![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Note: The Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians continues to function as a federation of groups, academics and activists in Canada and internationally. The IJV(C) has grown out of the March 2007 ACJC-sponsored conference to become a different organization.
see :
[1]
Jo Roberts article “Jewish-Canadian Activists Come Together for Peace”
Would you clarify to your readers that the description of the
Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians sponsored conference in Toronto March 2008 has missed a crucial aspect of the post-conference developments. The writer Jo Roberts was likely not informed that the post-conference Interim Steering Committee had a difference of opinion about how to treat anti-Jewish expressions when confronting the Israel State’s occupation and dispossession of the indigenous Palestinian population. As a result, the delegates of Independent Jewish Voices (Canada) left the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians - Alliance de Canadiens/nes juifs/ves consternés/es, while the ACJC continues to function on its own. Attached here is the recent international statement initiated by the ACJC which opposes the proposed attack on Iran. You may take note that the IJV(C) group of Montréal was one of the organiztional signers of the statement which included 20 organizations from 17 countries.
Abraham Weizfeld
Co-founder ACJC
Administrative Secretary ACJC
Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians
Alliance de Canadiens/nes juifs/ves consternés/es
A C J C
68, ave. Duluth E.
Montréal, Québec H2W 1G8 Canada
514.284.66.42
News/nouvelles &discussion List/e:
JUNITY-Canada-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Funding Agency : La Galerie Fokus
Info on tax-deductible donations
Eibieman (
talk) 04:45, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know when the ACJC was founded and when it changed from being an advocacy group to an umbrella group (was that at the March 2008 conference?). Seems that they have 18 affiliates already.
Also, are Naomi Klein or Avi Lewis members of ACJC or do they just share some of their views. Well, so does Stephen Lewis (Avi's dad), but he is a bit more conflicted between his Jewish roots and his belief that human rights (which he sees Israel as violating) trumps all other considerations [1].
Even though there is a lot of overlap - think that the CUPE dispute and the membership dispute should be treated as separate CJC related issues. There are some assertions that the CJC is only an umbrella organization for pro-Israel groups and that the ACJC was testing that hypothesis by trying to join. However, it could just be message board speculation so will leave it up to you guys how to put it.
I'm allergic to airfreshioner and disinfectants, so if I haven't gotten the wording exactly right, that is why, I can't any more - so I add the information and leave the fine tuning to those who still can. 07:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC) 24.77.37.48 ( talk) 07:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
References
I've tagged this article as making questionable claim to notability. As one editor stated, the group currently claims a membership of less than 0.03% of Canada's Jewish population. It doesn't have CJC recognition, very little media recognition, 260 google hits. Really, organizations like Jewish Youth Against the Occupation deserve articles. They have large followings and regularly receive media coverage. This group doesn't have either. -- Chabuk [ T • C ] 22:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Looking through the history of this article, as well as the relevant history of the several articles that link to it, it increasingly seems to me that the group's primary notability is in the apparent tenacity of its membership's pursuit of recognition by using Wikipedia as a platform for pontification. There are thousands of other groups, even synagogues, with astronomically more political clout than this group has, several dozen of which are in Canada. I previously characterized the group quite accurately in the article as "miniscule", which was probably overly generous of me. Not everyone bothers to do the math, and the removal of this clarification can easily result in the eggregiously mistaken impression that this group is more noteworthy than it actually is. As a result of the repeated removal, and mildly rude insinuation that the information is "inappropriate", the POV that the group really is notable is enshrined as fact. This is a direct violation of WP:NPOV#Undue weight. Further violations of Wikiphilosophy include the fact that, while Wikipedia certainly isn't paper, it's also not an indiscriminate collection of information. Tom e r talk 00:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if the content could be merged with a different page? CJCurrie 22:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I have already indicated that I believe the information in the ACJC article should be retained on Wikipedia in one form or another. Now, I will indicate why I believe this particular article should be kept.
Note: These comments are not made in a spirit of hostility toward any other contributor. Debate is welcome, and encouraged.
1. Wikipedia is founded on the principle that minority voices should receive fair representation. The ACJC are a small group in terms of membership, and it is safe to say that they do not represent a majority viewpoint in the Canadian Jewish community. Notwithstanding this, they are actively engaged in debates of concern to the community, and their views have been cited in major community publications ( [2], [3]). The group is not insignificant, and the publicity they have received outside of Wikipedia makes them sufficiently notable for inclusion.
2. The ACJC's relationship with the broader Canadian Jewish community is a matter of significance in and of itself. The Canadian Jewish Congress's recent rejection of the ACJC's application, and the ACJC's appeal, have drawn attention to conflicting interpretations of the CJC's mandate. ACJC spokesperson Michael Mandel argues that his group has a prima facie right to affiliate with the CJC, and has stated that the CJC cannot claim to speak for Canada's Jewish community if it excludes the ACJC viewpoint. The CJC took a different position when it first rejected their application (see: Montreal Gazette, 29 October 2006, A2 or Edmonton Journal, 29 October 2006, A11), although it may reconsider when it considers the appeal. The result of this debate could have serious repercussions for other groups wishing to affiliate with the CJC in the future.
3. Wikipedia already has articles on organizations comparible to the ACJC, such as the Jewish Voice for Peace and Jews Against the Occupation. From the other side, we also have articles on the Jewish Defense Organization (a JDL spinoff) and Jewish Task Force, a Kahanist organization whose leader is barred from entering Israel. I cannot imagine that these groups are numerically large, or command strong community support, but this hasn't stopped us from preparing fairly detailed articles on them. (One could also mention the Jewish Motorcyclists Alliance, which may be larger than the ACJC but can hardly be described as more notable.) Precendent, in other words, favours inclusion.
CJCurrie 23:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Add: The ACJC was mentioned by the Canadian Arab Federation in a letter in today's Globe and Mail. CJCurrie 03:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't see any reason to delete this, Wikipedia has a number of articles on groups that are smaller and less significant. It seems well sourced and since the group has been mentioned in the mainstream media I think it's valid to have an article. Hashomer 04:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
If no one is arguing in favor of deletion then the tag is inappropriate and should be replaced with something that doesn't say "If notability cannot be established, the article is more likely to be considered for deletion, as per Wikipedia:Guide to deletion." The argument that there should be more articles on the Jewish community that's fine but it doesn't have much to do with the notability of this article. Since no one is arguing for deletion I will remove the tag, particularly as the "non-notability" question has apparently already been dealt with in an earlier vote on deletion. Hashomer 02:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
The section is based on an article published in the National Post, which meets Wikipedia's requirements as a reliable source. The article in the Post quotes the pamphlet (i.e. this is not a commentary). If additional evidence comes to light that indicates the the IJV did not approve of this pamphlet, this can be added to this section. However, this does not change the fact that this article was published in the National Post.( Hyperionsteel ( talk) 21:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC))
Stumbled across the article today, and based on the edit history over the last few days, I wanted to remind the editors working on this page to try to avoid an WP:Edit War. The edits of August 17th looks like they came close to or crossed the line of WP:3RR. Singularity42 ( talk) 04:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
some IP has been adding antisemitism to this article IrgoraJew ( talk) 23:58, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
almost all the antisemitic edits come from this IP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/66.49.230.143 —Preceding unsigned comment added by IrgoraJew ( talk • contribs) 23:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
some one please delete this racist article, it is anti-israeli and almost nazi IrgoraJew ( talk) 00:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I will be making a series of revisions as suggested by a member of IJV Vancouver. Here is the reasons he provided:
"
"
InverseHypercube ( talk) 07:22, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
I rewrote the paragraph on the charges made by B'nai Brith that IJV was promoting Holocaust denial. The present wording makes it clearer what the article was about. The previous version seemed to suggest that IJV was linking directly to Holocaust denial material; however, it only linked to an article that was reposted with an editor's note that denied the Holocaust. Although I do think it was obviously unintentional, I have tried to write it in NPOV.
I have merged it with the section on the Diana Ralph scandal to avoid undue weight (see WP:UNDUE and WP:Recentism). It does not warrant its own section, given that it appears that only one independent news source (Canadian Jewish News) has reported on it.
InverseHypercube ( talk) 10:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Note: The Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians continues to function as a federation of groups, academics and activists in Canada and internationally. The IJV(C) has grown out of the March 2007 ACJC-sponsored conference to become a different organization.
see :
[1]
Jo Roberts article “Jewish-Canadian Activists Come Together for Peace”
Would you clarify to your readers that the description of the
Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians sponsored conference in Toronto March 2008 has missed a crucial aspect of the post-conference developments. The writer Jo Roberts was likely not informed that the post-conference Interim Steering Committee had a difference of opinion about how to treat anti-Jewish expressions when confronting the Israel State’s occupation and dispossession of the indigenous Palestinian population. As a result, the delegates of Independent Jewish Voices (Canada) left the Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians - Alliance de Canadiens/nes juifs/ves consternés/es, while the ACJC continues to function on its own. Attached here is the recent international statement initiated by the ACJC which opposes the proposed attack on Iran. You may take note that the IJV(C) group of Montréal was one of the organiztional signers of the statement which included 20 organizations from 17 countries.
Abraham Weizfeld
Co-founder ACJC
Administrative Secretary ACJC
Alliance of Concerned Jewish Canadians
Alliance de Canadiens/nes juifs/ves consternés/es
A C J C
68, ave. Duluth E.
Montréal, Québec H2W 1G8 Canada
514.284.66.42
News/nouvelles &discussion List/e:
JUNITY-Canada-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Funding Agency : La Galerie Fokus
Info on tax-deductible donations
Eibieman (
talk) 04:45, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know when the ACJC was founded and when it changed from being an advocacy group to an umbrella group (was that at the March 2008 conference?). Seems that they have 18 affiliates already.
Also, are Naomi Klein or Avi Lewis members of ACJC or do they just share some of their views. Well, so does Stephen Lewis (Avi's dad), but he is a bit more conflicted between his Jewish roots and his belief that human rights (which he sees Israel as violating) trumps all other considerations [1].
Even though there is a lot of overlap - think that the CUPE dispute and the membership dispute should be treated as separate CJC related issues. There are some assertions that the CJC is only an umbrella organization for pro-Israel groups and that the ACJC was testing that hypothesis by trying to join. However, it could just be message board speculation so will leave it up to you guys how to put it.
I'm allergic to airfreshioner and disinfectants, so if I haven't gotten the wording exactly right, that is why, I can't any more - so I add the information and leave the fine tuning to those who still can. 07:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC) 24.77.37.48 ( talk) 07:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
References
I've tagged this article as making questionable claim to notability. As one editor stated, the group currently claims a membership of less than 0.03% of Canada's Jewish population. It doesn't have CJC recognition, very little media recognition, 260 google hits. Really, organizations like Jewish Youth Against the Occupation deserve articles. They have large followings and regularly receive media coverage. This group doesn't have either. -- Chabuk [ T • C ] 22:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Looking through the history of this article, as well as the relevant history of the several articles that link to it, it increasingly seems to me that the group's primary notability is in the apparent tenacity of its membership's pursuit of recognition by using Wikipedia as a platform for pontification. There are thousands of other groups, even synagogues, with astronomically more political clout than this group has, several dozen of which are in Canada. I previously characterized the group quite accurately in the article as "miniscule", which was probably overly generous of me. Not everyone bothers to do the math, and the removal of this clarification can easily result in the eggregiously mistaken impression that this group is more noteworthy than it actually is. As a result of the repeated removal, and mildly rude insinuation that the information is "inappropriate", the POV that the group really is notable is enshrined as fact. This is a direct violation of WP:NPOV#Undue weight. Further violations of Wikiphilosophy include the fact that, while Wikipedia certainly isn't paper, it's also not an indiscriminate collection of information. Tom e r talk 00:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if the content could be merged with a different page? CJCurrie 22:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I have already indicated that I believe the information in the ACJC article should be retained on Wikipedia in one form or another. Now, I will indicate why I believe this particular article should be kept.
Note: These comments are not made in a spirit of hostility toward any other contributor. Debate is welcome, and encouraged.
1. Wikipedia is founded on the principle that minority voices should receive fair representation. The ACJC are a small group in terms of membership, and it is safe to say that they do not represent a majority viewpoint in the Canadian Jewish community. Notwithstanding this, they are actively engaged in debates of concern to the community, and their views have been cited in major community publications ( [2], [3]). The group is not insignificant, and the publicity they have received outside of Wikipedia makes them sufficiently notable for inclusion.
2. The ACJC's relationship with the broader Canadian Jewish community is a matter of significance in and of itself. The Canadian Jewish Congress's recent rejection of the ACJC's application, and the ACJC's appeal, have drawn attention to conflicting interpretations of the CJC's mandate. ACJC spokesperson Michael Mandel argues that his group has a prima facie right to affiliate with the CJC, and has stated that the CJC cannot claim to speak for Canada's Jewish community if it excludes the ACJC viewpoint. The CJC took a different position when it first rejected their application (see: Montreal Gazette, 29 October 2006, A2 or Edmonton Journal, 29 October 2006, A11), although it may reconsider when it considers the appeal. The result of this debate could have serious repercussions for other groups wishing to affiliate with the CJC in the future.
3. Wikipedia already has articles on organizations comparible to the ACJC, such as the Jewish Voice for Peace and Jews Against the Occupation. From the other side, we also have articles on the Jewish Defense Organization (a JDL spinoff) and Jewish Task Force, a Kahanist organization whose leader is barred from entering Israel. I cannot imagine that these groups are numerically large, or command strong community support, but this hasn't stopped us from preparing fairly detailed articles on them. (One could also mention the Jewish Motorcyclists Alliance, which may be larger than the ACJC but can hardly be described as more notable.) Precendent, in other words, favours inclusion.
CJCurrie 23:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Add: The ACJC was mentioned by the Canadian Arab Federation in a letter in today's Globe and Mail. CJCurrie 03:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't see any reason to delete this, Wikipedia has a number of articles on groups that are smaller and less significant. It seems well sourced and since the group has been mentioned in the mainstream media I think it's valid to have an article. Hashomer 04:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
If no one is arguing in favor of deletion then the tag is inappropriate and should be replaced with something that doesn't say "If notability cannot be established, the article is more likely to be considered for deletion, as per Wikipedia:Guide to deletion." The argument that there should be more articles on the Jewish community that's fine but it doesn't have much to do with the notability of this article. Since no one is arguing for deletion I will remove the tag, particularly as the "non-notability" question has apparently already been dealt with in an earlier vote on deletion. Hashomer 02:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
The section is based on an article published in the National Post, which meets Wikipedia's requirements as a reliable source. The article in the Post quotes the pamphlet (i.e. this is not a commentary). If additional evidence comes to light that indicates the the IJV did not approve of this pamphlet, this can be added to this section. However, this does not change the fact that this article was published in the National Post.( Hyperionsteel ( talk) 21:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC))
Stumbled across the article today, and based on the edit history over the last few days, I wanted to remind the editors working on this page to try to avoid an WP:Edit War. The edits of August 17th looks like they came close to or crossed the line of WP:3RR. Singularity42 ( talk) 04:14, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
some IP has been adding antisemitism to this article IrgoraJew ( talk) 23:58, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
almost all the antisemitic edits come from this IP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/66.49.230.143 —Preceding unsigned comment added by IrgoraJew ( talk • contribs) 23:59, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
some one please delete this racist article, it is anti-israeli and almost nazi IrgoraJew ( talk) 00:01, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I will be making a series of revisions as suggested by a member of IJV Vancouver. Here is the reasons he provided:
"
"
InverseHypercube ( talk) 07:22, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello,
I rewrote the paragraph on the charges made by B'nai Brith that IJV was promoting Holocaust denial. The present wording makes it clearer what the article was about. The previous version seemed to suggest that IJV was linking directly to Holocaust denial material; however, it only linked to an article that was reposted with an editor's note that denied the Holocaust. Although I do think it was obviously unintentional, I have tried to write it in NPOV.
I have merged it with the section on the Diana Ralph scandal to avoid undue weight (see WP:UNDUE and WP:Recentism). It does not warrant its own section, given that it appears that only one independent news source (Canadian Jewish News) has reported on it.
InverseHypercube ( talk) 10:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)