![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 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.
|
The number of Israelis killed in road accidents between 1948 and 1958 was 1,720 with 11,300 seriously injured. Burns, Lieutenant-General E.L.M. (1962) Between Arab and Israeli. George G. Harrap. Page 61. Just parking this here until I get the time to come back. Padres Hana ( talk) 20:51, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Just a thought, but how come this is the only article including the Fedayeen attacks as well? The parent article should be something like "Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency" or "Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency and Reprisal operations". We cannot separate the context of Palestinian attacks and Israeli retributions into two articles - that doesn't make sense. It is like making two articles for Syrian civil war, one on "Syrian government attacks" and another on "Syrian rebel counter-attacks and operations". Thoughts? Greyshark09 ( talk) 10:21, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
As an extreme so-called "revisionist historian", i.e. not a historian at all but a promoter of a political viewpoint, Shlaim is scarcely an unbiased source, nor is his book review (which is referenced) a suitable source per se. The title "dirty war" gives it away. Benny Morris, whose book is being reviewed, was also at one stage a partisan not an objective historian (he has since recanted), but even so was apparently not radical enough for Shlaim. I've made the reference to the original (secondary, authoritative) source, not some extremist's take on that source. The UK ambassador's more considered comment can stand Chrismorey ( talk) 04:38, 6 January 2014 (UTC) PS if Oxford University wishes to give credence to Shlaim's hate-mongering, so much the worse for Oxford. It's free speech - but that doesn't mean WP has to slavishly copy
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Reprisal operations. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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 20:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
See discussion at Talk:Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency. Onceinawhile ( talk) 09:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
"The goal of these operations was to create deterrence and prevent future attacks." Attacking civilians does not create deterrence, certainly not from a neutral view point. Seems to me the entire article is heavily biased to the Israeli state's narrative. Needs the inclusion of other perspectives throughout the article. Makeandtoss ( talk) 09:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 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.
|
The number of Israelis killed in road accidents between 1948 and 1958 was 1,720 with 11,300 seriously injured. Burns, Lieutenant-General E.L.M. (1962) Between Arab and Israeli. George G. Harrap. Page 61. Just parking this here until I get the time to come back. Padres Hana ( talk) 20:51, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Just a thought, but how come this is the only article including the Fedayeen attacks as well? The parent article should be something like "Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency" or "Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency and Reprisal operations". We cannot separate the context of Palestinian attacks and Israeli retributions into two articles - that doesn't make sense. It is like making two articles for Syrian civil war, one on "Syrian government attacks" and another on "Syrian rebel counter-attacks and operations". Thoughts? Greyshark09 ( talk) 10:21, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
As an extreme so-called "revisionist historian", i.e. not a historian at all but a promoter of a political viewpoint, Shlaim is scarcely an unbiased source, nor is his book review (which is referenced) a suitable source per se. The title "dirty war" gives it away. Benny Morris, whose book is being reviewed, was also at one stage a partisan not an objective historian (he has since recanted), but even so was apparently not radical enough for Shlaim. I've made the reference to the original (secondary, authoritative) source, not some extremist's take on that source. The UK ambassador's more considered comment can stand Chrismorey ( talk) 04:38, 6 January 2014 (UTC) PS if Oxford University wishes to give credence to Shlaim's hate-mongering, so much the worse for Oxford. It's free speech - but that doesn't mean WP has to slavishly copy
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Reprisal operations. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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 20:57, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
See discussion at Talk:Palestinian Fedayeen insurgency. Onceinawhile ( talk) 09:50, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
"The goal of these operations was to create deterrence and prevent future attacks." Attacking civilians does not create deterrence, certainly not from a neutral view point. Seems to me the entire article is heavily biased to the Israeli state's narrative. Needs the inclusion of other perspectives throughout the article. Makeandtoss ( talk) 09:50, 18 May 2023 (UTC)