... Rat, Ox, Tiger, etc.). Also Chinese lunar months do not often co-incide with the Julian months, although Chinese sometimes adopt the Julian month names when they are, in fact, giving a lunar date ... which can be quite confusing at times. Not sure, though if the above applies for Uygur communities, maybe they have their own calendar? Clearly care needs to be taken to ensure that dates given are true Julian dates, and not simply lunar dates with Julian names used for translation of the original Chinese names.

Of course, we should make sure that the ages given reflect contemporary international conventions (child is '0' old at birth, and age increments on the anniversary of their birth, etc.) and that dates are true Julian dates, and not dates based on the lunar calendar with Julian month names used for translation of Chinese lunar month names. Enquire (talk) 08:57, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Parliament[edit]

The article refers to a speech she made to "parliament" ... there is no Chinese Parliament, although the National People's Congress is sometimes informally referred to as "parliament" but this is incorrect, since the PRC does not, in fact, have a parliamentary system ... although conceivably something like that could evolve in the future.

I would replace the reference to "parliament" ... to the National People's Congress, but since I cannot find an independent confirmation of this nor that this was the forum where she "openly criticised the government in a speech" ... maybe someone can independently verify this? Enquire (talk) 08:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan controversy[edit]

Does anyone else think the ongoing Taiwan controversy and her links with terrorism by the KMT government should be mentioned in this article? I am looking to add to this today, but would like to get the opinion of others on it before I do so unilateraly. ludahai 魯大海 (talk) 21:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that too. What's her relationship with the East Turkestan Islamic Movement? (which is a terrorist organization, links with Al-Qaeda) TheAsianGURU (talk) 23:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Tricky one, that. This follows on from the visit to the island by the 13th Dalai Lama. Obviously, these East Turkestan Islamic Movement/terrorist claims are state propaganda, and is extension of the China perspective, and the power politics being played by the PRC by silencing her. For Taiwan, it is probably more symptomatic of the pro- and anti-independence stances which run straight through the country/island, that I feel warrants only a short mention in her biography - to the extent of 'she was invited to the premier by the mayor of Kaoshiung, but was denied an entry visa by the Taiwanese authorities'. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of political celebrity article is this?![edit]

There should be WAY more info and sections. There is just so much this article is missing about her. There should even be an article on "The 10 Conditions of Love". ---GooglePedia12 02:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC) (GooglePedia12|talk.)

I'll try. But as all Wikipedians know, making an article longer and detailed requires much work: Much typing + editing (well, pretty much all of my life's work is typed, so that will be easy), citing sources, sources must be reliable, updating, etc. You get the point. But since Kadeer is a worthy cause to me, as she is one of my favorite people, I will work on this page. It probably will attract many visitors, since many celebrities, news, famous stuff, etc. is searched for on Wikipedia. I may put in that the article is a stub. ---GooglePedia12 21:30, 22 October 2009 (UTC)(GooglePedia12)

I've remove the stub tag. While the article may be incomplete, it's start-class at the least. Buckshot06(prof) 21:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm just curious about the Oxford interview section. I appreciate the work which has gone in, but there seems precious little biographical material in it. Only the small part about he being whisked out of the country seems remotely the sort of material suitable for a biographical article... Ohconfucius ¡digame! 03:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Agree. Feel free to keep going, but don't be surprised if somebody kicks your additions out again. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Visit to Palau[edit]

So far, I see not much of biographical value there. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

neither do I. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 07:06, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford University interview[edit]

It's been there for a while, and I have been waiting to see if it has any significance. I have today removed the section on the Oxford interview, which seems to have a minimal relevant biographical material. I have left it as a note, and readers will see that there is an iTunes file avialable there. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 04:58, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Date of birth[edit]

According to her german book Die Himmelsstürmerin (which is listed in the works-section), she was born July 15th 1948. Thus, I'm going to change it.--Snc212 (talk) 12:33, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Various WPs have significantly differing dates deWP 15. July 1948, chWP 1947年1月21日, jpWP 1947年1月27日 ... I won't check all the others. --Zenwort 10:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenwort (talk • contribs)

East Turkestan[edit]

The location does not exist and should reflect 'Xinjiang' as the location. I have updated this. I am not pro or anti China, but East Turkestan does not exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Number 8 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

see East Turkestan--Kmhkmh (talk) 04:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 16:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rebiya Kadeer. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:41, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Rebiya Kadeer. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 05:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Rebiya Kadeer. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 11:45, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:54, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Citizenship[edit]

I just removed the claims about her being a US citizen because I didn't find any specific support for those claims via a google search. Is she stateless or still technically of PRC citizenship? Another country? Not sure- can't find specific information. Geographyinitiative (talk) 18:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@KH561: Hope you are doing well. Do you have a source that says that Kadeer is an American citizen [3]? Thanks for any help. Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Geographyinitiative: I'm fine, thanks BR. I don't have that source, but she has been living in US since 2005 and a notable Uyghur person, and it is adequate to put her name in this page for the convenience of others even if she is not a US citizen. --KH561 (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rebiya_Kadeer&oldid=1194469959"