![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Whoever edited this page anonymously, if we don't disagree with something, we put it under "Beliefs of Side X" category, as did I. And by the way, most of the statements there were proved by the Palestinian position paper quotes. -- User:Uriyan
This whole page is nothing more than a presentation of a particular point of view put forward by a few people who are disposed to such views. It doesn't even pretend to obey the NPOV rules of Wikipedia. Rather, it is propaganda pure and simple.
To see how contentious the claims on this page are, note that the Israeli government site which is cited on the page states without any qualification that the offending articles were "cancelled" (the word chosen by that site's translator).
Similarly, this official PLO site states plainly that the offending articles were "abrogated", which is a bit hard to reconcile with the claims on this page that the PLO official position is that no changes have been made.
I fully expect that the translation of the word as "aged" is pure baloney.
The alleged proof that no changes have been made, as given on this page, consists entirely of context-free translations of unknown accuracy from sources that are not cited. Personally I doubt them. The one from the legal official is almost certainly just a statement that the Draft Palestinian Constitution, intended as a permanent replacement for the amended Covenant, is not yet complete. Its approximate contents are no secret because the Palestinian National Authority publishes drafts at regular intervals. Indeed it is impossible to see how it could be completed without a binding final agreement with Israel. To not even mention it on this page is unconscionable.
What is required is to replace this page by a plain account of the facts, with any contrary opinions relegated to a section at the end.
-- zero 12:06, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)
This page was, and still is a mess, from almost any perspective. I made a major overhaul, but did not eliminate anything substantive, my main contribution being to add a great deal - in particular the major lacunae of the official Palestinian position and the Israeli acceptance of the changes in 1998 (and 1996) and make the chronology understandable. I did eliminate incorrect dates and corrected some links put in the wrong place, and eliminated redundant or meaningless statements; the article still jumps around timewise, but less than before, and is more coherent. I kept the same structure to make it easier to see what I changed, in the future some things should be taken out of the various sides views and put in the first, main section, and the 1998 events merged in with that. Obviously, even absurdly wrong / misleading and POV statements like "The PNC was never amended, as far as the Palestinian side is concerned" were removed, and refuting citations provided. (Even if this one is understood merely as one Israeli criticism, is an unsourced and strange opinion of the other side's purportedly universal opinion, completely contrary to both sides' official opinion, something to be taken seriously, something that belongs even there?)
In particular the "context-free translations of unknown accuracy from sources that are not cited" were left in, just modified with words like "reportedly." I believe I've seen them at one place or another, but am putting off citing them correctly to another day. It was a lot of work already. I don't think anyone doubts the veracity of the Arafat - Clinton letter text or says there are real differences with the Blair letter, and think that there is undue doubt cast here - I believe I've seen (basically?) identical official texts and will try to dig them up. I added some references, many of them lifted from the PLO article, when they are more particularly relevant to this one. This seems to be the right place to describe fundamental documents of the PLO/PNA - there already is some description of proposed constitutions here. I put in a weasel word many (instead of most) as that seemed better than the unsourced original (but of course still bad). -- John Z 20:26, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Jay - Yes, I did. "While unchanged, mentions these amendments" is problematic. An addition is a change, and the official positions of every relevant international personality is that there has been a change and revocation. Having the original document with amendments added at the end is the standard way amended constitutions are presented, like the US constitution with its amendments. It would be odd to say this of the US constitution. Of course, in this case the complexity, reference to other documents and explanatory material are noteworthy.
Howzabout: "The text of the charter at ... appends these amendments, although the redrafting process referred to in the second amendment has not been completed."?-- John Z 23:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone imagine that it's NPOV to have an article on the Palestinian National Covenant that focuses exclusively (!) on its relationship to Israel's supposed right to exist? Did it even occur to whoever wrote most of this that someone might be interested in the covenant's contents, or authorship, or anything else about it? - Mustafaa 22:19, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
My recent edits edit referring to Naftali Bennett's rejection of Palestine's right to exist has been undone on these grounds "Not according to source. Bennett doesn't say he opposes "Palestine's" right to exist, but he rejects the creation of a Palestinian state" http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Naftali_Bennett&action=history If valid then in interests of NPOV does that principle need to be applied to this page too ? Presumably Michael Zeev means the phrase "right to exist" needs to occur in the source document - and that phrase does not occur in the PNC as far as I can see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.82.114 ( talk) 13:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Palestinian National Covenant. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Palestinian National Covenant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:46, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Whoever edited this page anonymously, if we don't disagree with something, we put it under "Beliefs of Side X" category, as did I. And by the way, most of the statements there were proved by the Palestinian position paper quotes. -- User:Uriyan
This whole page is nothing more than a presentation of a particular point of view put forward by a few people who are disposed to such views. It doesn't even pretend to obey the NPOV rules of Wikipedia. Rather, it is propaganda pure and simple.
To see how contentious the claims on this page are, note that the Israeli government site which is cited on the page states without any qualification that the offending articles were "cancelled" (the word chosen by that site's translator).
Similarly, this official PLO site states plainly that the offending articles were "abrogated", which is a bit hard to reconcile with the claims on this page that the PLO official position is that no changes have been made.
I fully expect that the translation of the word as "aged" is pure baloney.
The alleged proof that no changes have been made, as given on this page, consists entirely of context-free translations of unknown accuracy from sources that are not cited. Personally I doubt them. The one from the legal official is almost certainly just a statement that the Draft Palestinian Constitution, intended as a permanent replacement for the amended Covenant, is not yet complete. Its approximate contents are no secret because the Palestinian National Authority publishes drafts at regular intervals. Indeed it is impossible to see how it could be completed without a binding final agreement with Israel. To not even mention it on this page is unconscionable.
What is required is to replace this page by a plain account of the facts, with any contrary opinions relegated to a section at the end.
-- zero 12:06, 10 Aug 2003 (UTC)
This page was, and still is a mess, from almost any perspective. I made a major overhaul, but did not eliminate anything substantive, my main contribution being to add a great deal - in particular the major lacunae of the official Palestinian position and the Israeli acceptance of the changes in 1998 (and 1996) and make the chronology understandable. I did eliminate incorrect dates and corrected some links put in the wrong place, and eliminated redundant or meaningless statements; the article still jumps around timewise, but less than before, and is more coherent. I kept the same structure to make it easier to see what I changed, in the future some things should be taken out of the various sides views and put in the first, main section, and the 1998 events merged in with that. Obviously, even absurdly wrong / misleading and POV statements like "The PNC was never amended, as far as the Palestinian side is concerned" were removed, and refuting citations provided. (Even if this one is understood merely as one Israeli criticism, is an unsourced and strange opinion of the other side's purportedly universal opinion, completely contrary to both sides' official opinion, something to be taken seriously, something that belongs even there?)
In particular the "context-free translations of unknown accuracy from sources that are not cited" were left in, just modified with words like "reportedly." I believe I've seen them at one place or another, but am putting off citing them correctly to another day. It was a lot of work already. I don't think anyone doubts the veracity of the Arafat - Clinton letter text or says there are real differences with the Blair letter, and think that there is undue doubt cast here - I believe I've seen (basically?) identical official texts and will try to dig them up. I added some references, many of them lifted from the PLO article, when they are more particularly relevant to this one. This seems to be the right place to describe fundamental documents of the PLO/PNA - there already is some description of proposed constitutions here. I put in a weasel word many (instead of most) as that seemed better than the unsourced original (but of course still bad). -- John Z 20:26, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Jay - Yes, I did. "While unchanged, mentions these amendments" is problematic. An addition is a change, and the official positions of every relevant international personality is that there has been a change and revocation. Having the original document with amendments added at the end is the standard way amended constitutions are presented, like the US constitution with its amendments. It would be odd to say this of the US constitution. Of course, in this case the complexity, reference to other documents and explanatory material are noteworthy.
Howzabout: "The text of the charter at ... appends these amendments, although the redrafting process referred to in the second amendment has not been completed."?-- John Z 23:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone imagine that it's NPOV to have an article on the Palestinian National Covenant that focuses exclusively (!) on its relationship to Israel's supposed right to exist? Did it even occur to whoever wrote most of this that someone might be interested in the covenant's contents, or authorship, or anything else about it? - Mustafaa 22:19, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
My recent edits edit referring to Naftali Bennett's rejection of Palestine's right to exist has been undone on these grounds "Not according to source. Bennett doesn't say he opposes "Palestine's" right to exist, but he rejects the creation of a Palestinian state" http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Naftali_Bennett&action=history If valid then in interests of NPOV does that principle need to be applied to this page too ? Presumably Michael Zeev means the phrase "right to exist" needs to occur in the source document - and that phrase does not occur in the PNC as far as I can see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.82.114 ( talk) 13:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
maru (talk) contribs 05:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Palestinian National Covenant. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Palestinian National Covenant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:46, 14 September 2017 (UTC)