Talk:Block of Wikipedia in Turkey

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Question

What mechanism was used for the blocking? Does anyone know? Svobodat (talk) 13:21, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emmm what wikimedi take akction about it? Raditya 1108 (talk) 10:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Statement of Wikimedia Foundation is here. --Mavrikant (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That Wikimedia statement doesn't include anything technical. Turkey Blocks notes in its report that ISPs have each implemented the block in their own way, so it is best to assume that there is no single mechanism or filtering product used across all of Turkey. OliverHargreaves (talk) 11:09, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A user from trwiki claims ISP's using TCP reset attack. --Mavrikant (talk) 15:52, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Turkey Blocks perspective appears to be backed up by news coverage (although technical news coverage was lacking). This Guardian article says that users received a "connection timed out" message, which is indicative of a TCP reset attack. On the other hand this verge article says that users were not able to connect securely which indicates to me a Man-in-the-middle attack whereby the connection is intercepted - in a website like Wikipedia using HTTPS this will result in a secure connection error. I think there are sufficient sources here (Turkey Blocks, and the Guardian and Verge articles) to write that different ISPs carried out the block in different ways which included TCP reset and MITM, but not sufficient information to go far beyond that (there may have been more methods used; we don't know). Mildlyincompetent (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In The News

Hi, can we get this article link posted to the Wikipedia mainpage for In The News? IQ125 (talk) 16:24, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Articles at AfD can't be linked on the main page. If it survives AfD and the topic is still "In the News" it can be renominated. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:27, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this article at Afd?rinduzahid(talk) 19:29, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because several editors thinks it should be deleted or merged. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Outcome of AfD is keep. We should add this article in News. --Mavrikant (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, we shouldn't, certainly not simply as a result of the outcome being "keep". The outcome was actually pretty darned split between "keep" and "merge", and while both are technically "keep" outcomes, people suggesting "merge" likely think this doesn't warrant anything more than merging with existing list of government censorship in Turkey on the one hand, and censorship of Wikipedia on the other. I feel the people who have voted that (me included) might be strongly opposed about slamming it on Wikipedia's very frontpage. Was that one with the large number of other prominent websites that Turkey blocked before? LjL (talk) 18:09, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Limited coverage

By the way, the Turkish version of the 2016–17 Turkish purges article is smaller than its Chinese version. Given the current state of Turkey, as an internet police state, I guess Turkey based contributors doesn't dare to edit the page. If you do speak/write Turkish and are not living nor traveling to Turkey, please consider contributing to the Turkish article, so sourced information is available online. --Yug (talk) 12:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed rationale for the ban ?

I did read in some source that the Turkish government, after asking for a block to internet providers, had to send an official rational to a judge within 24hours, the judge reviewing it within 48hours to maintain or cancel the block. So, did anyone is aware about the detailed rational for this block ?--Yug (talk) 17:03, 30 April 2017 (UTC) So far, the Turkish Wikipedia just reported the following :[reply]

By ICTA, the decision regarding Twitter via Turkish and English statement made the following statements are made and are used in the description[1][2] :

"1. Despite all the initiatives, content that states that Turkey supports terrorist organizations has not been removed from Wikipedia.
"2. It is not allowed to edit these contents with correct information.
"3. Since it broadcasts via the https protocol, it is not possible to block only related content.
"4. For this reason, measures have to be applied to the whole of the site.
"5. The Wikipedia editors on this and similar content should do the right thing."

References

  1. ^ BTK'nin Vikipedi hakkındaki Twitter açıklaması, 30 April 2017, retrieved 29 Nisan 2017 {{citation}}: |archive-url= requires |archive-date= (help); Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  2. ^ "BTKden Wikipediaya Erişim Engeli Açıklaması", Bianet, 30 Nisan 2017, retrieved 29 April 2017 {{citation}}: |archive-url= requires |archive-date= (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)


"5. The Wikipedia editors on this and similar content should do the right thing."
Being one of the editors of the content concerned, I will certainly do the right thing and resist any pressure to hide the facts about the policies of the Erdogan government in Turkey, in particular its comprehensive support for jihadist militias in Syria. -- 2A1ZA (talk) 12:07, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mail from ICTA

This news shows that ICTA wants to remove Wikileak links from Berat Albayrak's page. We should add this info to both this and Berat's article. --Mavrikant (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately Turkey is right and block will not get removed until court orders are applied

The talk page is not a forum and is not a place to express your personal opinions on the subject.

Even though I know you will deny these facts, I want to express my opinions. There are mass bias in editors of Wikipedia. They are counting valid or invalid any sources as they wish. Especially in non-scientific pages. For example in Turkey case, all of them are weak allegations. I can find many more such allegations with sources against USA that claims: USA has founded and funded many of the existing terrorist organizations including ISIS. Hack currently they are openly guarding and supporting PKK/YPG/PYD/SDF (they are all same organization) terrorists. However, would any of them survive? Of course not. All of them would be counted as untrusted, get deleted immediately and I would probably get banned. This is what Wikipedia is doing exactly. So i do not think so Turkish court will reserve the ban decision until this hypocrisy get fixed in Wikipedia community. BurstPower (talk) 15:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And then i stopped searching, but there is plenty more out there. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:20, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked as i have guessed nothing about ISIS. And the information amount is ridiculously low when compared to Turkish case. I can find thousands of articles about USA and ISIS relation BurstPower (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTAFORUM .. this page is for discussing changes to the text. -- GreenC 03:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What Wikipeda pages or edits does Turkey actually object to?

The second thing every censor censors is the list of things that they are censoring.

But since Wikipedia is not censored, *we* should be free to post those lists in the article page about the censorship.

It's hard to evaluate whether Turkey's gripe is accurate, if we can't even be told which pages they are objecting to. And for those who want the world to know things that Turkey is trying to censor, the quickest way is to post links to the particular pages being censored. (See Streisand effect.)

Turkey claims that they have told "wikipedia" that they object to content by "certain writers".Turkish authorities block Wikipedia without giving reason And suggested that "The Wikipedia editors on this and similar content should do the right thing." (see above on this talk page). How could editors do that if they are not told which content Turkey finds objectionable? Gnuish (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#The_cause_of_the_Wikipedia_block_in_Turkey] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey will not allow access to Wikipedia inside the country until rulings ordering the online encyclopedia to remove content that Ankara deems to be false are implemented, the head of the country's communications agency said Wednesday. Turkey's Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK) implemented the ban on wikipedia.org on Saturday as an "administrative measure"...

Wikipedia refuses to respond to Turkish Information and Communication Tehcnologies Authority over article on Syrian Civil War

Ban removed?

I'm in Istanbul and I can access this page today without using a VPN! :) --78.161.192.242 (talk) 07:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same in İzmir. Erkin Alp Güney (talk) 17:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I rechecked with my friends in the same work place and my computer seems the only one to be able to open it! Although checking my IP location shows it's Istanbul! I'm confused! --78.161.192.242 (talk) 07:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that some IP ranges, or some smaller networks have access, I have no idea of how IT is structured in Turkey. — PaleoNeonate — 07:25, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Probability, you are using different DNS other than your ISPs. Changing DNS bypass ban. --Mavrikant (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the only way they blacklist is via DNS, that's fortunately very easy to circumvent, no VPN or Tor needed... if so, maybe an information campaign would help many to freely connect... If we can confirm this and find a source, the article could also mention it. — PaleoNeonate — 03:29, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't seem the ban is only on DNS, I still can access from my computer (Although I can see I have a different IP address now!), but my friend has Google DNS and he can't access without VPN.--78.191.181.57 (talk) 14:39, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Combination of DNS, TLS and port spoofing is applied. Erkin Alp Güney (talk) 20:14, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's an ISP in Turkey called TTNET and it seems not blocked on it, because my same friend just switched to it and he could open Wikipedia without using a VPN--78.191.181.57 (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Me too. However, connection gets broken sometimes. Erkin Alp Güney (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They changed how it is implemented. A previous workaround no longer works. Erkin Alp Güney (talk) 07:37, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The work around again started to work in TURKCELL. Erkin Alp Güney 13:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia responses

There is currently a banner advert on all pages of the Italian-language Wikipedia protesting the block, and a dedicated logo [1]. There is also a petition on wikimedia.org [2]. I'm not sure how appropriate these are for mention in the Responses section because there is no third-party source. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removed paragraph about Crimean Tatar Wikipedia

I've removed the paragraph "In response to the block, a subheader has been placed on each page on the Crimean Tatar Wikipedia reading "QIRIMTATAR VİKİPEDİYASINIÑ MALÜMATI"." since it was unreferenced and doesn't explain how this relates to the article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Crimean Tatar is an Oghuz Turkic language partially intelligible with Istanbul Turkish.Erkin Alp Güney 21:31, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about sister projects?

Were Commons, Wikinews, etc. blocked as well? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:16, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Erkinalp9035 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block notice

When you try to access Wikipedia from Turkey you get redirected to a page with Turkish text saying some nonsense about Wikipedia stealing your personal information. I had intended to make a screenshot of it, but forgot. I think fair use would make it OK to have such a redirect page screenshot as an article illustration, so if anyone is visiting Turkey, would they take that screenshot for uploading later to this article. Maybe take other banned in Turkey screenshots too - Paypal, Booking.com, etc. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:20, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you just make that up? Please provide proof as there was no such thing. It said Wikipedia was banned for breaking the laws of the country. HEICOgel (talk) 12:49, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You are both right as the message or lack of any message depends on the browser. I just added a screenshot to the article.Chidgk1 (talk) 11:42, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked?

Be advised, I can now access Wikipedia from Turkey.

Waiting a few days to confirm this is indeed permanent and not just an error.

Signed: Logos-Aletheia (talk) 17:29, 5 September 2017 (UTC)Logos-Aletheia, on 05 Sep 2017[reply]

That is good to hear. Let's hope you are not the only one, and that it is not a fluke. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:33, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, maybe it was a mistake in the ban.--31.202.25.100 (talk) 13:34, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Childish

I was childish and stupid. Seriously. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martimafonso (talk • contribs) 16:27, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's a new logo which the black bar is changed into a red and a Turkish text. Should we change it? Just to let you know. Hans T.M / Hans5958 Talk | Guestbook 11:35, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*There's a new logo where the black censor bar is changed to red and has white-colored Turkish text on said bar.
Logo currently used--tr:Dosya:Wiki.png (large version - Commons:File:Vikipedi'yiÖzledik.png)--example: tr:Özledik
On this article it says "The Turkish Wikipedia logo with a censor bar covering the text. This version of the logo has been in use since the ban." That is correct. There is no need to change it. --Spunionztastic (talk) 02:21, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018

Reflect in title? Wakari07 (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I read the article looking to see when the block ended as the title suggests it was a 2017 event. Apparently, its not. The title should be changed. I'll do that unless someone objects. Bangabandhu (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Neutralitytalk 00:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Because there is no objection, I'll go ahead and move this. Neutralitytalk 04:48, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why not mention PKK/YPG connection on background?

I think it is relevant to mention PKK and YPG connection at the background section. --193.140.128.36 (talk) 10:57, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They will probably not because then the article may adhere wikipedia neutral point of view (NPOV) rule:
"All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic."
Gotta be true, when an article is NOT about anything related with Turks or Turkiye.
Check https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Turkish_sentiment (remember, it is no "Anti-Turkism" just a sentiment) 31.142.177.124 (talk) 06:06, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still banned

It's not clear from the line "As of 2019, Wikipedia is still uncertain the ban". Please clarify. PelicanTwo (talk) 07:41, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it since it didn't read right. I looked for sources from this year saying "yep, still blocked" but couldn't find any. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just turned off my vpn and tried. It is still blocked from here in Turkey. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:14, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you and I am glad to hear your vpn works. But I won't use your statement as a source in the article ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey’s top court set to rule on Wikipedia ban

For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If there are any Turkish-readers around, Wikipedia Giriş Yöntemleri: Vikipedi’ye Nasıl Girilir? may be good for something. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update, sort of. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone add more technical details of how it is done?

For example how do they block Turkish Wikipedia from being read via the Opera browser VPN but allow English Wikipedia to be read through that VPN?Chidgk1 (talk) 12:59, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pornography?

Dimadick, why? [3] It's not mentioned in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I transferred the WikiProjects covering the article on internet censorship. Pornography just happens to be one of the most frequent excuses for censorship. If it is irrelevant here, you can remove it. Dimadick (talk) 18:39, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Surveillance?

Dimadick Is this edit from Turkey via VPN being surveilled? If so please revert my removal of the mass surveillance project and add details in the article.Chidgk1 (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Block_of_Wikipedia_in_Turkey"