Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This edit seems wrongheaded. Is there really any debate about whether or not the Brookings Institution is a reliable source? I intend on restoring the information if there are no reasonable objections. GHcool ( talk) 03:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, I would like to submit a request to remove ACRI from the lists of NGOs that support the BDS movement. ACRI has never been in any private or public partnerships with the BDS movement nor have they publicly announced their support for the movement. Please remove ACRI from the list of supporters on this Wikipedia page. ACRIResource ( talk) 12:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Not done. The article source says "Initially, the more established radical groups, such as Women in Black, ICAHD, ACRI and New Profile, issued statements supporting the boycott, and conferences were organized to discuss this method of resisting the occupation." whereas your statement is unsourced. Selfstudier ( talk) 13:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to change the zcomm.org references to znetwork.org since the website has changed its name. Ottosonny ( talk) 17:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thank you Hila Livne ( talk) 16:35, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
I wrote to Leonie Fleischmann, to ask if she could shed any light on this. She has replied to me, apologising "with embarrassment" for the error. She did indeed intend to write AIC, as suggested above, and the error was not picked up. She adds that she does not consider ACRI to be a "radical group", and would not intentionally have referred to them as such. She does not expect there to be another edition of the book, so will not be able to correct the error.
I am aware that a personal email cannot be considered a reliable source, but since the proposal here has been to remove rather than include a challenged statement I see this as sufficient justification for removal of the mistaken assertion about ACRI. Is there any need to put a note in the article or footnote summarising this? RolandR ( talk) 14:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia's 2nd parapgraph is based on what the BDS describes their movement based on. But it more based on the Nazi movement targeting Jewish business. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/will-bds-lead-to-the-next-kristallnacht/ Right now Wikipedia is accepting a POV descrition as opposed toa NPOV. Unselfstudier ( talk) 14:57, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
And we don't have to take the statement of the BDS at face value {BLP infraction removed}. Unselfstudier ( talk) 20:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
No the BDS self description is not the best way to describe them I am sure Hezbollah, Al Quada and antifa don't describe themselves as terrorists. Having a newspaper like the Jerusalem Post the leading Mideast newspaper is a much better source. Unselfstudier ( talk) 22:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reading the opening description and other parts of the article, would Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies apply here? Obviously, they would say they are a human rights movement and deny that they are anti-Semitic. Maybe because this discussion involves academic debates it goes beyond MRD, but just reading I could at least see the argument for it, but I can also see the opposite of Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies does not apply. Thoughts? I personally lean towards the point in not of "If we do not accompany an accusation with its denial, then our readers by and large will not assume the existence of one. This is especially true of readers who also are accustomed to the journalistic standard of including denials." However, if someone has a different opinion, I would be open to change. 3Kingdoms ( talk) 03:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change: “Some critics accuse the BDS movement of antisemitism, a charge the movement denies, calling it an attempt to conflate antisemitism with anti-Zionism.”
To: “Organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League have labeled the BDS movement antisemitic, a charge the movement denies, arguing such critiques conflate antisemitism with anti-Zionism.” 2603:6011:C222:4BAA:5E6:DF01:9B60:8D81 ( talk) 01:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
remove the comma before "could cost the Israeli economy" bit (Impact section, Economic subsection) Hypermoddie ( talk) 16:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
"Puma signed a for-year sponsorship" should be "Puma signed a four-year sponsorship"
I can't edit the page so I thought I would put it here Timsmsmsm ( talk) 09:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Per the RfCs, I/P is an area with significant bias for the source, and using them here is not appropriate. Please revert your edit. FortunateSons ( talk) 19:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This edit seems wrongheaded. Is there really any debate about whether or not the Brookings Institution is a reliable source? I intend on restoring the information if there are no reasonable objections. GHcool ( talk) 03:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, I would like to submit a request to remove ACRI from the lists of NGOs that support the BDS movement. ACRI has never been in any private or public partnerships with the BDS movement nor have they publicly announced their support for the movement. Please remove ACRI from the list of supporters on this Wikipedia page. ACRIResource ( talk) 12:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Not done. The article source says "Initially, the more established radical groups, such as Women in Black, ICAHD, ACRI and New Profile, issued statements supporting the boycott, and conferences were organized to discuss this method of resisting the occupation." whereas your statement is unsourced. Selfstudier ( talk) 13:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I want to change the zcomm.org references to znetwork.org since the website has changed its name. Ottosonny ( talk) 17:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thank you Hila Livne ( talk) 16:35, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
I wrote to Leonie Fleischmann, to ask if she could shed any light on this. She has replied to me, apologising "with embarrassment" for the error. She did indeed intend to write AIC, as suggested above, and the error was not picked up. She adds that she does not consider ACRI to be a "radical group", and would not intentionally have referred to them as such. She does not expect there to be another edition of the book, so will not be able to correct the error.
I am aware that a personal email cannot be considered a reliable source, but since the proposal here has been to remove rather than include a challenged statement I see this as sufficient justification for removal of the mistaken assertion about ACRI. Is there any need to put a note in the article or footnote summarising this? RolandR ( talk) 14:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia's 2nd parapgraph is based on what the BDS describes their movement based on. But it more based on the Nazi movement targeting Jewish business. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/will-bds-lead-to-the-next-kristallnacht/ Right now Wikipedia is accepting a POV descrition as opposed toa NPOV. Unselfstudier ( talk) 14:57, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
And we don't have to take the statement of the BDS at face value {BLP infraction removed}. Unselfstudier ( talk) 20:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
No the BDS self description is not the best way to describe them I am sure Hezbollah, Al Quada and antifa don't describe themselves as terrorists. Having a newspaper like the Jerusalem Post the leading Mideast newspaper is a much better source. Unselfstudier ( talk) 22:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Reading the opening description and other parts of the article, would Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies apply here? Obviously, they would say they are a human rights movement and deny that they are anti-Semitic. Maybe because this discussion involves academic debates it goes beyond MRD, but just reading I could at least see the argument for it, but I can also see the opposite of Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies does not apply. Thoughts? I personally lean towards the point in not of "If we do not accompany an accusation with its denial, then our readers by and large will not assume the existence of one. This is especially true of readers who also are accustomed to the journalistic standard of including denials." However, if someone has a different opinion, I would be open to change. 3Kingdoms ( talk) 03:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change: “Some critics accuse the BDS movement of antisemitism, a charge the movement denies, calling it an attempt to conflate antisemitism with anti-Zionism.”
To: “Organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League have labeled the BDS movement antisemitic, a charge the movement denies, arguing such critiques conflate antisemitism with anti-Zionism.” 2603:6011:C222:4BAA:5E6:DF01:9B60:8D81 ( talk) 01:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
remove the comma before "could cost the Israeli economy" bit (Impact section, Economic subsection) Hypermoddie ( talk) 16:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
"Puma signed a for-year sponsorship" should be "Puma signed a four-year sponsorship"
I can't edit the page so I thought I would put it here Timsmsmsm ( talk) 09:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Per the RfCs, I/P is an area with significant bias for the source, and using them here is not appropriate. Please revert your edit. FortunateSons ( talk) 19:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)