![]() | 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 must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
He is in the news as he has been on hunger strike for 83 days having been held in an Israeli prison without charge since 2009. A lot of news sources are reporting him as being a player for the Palestine national team. Has he ever been capped by the Palestine national team? TheBigJagielka ( talk) 14:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Have I misunderstood the meaning of this Guardian article, which describes Sarsak as "a former member of the Palestinian national football team"? (I know next to nothing about football – for example, I don't relly understand the difference between being a squad member and playing for a team – so this is a distinct possibility.) If I haven't, is it the Guardian that's mistaken? If so, in the absence of another reliable source explicitly saying he wasn't a member of the Palestine team, I'd like to point out that a fundamental standard for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 20:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC
I wonder how much of this does just come down to different understanding of terms. If he's played for Palestine at under-age level, as his brother seems to say in the samidoun.ca piece, then he is a Palestine national team member, just not the senior team. Similarly, if he was arrested on his way to join up with the national team, then it's not unreasonable to describe him as a national team member: why would he be joining up with it if he wasn't a member? The implications of the words "squad" and "team" and "national team" differ depending on what variety of English you use and whether you're into football or not. If the term is used in football-related articles on this encyclopedia, "member of the xxx national football team" would imply he'd played for xxx at senior international level. This may well not be common usage everywhere, and particularly by non-football specialists. Perhaps we can read too much into one form of words.
As to removing content sourced to the piece reproduced at samidoun.ca, I think we should look past the name of the website. The piece is a reprint of an article on the Electronic Intifada, a source which certainly has a political POV but which has been accepted here as RS depending on context. In context of Mr Sarsak, the article adds a minimal amount of football-related detail supplied by the subject's brother to that contained in the Reuters piece reproduced on the Daily News & Analysis site, which also quotes his brother. I don't see why that detail couldn't safely be included with attribution without violating any guideline. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 08:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
To repeat myself: do you really think samidoun.ca, the website of a North American activist network supporting Palestinian prisoners, is a reliable source? – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 15:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
(This is a response to a fairly detailed comment made at my talk page by User:Activism1234.) I certainly didn't mean to suggest your edits were undesirable because they were insufficiently referenced, clearly the opposite is true. My concerns were:
I'm going to try to write a compromise version (with more detail than I'd ideally want and less than you'd like) at some point in the next 24 hours, but I might wait and see if more refs (other than slightly modified reproductions of the AP piece) become available. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 00:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey,
Generally on Wikipedia chronological or structural order is followed. The Response section is dealing with responses to his imprisonment, which certainly played a large role in releasing him, so it makes sense, both chronoligally and structurally, to include release after response.
You said "response" could include responses to his release. Generally I believe this would either be a new section, but in this case, I think it'd be fine including in the "Release section." The reason is because I highly doubt there will be any further talk or discussion about his release, and have not seen any in the past day, but if something does pop up it could be quickly inserted into the "Release" section if appropriate.
(I didn't revert your edit, I wanted to bring it up on the talk page first and take it from there)
-- Activism 1234 18:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
It has been discussed in the section above and other before it. The subject meets GNG in one way or another. Most of the secondary sources discuss the subject in relation to the detainment. If the subject is notable under WP:FOOTYN is questionable. We have an article focusing on the detainment of the person while it only touches on the other aspects of the BLP's life. You might need to change the title since the person might be less notable than the situation. 71.35.143.113 ( talk) 07:54, 12 July 2012 (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 must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
He is in the news as he has been on hunger strike for 83 days having been held in an Israeli prison without charge since 2009. A lot of news sources are reporting him as being a player for the Palestine national team. Has he ever been capped by the Palestine national team? TheBigJagielka ( talk) 14:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Have I misunderstood the meaning of this Guardian article, which describes Sarsak as "a former member of the Palestinian national football team"? (I know next to nothing about football – for example, I don't relly understand the difference between being a squad member and playing for a team – so this is a distinct possibility.) If I haven't, is it the Guardian that's mistaken? If so, in the absence of another reliable source explicitly saying he wasn't a member of the Palestine team, I'd like to point out that a fundamental standard for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 20:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC
I wonder how much of this does just come down to different understanding of terms. If he's played for Palestine at under-age level, as his brother seems to say in the samidoun.ca piece, then he is a Palestine national team member, just not the senior team. Similarly, if he was arrested on his way to join up with the national team, then it's not unreasonable to describe him as a national team member: why would he be joining up with it if he wasn't a member? The implications of the words "squad" and "team" and "national team" differ depending on what variety of English you use and whether you're into football or not. If the term is used in football-related articles on this encyclopedia, "member of the xxx national football team" would imply he'd played for xxx at senior international level. This may well not be common usage everywhere, and particularly by non-football specialists. Perhaps we can read too much into one form of words.
As to removing content sourced to the piece reproduced at samidoun.ca, I think we should look past the name of the website. The piece is a reprint of an article on the Electronic Intifada, a source which certainly has a political POV but which has been accepted here as RS depending on context. In context of Mr Sarsak, the article adds a minimal amount of football-related detail supplied by the subject's brother to that contained in the Reuters piece reproduced on the Daily News & Analysis site, which also quotes his brother. I don't see why that detail couldn't safely be included with attribution without violating any guideline. cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 08:52, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
To repeat myself: do you really think samidoun.ca, the website of a North American activist network supporting Palestinian prisoners, is a reliable source? – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 15:59, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
(This is a response to a fairly detailed comment made at my talk page by User:Activism1234.) I certainly didn't mean to suggest your edits were undesirable because they were insufficiently referenced, clearly the opposite is true. My concerns were:
I'm going to try to write a compromise version (with more detail than I'd ideally want and less than you'd like) at some point in the next 24 hours, but I might wait and see if more refs (other than slightly modified reproductions of the AP piece) become available. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 00:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey,
Generally on Wikipedia chronological or structural order is followed. The Response section is dealing with responses to his imprisonment, which certainly played a large role in releasing him, so it makes sense, both chronoligally and structurally, to include release after response.
You said "response" could include responses to his release. Generally I believe this would either be a new section, but in this case, I think it'd be fine including in the "Release section." The reason is because I highly doubt there will be any further talk or discussion about his release, and have not seen any in the past day, but if something does pop up it could be quickly inserted into the "Release" section if appropriate.
(I didn't revert your edit, I wanted to bring it up on the talk page first and take it from there)
-- Activism 1234 18:35, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
It has been discussed in the section above and other before it. The subject meets GNG in one way or another. Most of the secondary sources discuss the subject in relation to the detainment. If the subject is notable under WP:FOOTYN is questionable. We have an article focusing on the detainment of the person while it only touches on the other aspects of the BLP's life. You might need to change the title since the person might be less notable than the situation. 71.35.143.113 ( talk) 07:54, 12 July 2012 (UTC)