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:
You must be logged-in and
extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic
Palestine region, the
Palestinian people and the
State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting
the project page, where you can add your name to the
list of members where you can contribute to the
discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
Editorials are reliable for opinions, not for facts, and
Loew Galitz you have
WP:ONUS backwards here. The onus is on your for inclusion of material, not the other way around. Im tagging the article in the meantime. nableezy - 18:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
You got it wrong here. My onus is to provide a reliable source.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 18:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Please read
WP:ONUS: The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.nableezy - 18:30, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
The material is disputed on the grounds of it not being a fact ie you can't say it in wikivoice. You can cite it as an opinion if you want ie attribute it to those giving the opinion but frankly, if an opinion source is the best you got, you ain't got much.
Selfstudier (
talk) 18:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Well, unless there's some airborne arson experts in there :)
Selfstudier (
talk) 18:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:WEIGHT as opinion. The Jerusalem Post editorial board is not an expert on "environmental terrorism". nableezy - 18:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I see. I removed the sentence and changed the title to neutral.
Loew Galitz (
talk)
You are referencing the editorial board of the Jerusalem Post, and per
WP:RSOPINION you may not use it for claiming facts. nableezy - 18:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Tags
Please provide evidence for your concerns expressed in the tags.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 18:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I just did, you are using unreliable sources to make POV claims. You can pretend like the section above is not justifying the tag, but it is. The Israeli Terrorism Information NGO is a likewise poor source, and the IDF spokesperson is a poor primary source. nableezy - 18:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
If you want to accuse some sources as unreliable, please go to
WP:RSN. If you think that some sources make POV claims, please find sources which contest them. You cannot single-handedly accuse sources as POV. For example in the case above you said that a newspaper editorial cannot be expert in ecology, and I agreed with your argument, not just opinion. Please discuss other issues.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 19:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I removed the disputed opinion. IMO the rest of the article are verifiable facts. If you see any other opinions, please tag them
Loew Galitz (
talk) 18:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
"Border riots"
Goes without saying that referring to the great march of return as "border riots" in the general sense is biased in favour of Israel and goes against Wikipedia's neutrality laws. I don't have the seniority to edit this page but someone should rectify this, or at least add in the caveat that Israel provoked violent responses from the Palestinian side of the boarder after firing into crowds of protesters indiscriminately on the first day of the great march of return.
2607:FEA8:A4E1:BC00:70B8:900:F3E8:D3AE (
talk) 01:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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:
You must be logged-in and
extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for
making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to
make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic
Palestine region, the
Palestinian people and the
State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting
the project page, where you can add your name to the
list of members where you can contribute to the
discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a
list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the
full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
Editorials are reliable for opinions, not for facts, and
Loew Galitz you have
WP:ONUS backwards here. The onus is on your for inclusion of material, not the other way around. Im tagging the article in the meantime. nableezy - 18:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
You got it wrong here. My onus is to provide a reliable source.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 18:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Please read
WP:ONUS: The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.nableezy - 18:30, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
The material is disputed on the grounds of it not being a fact ie you can't say it in wikivoice. You can cite it as an opinion if you want ie attribute it to those giving the opinion but frankly, if an opinion source is the best you got, you ain't got much.
Selfstudier (
talk) 18:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Well, unless there's some airborne arson experts in there :)
Selfstudier (
talk) 18:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:WEIGHT as opinion. The Jerusalem Post editorial board is not an expert on "environmental terrorism". nableezy - 18:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I see. I removed the sentence and changed the title to neutral.
Loew Galitz (
talk)
You are referencing the editorial board of the Jerusalem Post, and per
WP:RSOPINION you may not use it for claiming facts. nableezy - 18:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
Tags
Please provide evidence for your concerns expressed in the tags.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 18:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I just did, you are using unreliable sources to make POV claims. You can pretend like the section above is not justifying the tag, but it is. The Israeli Terrorism Information NGO is a likewise poor source, and the IDF spokesperson is a poor primary source. nableezy - 18:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
If you want to accuse some sources as unreliable, please go to
WP:RSN. If you think that some sources make POV claims, please find sources which contest them. You cannot single-handedly accuse sources as POV. For example in the case above you said that a newspaper editorial cannot be expert in ecology, and I agreed with your argument, not just opinion. Please discuss other issues.
Loew Galitz (
talk) 19:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I removed the disputed opinion. IMO the rest of the article are verifiable facts. If you see any other opinions, please tag them
Loew Galitz (
talk) 18:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)reply
"Border riots"
Goes without saying that referring to the great march of return as "border riots" in the general sense is biased in favour of Israel and goes against Wikipedia's neutrality laws. I don't have the seniority to edit this page but someone should rectify this, or at least add in the caveat that Israel provoked violent responses from the Palestinian side of the boarder after firing into crowds of protesters indiscriminately on the first day of the great march of return.
2607:FEA8:A4E1:BC00:70B8:900:F3E8:D3AE (
talk) 01:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)reply