Talk:Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow

Presumably, this means that the State Security Council of Turkmenistan (aka National Security Council of Turkmenistan, Security Council of Turkmenistan) are the real power brokers in the country. Can we have an article about it? Who's on it? Army leaders? -- Karada 13:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

The Security Council is mentioned in the 2003 constitution [1] but not in the 1992 constitution [2], and it's only mentioned that the Security Council is guided by the president. The 1995 Law on defence [3] says that the president defines the powers of the Security Council. That's all I was able to find, this is hardly enough for an article. Conscious 08:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

Turkmen spelling from here; Russian from the Russian article in the reference section. --Cam 20:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkmen article

When it's created, it will presumably be at tk:Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow: or possibly tk:Gurbanguly Berdimukhamedov? -- Karada 21:51, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Meanwhile, a meatier article facts can be brought over from is at ru:Бердымухаммедов, Гурбангулы Мяликкулиевич Chris 12:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

As Turkmen uses Latin script, wouldn't it make sanse to spell the name like it is spelt in Turkmen, rather than use a transcription from Cyrillic? Rain74 22:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I see it's been moved to a new spelling. Note that the CIA recently spelled the name Gurbanguly Berdimukhamedov.[4] --Cam 00:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

A Turkmen government website in a press release spells it Gurbanguly Myalikguliyevich Berdymuhammedov (the middle name is a patronymic). I don't know if we should take that as an official English spelling at this stage. --Cam 00:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we should make it Gurbanguly Berdymuhammedov. Actually, I tried to move his page to this name; however, there is already a redirect page there. So somebody should ask an admin to move it manually. I also notice that the current spelling - Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov - returns the most hits from Google news... Óðinn 17:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Turkmen language uses both Latin and Cyrillic scripts. And the sounds assigned to letters in Turkmen are not identical to English. Saparmurat Niyazov in Turkmen is Saparmyrat Nyýazow. Óðinn 18:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't see why this name must be translitterated. Turkmen language used to use Cyrillic script, but it has been shift to Latin script several years ago. Now Latin script is the only official script there. So there is of course no need to "translitterate" that name. The only right spelling is Gurbanguly Berdimugammedow, and that's all. I can't see why the CIA's spelling (Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov) would be more correct than the BBC's (Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov [5]). And why those two spellings should supplant the only original Turkmen spelling. Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov is only the tranlitteration of his Russian name Гурбангулы Бердымухамедов. The decision to use Russian names instead of local names for every citizens of the former Soviet Union (see Wikipedian arguments Mikheil Saakashvili vs. Mikhail Saakashvili, Islom Karimov vs. Islam Karimov, Rəsul Quliyev vs. Rasul Gouliev, Armen Sargsyan vs. Armen Sarkisian...) can be the result of the lack of sources from some places: every journalist covering the events in Turkmenistan are based in Russia and use Russian language sources. But if we know the correct form of the names, there's no reason not to use it. Using Russian instead of the official language is a form a colonialism, which is often kept alive by the rulers of those countries themselves who have great contempt for their own culture and find far much "stylish" to use Russian names. Švitrigaila 14:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

There isn't a single English media outlet referring to him as Berdimuhammedow. The Turkmen Government website refers to him as Gurbanguly Myalikguliyevich Berdymuhammedov. It is as official as it gets. I really hope no one in their right mind will try to blame the Turkmen government of succumbing to the dreadful Russian colonialism? I will therefore rename the article to Gurbanguly Berdymuhammedov. Óðinn 21:19, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The two only "official forms" are Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow in Turkmen and Гурбангулы Бердымухамедов in Russian. Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov is only the translitteeration from the Russian form of the name and it is not "official" by itself. If this site was written in French or German, it would be written Gourbangouly Berdymoukhammedov and Gurbanguly Berdymuchamedow respectivly. Now you must think what's the usefulness to use the Russian form instead of the Turkmen one if you have to transform it in order to have it readable for the English reader. The fact the Berdymukhamedov form is more often found in western newspaper has no importance since Wikipedia has the great advantage to have authomatic redirects. Švitrigaila 12:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you realize that "W" in Turkmen and English have very distinct sounds assigned to them? And this will thus misrepresent the presiden't name for the English speakers? This is an English Wikipedia after all, not a Turkmen one. Óðinn 21:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Name disputed

I provided a reference from the Turkmen official website showing that Gurbanguly Berdymuhammedov is the English form of the name of the Turkmen president. User Švitrigaila keeps changing the name to Berdimuhammedow, providing no references for his original research. Please state your thought on the matter. Óðinn 21:50, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that it's OK to use the Turkmen spelling. The good thing about it is that it doesn't have any letters which are too weird for English reader, like Ə in Azeri (see the big argument about Ilham Aliyev vs. İlham Əliyev).

Of course, the people who designed the current spelling in the nineties have made same totally weird decisions, such as using Y for Turkish dotless I (Turkmen Berdy would be written Berdı in Turkish) and using ý where in Turkish a y would be written (Nyýazow).

Also, for some reason which totally eludes me they chose to represents the v sound with a w. If you ask me - it's their problem. If they made up this stupid alphabet for themselves, they shouldn't complain that people mispronounce their names. It doesn't to seem the Poles too much - there are a lot of Poles whose names end in -owski and they are written like that in English text, even though they should be pronounced -ovski.

Personally, i hope that now that Turkmenbashi is dead, they'll have some reforms in the country and fix the alphabet on the way. And then we'll fix it in Wikipedia too.

And finally, anyone who has enough brain to read Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow in the first place, is also smart enough to read the explanation about the w in Turkmen alphabet. --Amir E. Aharoni 07:49, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems awfully presumptuous to assume that someone with a passing interest in central Asian politics should be willing to make the effort to learn the intricacies of Turkmen language Romanization. Why not simply have the article title in it's most commonly used, phonetic English form since we are writing for English speakers after all. See WP:ENGLISH. —Dgies^t c 00:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm against assuming that our readers are dumb and/or unwilling to learn. The correct romanisation should be used; if the most common form of the name happens to be wrong, tough luck. Just because e e cummings was by far the most common rendering of the author's name doesn't mean the articles is at that name; it's at E. E. Cummings instead, which is the *correct* way to write his name. —Nightstallion (?) 14:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

But what is the "correct" romanisation of Turkmen? Is there a law about it in Turkmenistan or in any English-speaking country? Is there a convention among linguists about it?

If there is none, then the spelling should be brought in directly from Turkmen-Latin, because of the reasons i wrote above. The letters and their sounds are not too weird for the average English reader; they are (arguably) easier than Turkish.

As i already stated, personally i think that the official new Latin spelling rules of Turkmen should have been more like Azeri Latin or Tatar Latin, but that's just my opinion.

What Wikipedia definitely should not do is to follow the practice of transliterating names related to former Soviet republics from Russian. Turkmen names should be transliterated from Turkmen, not from Russian. --Amir E. Aharoni 15:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

That's precisely what I meant to say. —Nightstallion (?) 02:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Here are some recent spellings I have found in the press. I am inclined to imitate these rather than use the Turkmen Latin spelling:

• RFE/RL: Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov.[6][7][8]
• BBC: Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov [9] and Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov.[10]
• Reuters: Kurbanguly Berdymukhamedov.[11][12][13]
• The New York Times: Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov.[14][15]
• The Associated Press: Gurbanguli Berdymukhamedov.[16]
  --Cam 17:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree with Nightstallion and Amir E. Aharoni. Berdimuhammedow derivates from two first names: Berdi and Muhammed. Berdi can't be rendered by Berdy in a Turkish language because of the rule of voyel harmony. That is to say, a name like "bardy" is possible, a name like "berdi" is possible, but not a name like "berdy". The Y spelling is only the transcription, using Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian or not, of the Russian transcription of his name: Берды. In this case, the ы (y) instead of и (i) indicates that the д (d) before is hard, and not soft (see Russian phonology). It's only a metter of Russian spelling according to Russian phonology. It has nothing to do with the Turkmen form of the name. So the question is: why using the Russian form instead of the Turkmen form? Ther is no reason to imitate the different spellings you can find on other sources. The simple fact all these sources use different spelling is a matter of question. The argument "Let's do like that because the other do, whaterver the reason they have to do it" is not a good argument. Švitrigaila 18:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm completely lost.

Is the Turkmen spelling Berdy or Berdi? --Amir E. Aharoni 07:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

In Turkmen, it's always Berdi. In Russian, it's Берды, that is Berdy (using Wikipedia:Romanization of Russian). I remind you the only official language of Turkmenistan is Turkmen, not Russian. Švitrigaila 11:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Strange - the Russian version of this Wikipedia article says that the Turkmen spelling is Gurbanguly Berdymuhammedow. Does anyone know for sure what the real Turkmen spelling is? I am totally confused. --Amir E. Aharoni 11:56, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The U.S. Embassy in Aşgabat spells it Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow in a recent press release in Turkmen.[17] The Türkmen news has Gurbanguly Mälikguyýewiç Berdimuhammedow. Their Mälikguyýewiç is apparently a typo for Mälikgulyýewiç, it's spelled the latter way in the video linked on that page. --Cam 00:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I have corrected the Russian page. It's Berdi in Turkmen. I didn't know this site, and it's very interresting to correct Turkmen presidential election, 2007. Švitrigaila 00:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. Looks convincing. --Amir E. Aharoni 10:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Parents

Russian media claim that Berdimuhammedow is widely seen in Turkmenistan as Niyazov's illegitimate son. Could anyone check this? --Ghirla ^-трёп- 09:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

It's mentioned on the New Eurasia blog here: [18] towards the end of the article. K. Lástocska 16:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Also here in a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty article, just says that B. is "reportedly a relative of Niyazov." [19] K. Lástocska 16:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Image?

Here's the first image of Gurbanguly that I've been able to find: http://www.registan.net/index.php/2007/02/12/turkmenistan-election/ What's the deal with copyright in these cases?

That would almost certainly be a copyrighted image that the registan site is using. We will probably have to wait until the U.S. government publishes its own photo of Berdimuhammedow before we get a truly free image.--Cam 15:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Party affiliation

The infobox currently states that Berdimuhammedow is not affiliated to any party - surely he's part of the Democratic Party of Turkmenistan? Dancarney 09:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I came here to ask the same question, actually...I don't see any sources that state it explicitly, but considering the situation I would think it can almost be taken for granted. Everyking 11:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

removal

I removed this "Radio Free Europe described the elections as "neither free nor fair", and the International Crisis Group described it as "blatantly falsified"."

Comments on the fairness of the elections seem irrelevant in this biographical article. I'd also question whether the two sources actually represent a neutral point of view.83.100.158.13 10:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I wish you were joking, but you're not. That the International Crisis Group describes Berdimuhammedow's election "victory" as "blatantly falsified" is extremely relevant to a biography of a new President of any nation. Try and not "make for glorious benefit of Turkmenistan" censors, will ya? Check this out: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6201669.stm

What does

Try and not "make for glorious benefit of Turkmenistan" censors, will ya?

mean?

The link you provide is from before the elections - if I have read right - how is that relevant to the above - it does not confirm the above?83.100.158.13 11:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Not a good sign IMO that you don't get my allusion to Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. (Now let me guess...you'll remind me that Kazakhstan isn't Turkmenistan?) It is also not encouraging that you think a BBC article about conditions in Turkmenistan in December 2006 is irrelevant to conditions in Turkmenistan less than two months later.

What I was saying was how is a report before the elections relevant to the fairness of the elections? - unless you think a thing is dammed before it has occured.

And I got that you immitate 'borat' but what did you mean by it?83.100.158.13 11:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

added neutrality tag

This article seems currently to be fairly negative towards the person, citing only references that give a negative point of view - for instance it criticises the health system of the country (as person was health minister), but also raises questions of parenthood as well - is this relevant or fair. I'm sure person knows who his father is - as it stands the statement about parentage is speculation - I'd suggest removing it until the true facts are known.83.100.158.13 10:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC) Also I'd suggest that a separate article would be the right place to mention details of political situation in Turkmenistan, not this article - which at present contains very little biographical information.83.100.158.13 10:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The statements you speak of are attributed to sources; they don't claim to be the truth, only what some people think or believe. This is considered neutral, at least on Wikipedia. Everyking 10:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Obviously quoting only foreign sources is not neutral - what about some statements from neighboring countries rather that something from the other side of the world - In isolation these comments are not neutral.83.100.158.13 11:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

In isolation, they're probably not neutral - although they may be based on reliable research conducted in the country. Thus, the remedy of integrating other sources into the article is a good one. In lieu of those sources, though (which of course may well not be neutral either), what we have is a claim and a source for it. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I hope you can sort this out for the benefit of any readers. Just to qualify my point take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Gurbanguly_Berdimuhammedow&oldid=108045959 I can tell you as an 'inpartial' observer that it just reads like a hatchet job/character assasination. I don't want to see ANY article looking as bad as that.83.100.158.13 11:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The point is, though, that the majority of readily-available sources (and when I say readily-available I'm restricting myself somewhat, since I don't speak a word of Turkmen or any other languages of nearby countries) share the opinion that the country is being run poorly and that the government is thus doing a bad job. I agree with you that it would be great to see sources on the other side saying that he did a good job of this and that, but I doubt I'll be able to find any by myself and we're not exactly inundated with Turkmen-speaking editors to help out in that regard. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

removal of speculation

Also, according to rumors, he is Niyazov's illegitimate son (if this is the case, Niyazov would have fathered him at the age of 17). 

Where in the article quoted does it say this - someone please point it out - true or not we are not hear to report speculation - first I'd like to see the part of the article which says this, before readding.83.100.158.13 11:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Quoting from the article cited: But surely the most sensational claim to have emerged on this individual to date is the allegation doing the rounds is that Berdymukhammedov is none other than Niyazov’s bastard son. That at least confirms the existence of the rumours. One suspects that confirming whether or not he is Niyazov's son would be quite a challenge. As was said above, reporting the existence of rumours is unobjectionable when their existence is cited. Of course, we can argue about whether a blog is the best place to be citing things from. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to ask that we do do that - and ask if the hottest pickings from the rumour mill are suitable for inclusion.83.100.158.13 11:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

When you ask to "do that", do you mean "argue about whether a blog is a good source" or "research whether he's Niyazov's son"? If the former, I'd say it depends on the nature of the blog - the jottings of a randomly selected teenager are likely to be less reliable than the considered opinion of a former ambassador to the country (for example). If the latter, I've always wanted to see Ashgabat, but I think the risks to my person in investigating the proclivities of the ruling elite would be too great :) BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I meant use caution in what we report - specifically as you say avoiding 'the jottings of a randomly selected teenager' - that's what I meant. I don't doubt that who is this guys father is the hot topic on the streets of Ashgabat.83.100.158.13 11:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't agree with you more about the need for caution. I haven't looked into the bona fides of the contributors to the blog in question very closely, but according to their own front page, they don't seem to be randomly selected teenagers. Perhaps not former ambassadors either, but I'd be tempted to believe them if they said there were rumours about something. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe there are rumours - I don't know if it's good form to report them in someones biography - except specifically under a 'rumours' or 'trivia' section.83.100.158.13 11:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I had a quick look - I say it's a collection of teenage/twenty somethings blogs - quite respectable - but do these blog things represent a 'good source'? (that's not a rhetorical question - I don't know what the answer is)83.100.158.13 11:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

neutrality tag removed

Someone removed the tag - I won't readd it in the articles present state. Though I still think that the article is remarkably negative for a neutral article in it's current state http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Gurbanguly_Berdimuhammedow&oldid=108051655 for instance is this necessary

Opposition officials have described Berdimuhammedow as a weak-willed man who wields little influence, which may have contributed to his long-standing career as deputy prime minister

- specifically the part underlined - by any standard deputy prime minister isn't bad - so why suggest that being deputy prime minister is somehow indicative of being 'weak willed'? Someone else should look at this83.100.158.13 11:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)